Matt, what are democrats saying that are misrepresentations of this story?

Oops, missed that link.

Personally, I don't think they're mischaracterizing it. They are jumping the gun, though. This testimony indicates Bush may have been a lot more involved in this than he let on. It also looks like he's leaked classified information (well, he declassified info for the sole purpose of leaking to the press) for political purposes. Seems very hypocritical. And if the information he declassified contained Plames status AND she was covert, he's in a whole lot of trouble.

But, we'll wait Fitz' investigation to end to find out what exactly went on.

The Dem's are hell bent on seeing the Valerie Plame scandal through.

I think this is because they won't have Tom Delay to rip on anymore and they need some fuel for their "culture of corruption" argument. If you ask me, this argument is rather tired and starved for lack of evidence. Unless you want to include any of the thousands of conspiracy theories that have become popular(this I doubt).

There are two items to this story that I find interesting (1st from the National Journal):

Two senior government officials said that Tenet did recall, however, that he made inquiries regarding the veracity of the Niger intelligence information as a result of inquires from both Cheney and Libby. As a result of those inquiries, Tenet then had the CIA conduct a new review of its Niger intelligence, and concluded that there was no evidence that Saddam Hussein had in fact attempted to purchase uranium from Niger or other African nations. Tenet and other CIA officials then informed Cheney, other administration officials, and the congressional intelligence committees of the new findings, the sources said.

So if Tenet had concluded that Saddam DID NOT try to buy uranium, why does the WH and conservatives still to this very day say Saddam did try to buy uranium?

Second, according to the documents, “W” did not know about Libby’s role in the leak until Sept. ’03.

In July of ’03 Bush ORDERED everyone in his administration to come forward with any information regarding the leaking of Plame’s identity. So why did Libby hide his involvement from the President for two months?

This stinks!

barney barney barney

Once again you've mistated and mischaracterized..

The President stated a "foreign intelligence" agency said..yellow cake etc..

Now if you had been reading the foreign agency was British intelligence..who still state Saddam attempted to purchase yellow cake. Further after an internal investigation (Butler report) not only did British intelligence make reference to the attempts, the French intelligence services did as well..

Further if you read Joe Wilson's report while not stating as such Wilson himslef stated the PM he knw had been ask to arrang a secret meeting with agents/representatives of Niger... The meeting never took place but nonetheless "secret" meetings are in and of itself interesting if you consider the fact.. Niger only exports 3 things.. cowpeas, livestock and yellowcake...

Now to make it even more intersting is France (french company) has part interest in a "yellow cake" producing entity within Niger... now go back to French intelligence services beliefs Saddam or agents of Iraq did attempt to but yellow cake...

Yes Tenet stated they had no evidence...

sorry for not checking the spelling...apologies

The more they deny and spin this issue the worse it looks. The Democrats don't need to say a thing -- the public is all over it.

OK, black, you believe:
-British Intelligence
-French Intelligence
-Joe Wilson

But you don’t trust the CIA? So I guess we should outsource all our foreign intelligence needs? Right black?

wilson "knew" jack*hit considering he parked his fat a$$ in a poolside chase lounge & "interviewed" his "contacts" (bribed-out govt officials), cooked-up a "report" for the DNC, er...cia, & outted his own wife back on the DC cocktail circuit.

The MSM have successfully created the illusion that Saddam had no link to Al-Quiada, there were no WMD's and that the U.S. economy is in the tank (4.7% unemployment, I think it's just fine).

If you tell a lie often enough, it soon becomes the truth.

I'm not sure, but I think that's on page 1 of the Demorat/MSM playbook.

"Democrats Delusional Over This Leak Business"
Tom Shipley, this title does apply to you. You are delusional because you (and many other sad libs) long ago bought into all this "Bush is dishonest" poppycock. You have been making mischaracterizations about President Bush and his administration from the beginning. You are heavily invested in this. That is what keeps you delusional. So much of your hopes and dreams were crushed when Bush won the last two presidential elections. Deluding yourself helps you deal with your sadness. You libs feel so ineffectual and powerless that you feel the need to continue investing yourselves in these fake scandals in order to give you some misguided hope. Your hopes are misguided because the boogeyman that you have chosen is actually a good, honest President of the United States.

The American public had the sense to re-elect George W. Bush for a second term in numbers never before seen in an American election. But go ahead, point to whatever latest poll you want, or the latest ginned up scandal. Whatever makes you feel better. Although I pity you, I understand that you are just trying to make yourselves feel better.

Scotty MC’saynothing just got busted. He is on record saying that the NIE was OFFICIAL DECLASSIFIED on 7/18, but Libby leaked the “declassified” NEI on 7/8.

So Scotty lied, and he wont comment on it now in the press briefing.

? Barney,

I'm more than a little confused here, you wrote "Scotty MC’saynothing” aren't you the one that complained that the Bush Administration was secretive and not forthcoming with information, and now you’re upset because the President de-classified information for release to the Press.

Which is it, so secretive, or blabbermouths?

July 18, 2003
Q When was it actually declassified?

MR. McCLELLAN: It was officially declassified today.

Either the NIE was not declassified on the 8th, so Libby leaked (with the Pez’s approval)classified information, or Scott lied when he said that the intelligence was official declassified on the 18th. Take your pick?

Oh, so it's "officially" declassified that's the problem!

Maybe it was formally declassified, or perhaps it was authoritatively declassified, or legitimately declassified before July 18?

"Maybe it was formally declassified, or perhaps it was authoritatively declassified, or legitimately declassified before July 18?"

Or maybe it was leaked and someone discovered it was classified and they said, "oh crap, we better declassify that!"

There are a few options.

Or maybe you’re imagining something that didn’t happen.

"Or maybe you’re imagining something that didn’t happen."

That's a possibility too. Just as you may be imagining that it was "formally" declassified before it was "officially" declassified.

Maybe bush had his fingers crossed?

If Mr. Bush says it's declassified; it's declassified, what part is a mystery to you?

Go to the other thread on this subject, find Cylinder’s post.

For starters, try 18 USC §798: The term “unauthorized person” means any person who, or agency which, is not authorized to receive information of the categories set forth in subsection (a) of this section, by the President, or by the head of a department or agency of the United States Government which is expressly designated by the President to engage in communication intelligence activities for the United States.

"If Mr. Bush says it's declassified; it's declassified, what part is a mystery to you?"

When he declassified it.

Because it’s not a matter of legal distinction, but a game of political gotcha?

Do you honestly think there is a criminal act here? Are you so delusional in your hatred of this President that you’d be willing to further sacrifice any chances of your party ever, gaining control of government to flog a date on a calendar?

Bane, than you agree that Scotty lied when he said the NIE was declassified on the 18th and not on the 8th when the Prez actually declassified it.

Barney,

Now you know Scottie can't comment on an ongoing investigation...(until the culture of corruption gets it's story together, anyway)

Long live Helen Thomas

Bane,

They've been riding the Plame kerfuffle for years - there was nothing to it to start, there's nothing to it now, and there never will be anything to it.

Valerie Plame got her hubby a junket; he went on it and confirmed intelligence reports that Saddam was trying to obtain uranium; he decides to cash in on it and writes a lying editorial in the NY Times; Bush Administration officials set the record straight on what a load of bull Wilson was peddling.

Thats it.

Barney,
Remember the news that started this?
"The court papers say Libby's boss, advised him that the president had authorized ... "
Then remember what Cylinder posted, the President may decide to whom and when information may be disseminated.

Are you just trying to play gotcha with the WH spokesman? That’s hardly the issue here.

Mark,
And yet they continue to blur the lines between the Plame story and the Libby story, just as they blur the lines between 9-11 and Iraq or al-Qaeda and Iraq, just as they have done with sex in the Oval Office and perjury, and on and on and on

Mark, so I guess you didn't see this:
Two senior government officials said that Tenet did recall, however, that he made inquiries regarding the veracity of the Niger intelligence information as a result of inquires from both Cheney and Libby. As a result of those inquiries, Tenet then had the CIA conduct a new review of its Niger intelligence, and concluded that there was no evidence that Saddam Hussein had in fact attempted to purchase uranium from Niger or other African nations. Tenet and other CIA officials then informed Cheney, other administration officials, and the congressional intelligence committees of the new findings, the sources said.

Joe Wilson was correct.

Joe Wilson was correct?
When he reported to the CIA that Saddam did indeed try to open trade with Niger, or when he adamantly denied that in his “pay for play” interviews?

Was he lying then, or is he lying now?

No, that would make Joe Wilson incorrect - when he came back from Niger, he advised CIA that Saddam did attempt to obtain uranium...

You should keep in mind that the liar in the Plame kerfuffle is Joe Wilson...he's been absolutely proven a serial liar.

Bane,

All that matters to them is that they keep hating President Bush...they don't need no stinkin' facts to get in the way of a good hate...

"Do you honestly think there is a criminal act here?"

I don't know. As I said above, let's wait for Fitz' investigation to end, then we'll find out what happened.

All i did was throw out a hypothetical, just as you did.

Mark,....No, that would make Joe Wilson incorrect - when he came back from Niger, he advised CIA that Saddam did attempt to obtain uranium...

Please post the part of the Joe W Op Ed that makes this claim.

September 8, 2002
New York Times
U.S. Says Hussein Intensifies Quest for A-Bomb Parts
By Michael R. Gordon and Judith Miller
WASHINGTON, Sept. 7 - More than a decade after Saddam Hussein agreed to give up weapons of mass destruction, Iraq has stepped up its quest for nuclear weapons and has embarked on a worldwide hunt for materials to make an atomic bomb, Bush administration officials said today.
In the last 14 months, Iraq has sought to buy thousands of specially designed aluminum tubes, which American officials believe were intended as components of centrifuges to enrich uranium. American officials said several efforts to arrange the shipment of the aluminum tubes were blocked or intercepted but declined to say, citing the sensitivity of the intelligence, where they came from or how they were stopped.

So did “W” or Darth Cheney declassify the above lie 10-months before it was official declassified (7/18/03 declassification of the NIE)?

Joe and Val failed in their partisan mission to destroy the president with false evidence. Val was not undercover for a long time. If anyone ousted her, it was Wilson.

It was all a gambit concotted by the liberals to smear Bush and the administration. Now that DeLay is done, Dems must resort to rehashing this old, old story again. I'm truly embarrassed for the democrats, as they continue making complete and utter jackasses of themselves.

The elephant needs to sit on the donkey and never let it up.

The truth is if Democrats knew how to read properly they would not be Democrats.

Uhm Barney

Didn't the CIA also say "SLAM DUNK!" that Iraq had WMD?

So you're now telling us that we should believe the CIA on this, but not believe the CIA on WMD?

How clever for you

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/ makes a great point:

The illegal NSA wiretapping program depends upon the nation placing their trust in this same president not to use this warrantless wiretapping for political purposes. The fact that he authorized leaking of sensitive classified information for political purposes proves that we should not do this.

No one,except you right wingers, will ever trust this president again.

Here is the proof that the president is a liar:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/10/20031007-2.html
THE PRESIDENT: Well, the investigators will ask our staff about what people did or did not do. This is a town of -- where a lot of people leak. And I've constantly expressed my displeasure with leaks, particularly leaks of classified information. And I want to know, I want to know the truth. I want to see to it that the truth prevail. And I hope we can get this investigation done in a thorough way, as quickly as possible.

See the president said all leaks whether the data is classified or not……"And I've constantly expressed my displeasure with leaks, particularly leaks of classified information."

The man is a liar.

All the king's horses and all the king's men
Couldn't put Humpty together again.

Let me just see if I have this right:

Joe Wilson leaked stuff that the White House said was false, but turned out to be true and, in fact, the Administration actually retracted the "16 words" in the face of these 'falsehoods' (which turned out to be true). And then, Scooter Libby, who was told to leak information which we now know to actually BE false, really didn't break the law leaking it because the President had already legally declassified it, but Libby decided to lie about it anyway to the prosecutors, which was against the law.

And Libby leaked to the New York Times, which is traitorous and out to bring down the president. The Times' Judy Miller sat in jail for a few months, rather than divulge that Scooter had legally leaked legally declassified information, which actually was false, in order to counter the falsehoods told by Joe Wilson which turned out to be true.

And the president, who knew all about this because he was the one who declassified the NIE in order to allow Scooter to leak it to the Times, which was out to get him, for the last three years has said he had no idea what happened, and that anyone caught leaking would be fired. And meanwhile he's got a special prosecutor investigating this thing and indicting people in the White House...

(lies down, exhausted, in the road)

I want to go back to "it depends on what the definition of 'is' is."

I'm still waiting for the mushroom cloud smoking gun. The Armageddonists are hell bent on creating the conditions so that "a third" of humanity dies, aren't they? Peace

Ha! Yeah, that pretty much sums it up, Longz.

Yikes.... when you put it like that...... I'm exhausted just reading it!

...so Libby leaked (with the Pez’s approval)...

So, Baloney, Libby got Pez's approval? What about the Pez dispenser--did it give it's approval too?

(lies down, exhausted, in the road)

I hope there's heavy traffic...

No one,except you right wingers, will ever trust this president again.

Uh, noone, except us right-wingers, has trusted this president for about four years now. The thing is, we right-wingers outnumber you left-wingers where it matters--at the ballot box.

Baloney, if you could think for yourself, you'd be dangerous. But you can't, and you're not. You're just funny. And stupid. And harmless. Thanks for the laughs.

So, kookbats, what's the scandal du jour gonna be on Monday? This one is three years old. Hey, let's revisit Bush's TANG service; it's only been covered six times...

Wow Keefer, two consecutive posts of saying nothing and just calling someone a name. Par for the course out of you.

I'll ask all the Bushies again...........
What will it take for you to question this President? How many QUESTIONABLE things will it take for you to question what the President is thinking? Is it just going to take him getting a BJ in office? Is that the only thing that is going to make people question this Administration??
Look... the lies around this Plame leak/non-leak of classified/non-classified information by people that lied/didn't lie is just spinning out of control. You tangle a web this crazy and something is going to break.

Everyone settle down. Let's agree on one thing: History will tell wether the Presidency of George W. Bush will be remembered as one of the greatest, or worst ever.

Remember, the on-going legal proceeding will not be on-going forever. Patience.

There are many here who appear to believe that the whole Valerie Plame issue is a total fabrication foisted upon the White House by the moonbat lefties and their MSM henchmen. As much as I'd like to believe it, I seem to be stymied by various pieces of information that don't seem to fit together very well. I guess in a way longz kind of covered it in a snarky way (and you have to admit, it was kinda entertaining, lol!), but I'm trying to be serious. So if I could I'd like to ask a few questions...

1. If Valerie Plame's identity was no big deal and everyone knew it anyway, why didn't Bush come out and say that? Instead, he's the one that made it a big deal.

2. Why is Valerie Plame no longer employed at the CIA? If in fact revealing her identity was no big deal, why didn't she continue what she was doing? She wasn't accused of anything.

3. Why is Scooter Libby under indictment for lying to the FBI and the grand jury? He initially said that it was all just a big misunderstanding, that he forgot because it wasn't a big deal and he was a really busy guy. Yet in spite of that he let Judith Miller dwell in prison for months. Furthermore, now it appears he's changing his tune and claiming he didn't actually do anything wrong. So a corollary question is... which is it?

4. Why did the White House try so hard to discredit Joe Wilson? I reread his NYT op-ed piece again, and it's relatively innocuous. All he indicated was that Bush's story doesn't jibe with what he discovered on his trip to Africa. All he basically asked is, "what gives?" In response, all the administration had to say is, "you were wrong, dude." If he was so obviously a buffoon, why all the below-board calisthenics on his behalf? Just tell people he's a buffoon and let him go ahead and prove it.

5. Why did the White House attempt to discredit Wilson by going through the MSM? I mean if the MSM is the enemy, why go to them first and foremost? And why the "anonymous source" route? That just made it worse, or so it seems.

As much as I'd like to disbelieve the whole "left wing conspiracy" take on this, I find it hard to put it to bed. I find it a little hard to get all my ducks in a row, logically speaking. At this point, it seems to me that in order to believe that none of it is a big deal, then one would have to conclude that the White House handled it very poorly. And if so, that's a big deal in itself.

Now, if anyone has a reference that ties the whole issue up in a nice, logical package which indicates that all of this really isn't a big deal and that it was handled precisely right by the White House from the start and all the way through, please let me know because I really want to hear it.

I like how Tom Shipley spends so much of his time on Blogs for Bush. It's ironic isn't it? Hey Tom...if President Bush authorizes the the release of the information then it is NOT a leak!I know your stupid because you are a Dummocrat, but come on......this is simple to understand.

Forgot to mention Barney also..............Barney, if the President authorizes the release of information then it is by definition NOT a leak...........you're an idiot!

I'll ask all the Bushies again...........
What will it take for you to question this President? How many QUESTIONABLE things will it take for you to question what the President is thinking? Is it just going to take him getting a BJ in office? Is that the only thing that is going to make people question this Administration??
Look... the lies around this Plame leak/non-leak of classified/non-classified information by people that lied/didn't lie is just spinning out of control. You tangle a web this crazy and something is going to break.

Posted by: Sick of Lies at April 7, 2006 05:3I

Hey SOL, we have answered that question numerous times on numerous occasions for you! We question daily & will continue! The dif is we didn't have a virulent hate for the man and his party from day uno! You are driven by hate & jealousy! Not a good combo to convince non-wacko/kook/lefty's!!!

Its a non-story, and everyone realizes it. Joe Wilson is the liar, and the Senate report calls hims a liar.

Wow Keefer, two consecutive posts of saying nothing and just calling someone a name. Par for the course out of you.

I try not to use much space here, to make up for all the space you waste here.

As for the oxygen you waste, why don't you do us humans a favour and go jump under a train?

Seriously, now, this issue is a non-issue, and we're all wasting way too much time on it. Let's all move on to the next scandal--Rathergate, the Sequel...

"Hey Tom...if President Bush authorizes the the release of the information then it is NOT a leak!I know your stupid because you are a Dummocrat, but come on......this is simple to understand."

Gman,

Material does not need to be classified for it to be leaked. See the Webster definition:

2 : to give out (information) surreptitiously

Maybe you should make sure you know the definition of a word before you start calling people idiots for not knowing the definition of that word.

But Encarta says “5. disclosure of secrets: an unofficial release of confidential information, usually to the media” If the President authorized it, it’s no longer confidential!

Did you look up surreptitiously? How about idiot? Is lexicon in your lexicon? Maybe he didn’t mean idiot, maybe he meant lassitude.

He did not leak anything. A President has the authority to declassify classified information as establishsed through Executive Order dating back to the early 1980s.

On Oct. 7, 2002, the administration released an unclassified version of the very same NIE at the urging of Senate Democrats. In early 2003, reporters hostile to the administration were being told all sorts of things about the still-classified portions of the NIE.

That is what was declassified. In no way,

parts of the IE report was declassified in 2002 as the request of the

Barney....I'm still waiting.

The CIA also said "SLAM DUNK" on WMDs. Yet you say there are no WMD's and in the next breath you say we must listen to the CIA.?!?!

Hmm, sort of caught yourself in the a bit of a pinch there haven't you sunshine!!

LOL

Joe and Valerie Rosenberg sold a lot of books, why all the whining from the left. I know Joe Rosenberg got the full scoop, sitting by the pool sipping margaritas at the Ramada Inn in Niger. I say hang em both for trying to set US foreign policy.

Come on Tom, haven't you read the Bush playbook? President Bush can do what he wants to, when he wants to, any way he wants to. It doesn't matter what what you or I think, or what the established protocol is, or even what Congress thinks. As long as he can get AG Gonzalez to go along with it, everything is hunky dory. So I don't understand why you have your shorts in such a bunch.

However, given the playbook, why did Bush get himself in such a bind on this whole Plame/NIE issue? Why didn't he just pull the book out right from the start? Did he misplace it in his library?

I love the debate on this site....

Dems: Bush did xyz
Repubs: You idiot
Dems: No really, the facts show Bush did xyz
Repubs: You are a moron
Dems: It says it right here... Bush did xyz
Repubs: You kook, you don't even know how to read.

The debate is truly enthralling.

oh... I forgot...

Dems: Really, Bush did that.
Repubs: It is Clinton's fault
Dems: What?
Repubs: The MSM is all to blame.

Sick of Lies: HOW BOUT THIS DEBATE:

Republicans: Unemployment went down to 4.7% today.

Dems: George Bush (the highest ranking government official in this country by the way) "leaked" information all over.

Republicans: There is something wrong with Syria being on the UN Human Rights Commission.

Democrats: If it weren't for Bush's Leaking, we'd be on the Human Rights Commission if the United States weren't the biggest violators of human rights on earth.

Republicans: The Sky is Blue

Democrats: BUSH LEAKED THAT INFORMATION!!!!

With the exception of Fox News... if you believe that most other media outlets aren't heavily skewed toward the Democrat/Liberal point of view... then I have a base on the moon I want to sell you.

SIMPLETON OF LIES, read wawilliyo post! Do ya get it, huh do ya! It doesn't get or look any simpler than that! Which is why I dare to say that you will win no elections anytime soon!

Bear! Glad to see you back! Do you care to answer my questions? Or Wawlliyo? Or Warrior? At least give me a reference. I'm easy, lol!

Thanks Rico, I'll always be back,LOL! No time today tho, more important things to do, namely a golf tournament! But, like I said I'LL BE BACK! Which question are you reffering to Rico? The one right after you refer to Bush as a dictator? I'm not 100% happy with G.B. and the admin. but I still don't buy the dictator theory!!! Talk to ya later!

Bear, I was a little over the top in my last comment. I'm getting a little upset about the nature of the news coming out of the White House these days. Anyway, the questions I was referring to were the ones in my first post in this thread, numbered 1 - 5.

Sick of Lies,

If your so sick of lies as you say you are you keep your lying pie hole shut.

Good questions Rico,
Can't say I know the answers, and can't say we ever will! Unless somebody has secret recording of white house meetings and stuff!! I believe what I'm trying to say is, we may never get the whole picture! I would probably be more inclined to question some of the dealings of our GOVERMENT as a whole, were it not for the incessant hatred and hypocrisy from the left! I mean lets be real for about ten minutes! Let's say the dems could prove half the crap they claim short of calling Bush a hitler that want to run the world! Do I really see a saving grace in the democrat hypocrites? Hell know, not even among most of the non-political everyday citizen! They would never do anything good for the security of this country, they would hand our soveirnty over to the U.N., and they would tax into oblivion everybody with the drive to work hard for THEIR money in the hope of getting ahead & getting alittle extra out of life! Nope, can't say the democratic party has even a little bit of appeal to the general informed population, evem if we did find that Bush had told some white lies(don't get me wrong, I still believe he has been on the up-nup with us to the best of his abilities)!

Bear,
Nice to be able to make general statements like that with nothing to back it up.
You obviously must be 100% correct. Dems hate America and we just want to give it to the UN.
Of course we just want to tax the crap out of you. Why wouldn't we?
National Security? Huh.. who needs it? The UN will be running the country anyway.
Of course. We chose not to appeal to people.

So instead, we as a nation, will just continue to spend spend spend until the deficit is at 500 trillion. Who cares as long as corporations and the upper classes don't have to pay any taxes. As long as the poor get poorer, who cares? We'll never have to pay that 500 gazillion back to China and the Saudis. We'll bomb them before we pay back a dime!
You don't care about paying $3 for a gallon of gas or some ridiculous amount of money for healthcare.

Who cares if the President told some "white lies" about sending us into war or spying on Americans. Does it really matter? As long as he doesn't try lying about getting a BJ in the White House, he can lie because it is in the purpose of war. Remember 9/11?

You sound ridiculous.

SOL, your absolutely right(as always)! I sound ridiculous! My only saving grace is....... you goes ARE ridiculous! Thing is, you know it too! Yet you still choose to be on the ridiculous side of the equation SOL. What does that make you? I could think of some choice words!