Live-Blogging Oversight Hearing

This hearing destroys the MYTH Valire Plame was NOT Covert, because under OATH she says she was covert.

also it shows how hard the republicans in BOTH the white House and US Senate went to LIE about who sent Joseph Wilson to Niger.

Thus the republicans are willing to destroy US National security in a time of war THEN lie about it for PURELY political reasons.

Man am I glad she got the chance to finally square this away, although I’m looking forward to the contortions upcoming from the lying right to twist her words.

Speaking of the lying right, Victoria Toensing up later today. This oughta be good.

SusanUnPC writes: “I can’t recall a hearing that so baldly, simply exposed the unethical and (imho) criminal conduct of an administration.”

Yep, ya gotta wonder, just what exactly does this administration have to do to get noticed and censured by the press and impeached down to the last man.

What the hell does it take?

Yes, it will take more Dems in Congress, but beyond that I think it is essential for each and every citizen to rise up and say “Enough”…

I am so thankful for Valerie’s courage and diligence in putting the truth in everyone’s faces. I worry that she, and others like her (sibel edmonds???) will grow weary and fade into the background, and these evil doers, who have this horrendous plan for us all, will go free…

Why are we not beginning to hear rumblings from the right wing, that the shrub should resign for the ‘good of the party’?

crackers, as I see it they–the republicans–were still trying to politicalize this thing…and it should not be that way.

Nothing wrong with telling No Quarter visitors of the Daily Kos blogging on the Plame appearance. Just the opposite–I, for one, found this “live” exchange because I read Susan’s post here.

WOW Go Waxman!!!

As an added bonus, Valerie’s testimony nicely underscores the true nature of the deeply dishonest SSCI report– partisan water-carrying of the worst kind.

God, I hope we’ve heard the last of the wingnut cites from that scurrilous piece of crap.

Brigitte N. writers: “Nothing wrong with telling No Quarter visitors of the Daily Kos blogging on the Plame appearance.”

Brigitte, this particular troll can counted upon to pop up like clockwork whenever any mention of Kos is made here.

To answer the unspoken question, no, I’m afraid I don’t understand the nature of the illness he is suffering.

James Knodell, seems like he is just a political hack placement, IMHO.

Ya know if someones head had rolled over this whole matter, this would maybe not have been such a bigger deal with congress, now. But there has been so much– cover up — that I do believe that no one really knows who the hell is really the bad guy here. Is it really cheney, rove or whig or who!!? Can they really get to the best conclusion here? I find it really telling here….the WH has a lot of stupid and incompetent ppl in it started from the top down.

Bill Leonard, competent and cool.

James Knodell, deer in the headlights.

Spot the Bush apointee.

Victoria Toensing is testi[l]ying now.

You all seem to connect dots differently than I.

Ms. Plame answered one of the first questions on the “how she felt” upon seeing Novak’s article with Joe’s comment “OMG, he did it” while tossing the paper the table. Who’s the “he”?? Were they expecting this article? I take this as they were already in “victim” mode.

However the timeline of events shows flaws in the notion of an orchestrated attempt to out Plame merely to discredit Wilson’s Niger oral report.

First off, the oral Wilson report was done in February 2002. However the report and intel used in the SOTU address was the British intel from Sept 2002 (7 months more current data), which to this day runs contrary to Wilson’s report. Presumably, Wilson himself would not have access to the British intel. Did his wife? Did she speak about the British intel and it’s disagreement with her husband’s findings? Alas… another question that won’t be asked.

Wilson had already done his desired damage by disclosing his own findings to the NYTs in May 2003 under an anonymous moniker. The Plame “outing” publicly was a month later.

So burning question… what is the advantage to destroying Plame’s career just to “discredit” a report by Wilson? A report already refuted by more current foreign intel? Fact is, Plame’s status in the CIA has nothing to do with the accuracy or inaccuracy of Wilson’s “leaked” oral report.

However, if a citizen decides to naysay foreign intel in a US media, the WH would have not only the interest, but the right to refute perceptably inaccurate claims, AND question the motive of anonymously disclosing older CIA data to discredit the British intel.

In the course of finding out who, what, where, when and why for Wilson’s motives, Plame’s CIA status would be discovered (also thru CIA channels, as noted on the hearing diagram). However no one was told, as Plame herself testified, that she was a “covert” status. They were only to assume that in her views.

The Fitz investigation concluded that Ms. Plame’s outing was not deliberate in intent (a sad byproduct, at best), and that’s why no one is charged.

However the larger story is, why did Wilson feel he needed to leak his own, older report after the SOTU, and why does he feel it is more valid that the more current British intel?

Waxman said,in closing,that he will check on Victoria’s ‘facts’.
It shouldn’t be hard for him to contradict that liar.

MataHarley,
All of the Niger “intel” (of any date) regarding the alleged attempt of Iraq to buy yellowcake from Niger is from the same forged document. The administration’s initial interest stemmed from it, Wilson’s investigation refuted it and then the Brits came calling with old news that happened to be what Bush and Cheney wanted to hear. They then touted it as credible because it came from the Brits. Kind of like money laundering.

MataHarley writes: “So burning question… what is the advantage to destroying Plame’s career just to ‘discredit’ a report by Wilson? A report already refuted by more current foreign intel? Fact is, Plame’s status in the CIA has nothing to do with the accuracy or inaccuracy of Wilson’s ‘leaked’ oral report.”

Although there is a conspiracy theory afoot which says that there is a motive beyond that of simply discrediting Joe by inferring that his trip was based on nepotism, it is not widely held.

Most think that the outing of Valerie was simply reckless and negligent, perhaps criminally so, and that the issue is unecessarily obscured by the ulterior motive claims, which always cause my eyes to glaze over.

That said, I agree with Crackers that you are not arguing in good faith here.

Jederman and Chris

What I base my British intel personal opinions on is the 2004 Butler Review report for the House of Commons (link to PDF report is http://www.butlerreview.org.uk/report/report.pdf) which addresses the Uraniam from Africa issue specifically, and a post-view validity of their findings. I do not believe that all hinges around the “forged/unforged/how did you know they were forged Joe/I may have misspoke” Niger reports.

According to this HOC review, they state that the evidence that Saddam had attempted to acquired uranium, and the SOTU language of 2002 were “well founded”.

This would mean that perhaps what was perceived as BS in 2002 Feb or Sept is now perceived in 2004 as “well founded”.

You may read the report yourselves. Pertinent PDF pages start at 136 on the online PDF.

I grew up with Joe DiGenova, husband of Victoria Toensing. Isn’t it funny how some men seem to marry women who look just like their mothers.

MataHarley writes: “What I base my British intel personal opinions on is the 2004 Butler Review report for the House of Commons…”

Fuck your opinions. Let’s stick to the facts, please.

From the report you cite:

“The forged documents were not available to the British Government at the time its assessment was made, and so the fact of the forgery does not undermine it.”

Does not undermine its assessment at the time, in other words, letting the brit gov off the hook (the sole purpose, apparently, of the Butler Report).

Nevertheless, what was bullshit in February 2002 and September 2002 was still bullshit in 2004.

Actually, VT has a point that the CIA should have done more to protect its own. Obviously, the CIA is now heeding this advice as it will not allow reporters within two hundred yards of an attorney’s office two hours before and two hours after his fired CIA client meets with him.

This is the HEART of the matter folks- ybnormal has it:
“Based on these two items alone, I think there’s reasonable suspicion about whether the White House intended to destroy or at least discredit the program that Valerie Plame was operating; most likely because her program would not have been giving the White House the verification it so desparately wanted. The fact that verification couldn’t be given because it didn’t exist, seems to be meaningless to a White House which fires anyone who won’t feed their agenda by any means necessary.”

Only Valerie and others in the agency know the truth here (and that is probably all we truly need to know).

What we need to ASK is why the White House decided to deep six Brewster Jennings? that is THE question… start there, the rest follows, in layer upon layer of rotten onion, unpeeling.

MataHarley writes: “Ms. Plame answered one of the first questions on the ‘how she felt’ upon seeing Novak’s article with Joe’s comment ‘OMG, he did it’ while tossing the paper the table.”

The quotation marks you’ve included imply that she’s quoting Joe verbatim.

A lie. [yawning] How dare you.

Just had a look at the replay of her testimony, and she is actually responding in her own voice to a question of when she first heard about Novak’s article outing her (“it”, in context).

She simply says that Joe dropped the newpaper and told her that he did it. Notice lack of quotes, and how it changes the sense of the phrase.

Does this put to rest any lingering doubts about whether you are arguing in good faith?

Right, why’d I ask.

mata- you arne’t going to trip anyone here up as per the plame case. go back to to little green footballs. several people here have been knee deep in this thing for lke 4 years. we know the butler report. I frickin wrote it!

I’m Lester butler

Val opening with, “I was a covert agent” was a very good beginning, the best one she could’ve made. That’ll force the wingnuts to say, “No you weren’t!”, which will only make them them look stupider than we already give them credit for.

Good on her.

Btw, #62: W For Vendetta Edition is just up for your amusement or bemusement. On the spit this week: Alberto Gonzo
Turdblossom and the DOJ
Zell Miller
Phil Gingrey
Peter Pace
The June Taylor dancers…

I imagine next weekend’s edition will be completely dominated with the wingnut response to her testimony.

Toesring sounded scared to me while she was speachifying at the start of the hearing. I could feel it in the way she tried so hard to defend the evil ones she represents.

I was very impressed with Valerie’s testimony, and esp grateful to her for the service she continues to provide this country. She is doing something so worthwhile and important, and I bless her efforts.

Chris and all, don’t worry about the trolls. They will go away when we keep ignoring the lies that they tell…

Yes, unfortunately, Chris, you are right. I stand corrected. i appreciate all your comments here… I think looking at all those Faux news clips must have strained my thought process a bit… I can hardly wait to hear how they spin all this…

Again, I think the CIA could have done more. By the way, I am a registered Democrat. Have never voted for a republican candidate and don’t ever intend to. But here’s another scenario:

An unsuspecting, natural born, upstanding American citizen marries an immigrant. She takes his sur name. During first year of marriage, it’s time to renew her American passport. She renews it in her new, legal name. He turns out to be a suspicious character and she files for divorce. But she has trouble getting the divorce. The first lawyer fires her, the second lawyer was very smug.

Immediately after divorce, American citizen sends her passport away to be amended to reflect her own, given name. Passport is returned “Amended” but the name of the ex still appears prominently on the face of the passport right under her picture.

American citizen decides to become an expat and live south of the border. She applies for a Visa with Mexican Consulate in Texas and gives them a copy of her American passport. She sells her home and moves to Mexico.

While in Mexico, she learns that she was born with dual citizenship because her parents are Italian. She applies for an Italian passport and gives a copy of her American passport to the Italian Embassy in Mexico. She then receives the Italian passport and moves to Italy.

Within one year of residing in Italy, she starts seeing pictures of a man who resembles her ex all over the TV, Internet, Newspapers, etc. It gets worse and worse. More and more pictures and talk of this person. Everywhere she goes, she sees his picture.

Now, she is getting scared. When she goes home to see her mother in the USA and uses her American passport, is she going to be detained? Arrested? Kidnapped? Thrown into a secret prison somewhere?

She decides to write a letter to an important person. She tells him of her fears and asks “who is this person she divorced and whose picture she sees all over the world and whose name is on her passport”?

No reply from the important person but five months later, the American Embassy in Rome sends an email to its citizens in Italy. “For security purposes, we are no longer amending passports. If you have a name change, you will get a NEW passport”. A little late, I would think, if you get my drift.

Question: Did any evidence during the Libby trial emerge to prove the existence of The White House Iraq Group (WHIG)?

The very idea that it was established…and who comprised it….and for what purpose….would go a long way to show their intent…..as part of the PATTERN of building the case for their phony war.

All the lies shot down, a house of cards imploding.

The process talk only distracted from the main issue, that will become even more an outrage with the eventual disclosures.

The intent can be assertained by the statement “fair game” and this will accelerate soon.

Unnamed was Colin Powell. Armitage is being a fall guy, his Senior boss is accountable and the man wasn’t called forward? The Reps. Fear that because he will say something.

When internals that suggest promoting his son to FCC as a means of coverup come out, it will be the tipping point there and the man will stooge to new levels on his former co-conspiratores.

Someone mentioned Plame to Armitage, he was not a Senior administration person. The NSA oversees all interdepartment work. Condi was notably out of the DC limelight this past week.

Too many lies to deny, push harder. Call Powell before Congress and you will get impeachable material.

Call Rice before Congress, no communication was taken with regard to compliance.

They cannot line out their lies, keep at them.