Well, this comes as quite the shocker, doesn't it? Eh, not so much. But, let's quote it anyway, for the dimwitted among us, shall we?
The unclassified summary of Plame's employment with the CIA at the time that syndicated columnist Robert Novak published her name on July 14, 2003 says, "Ms. Wilson was a covert CIA employee for who the CIA was taking affirmative measures to conceal her intelligence relationship to the United States."
Plame worked as an operations officer in the Directorate of Operations and was assigned to the Counterproliferation Division (CPD) in January 2002 at CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia.
The employment history indicates that while she was assigned to CPD, Plame, "engaged in temporary duty travel overseas on official business." The report says, "she traveled at least seven times to more than ten times." When overseas Plame traveled undercover, "sometimes in true name and sometimes in alias — but always using cover — whether official or non-official (NOC) — with no ostensible relationship to the CIA." (emphasis mine)
Now, let's see. Who called this correctly? Victoria Toensing and Joe DiGenova, the Boris and Natasha of bobbleheads, who shilled their asinine fact-free "oh no, clearly not covert" bullshit on every talk show from here to China and back again? Nope. Wrong. Over and over again. Completely wrong. On cable teevee. In the WaPo. You name it. And did I mention they were wrong?
Oh wait…and to Congress.
Waxman: Ms. Toensing, I just only can say that we are pleased to accommodate the request of the Minority to have you as a witness and some of the statements you’ve made without any doubt and with great authority I understand may not be accurate so we’re going to check the information and we’re going to hold the record open to put in other things that might contradict some of what you had to say.
Oooopsie. Wonder if the time has elapsed to revise and extend Ms. Toensing's remarks to Rep. Waxman's committee? Sure hope not, because I hear a perjury charge can really set you back.
And so today, I'm calling for more honest bobbleheads. I don't think it is too much to ask that if people are going to sling information around like it is so much hash, that at the least they have some rudimentary knowledge of the veracity of its component ingredients. Otherwise, they could just be serving the general public a dish of crap, couldn't they? And, frankly, bobbleheads ought to be held to account as to whether or not the acid that comes dripping so blithely off their overly-whitened fangs is true or false.
And, in this particular case, I think every media organization which has allowed these two particular fact free partisans to sally forth and spew whatever filth they chose to spew about Valerie Plame Wilson and her role at the CIA need to do a couple of things — I agree with Amato on this: (1) apologize publicly to Valerie Plame Wilson and (2) issue a correction in a prominent place so that all of their readers and/or viewers will know that they allowed themselves to be used by false and maniplating fact free shills. Is that really too much to ask — that integrity be restored, if only for a moment, to the whole bobblehead process? (Fred Hiatt especially needs to answer for the Toensing op-ed that seemed awfully close to a jury nullification attempt, don't you think?)
I'd say that Toensing and DiGenova (and Mary Matalin and Barbara Comstock and all of Dick's other shrieking PR minions) should apologize as well. But, last I checked between the temperature and humidity outside today, hell hasn't frozen over yet.
Dan Froomkin has a great overview of the filing information to date and what it means. And Larry Johnson has much more, including a link to the PDF of Patrick Fitzgerald's filing on the matter, wherein Mr. Fitzgerald argues the following:
Particularly in a case such as this, where Mr. Libby was a high-ranking government official whose falsehoods were central to issues in a significant criminal investigation, it is important that this court impose a sentence that accurately reflects the value the judicial system places on truth-telling in criminal investigations….
He has expressed no remorse, no acceptance of responsibility, and no recognition that there is anything he should have done differently – either with respect to his false statements and testimony, or his role in providing reporters with classified information about Ms. Wilson's affiliation with the CIA.
Absolutely correct, and a sentiment that more folks in the Bush Administration and inside the Beltway in general would do well to internalize. And quickly. Those sorts of orchestrated, deliberate leaks and lies get people killed. And when they are coming from political officials to whom we entrust our national security secrets? That is doubly disturbing because they break faith with the public by their actions, and they put us at more risk in the process by betraying agents and assets who were working on nuclear weapons and other WMD proliferation for the safety of us all.
I talked earlier about sentencing arguments and whether bond will continue pending appeal and I stand by my thoughts that it is likely that Mr. Libby's bond will be revoked shortly after sentencing — he'll likely be given time to finish getting his affairs in order and be able to surrender on his own recognizance shortly after sentencing. And, based on Judge Walton's history, I'm expecting it to be closer to the requests made by Fitzgerald and his team than those requested by Wells, Jeffress and company. These things are often unpredictable, so there is no guarantee one way or the other, especially not having seen the contents of the presentence investigation. But, we'll see on June 5th, won't we?
Related posts:
- Naomi Wolf, OMB Watch Endorse Alan Grayson’s Campaign to Reform the Fed
- SCOTUS Denies Valerie Plame Wilson Her Day in Court
- Christie’s Cookie Crumbles: Fed Attorney/Paramour Timed Arrests, Stonewalled Investigation to Aid Campaign
- The Secrets Novak Took to the Grave
- Cheney Interview: Washington Post Losing Its Ability to Report, Too





Spotlight







Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search

FDL
Honest Bobbleheads? Isn’t that an OXYMORON?
Zed?
See, Christy, that’s one of the things I wish for, every night, on the first star: “Please let Toesuck be charged with perjury.”
It’s not at the top of the list, but it’s there.
Someone during the Goodling investigation claimed the Libby hearing was a sign of Democratic paranoia. Does anyone else remember which member of Congress made this statement? I wish we could perform a keyword search in the Congressional Record, for we could then compile a list of names and begin demanding official apologies on the House and Senate floors.
I think they have a thirty day period during which they can revise and extend remarks. I laughed when I read this.
I sacrificed a rare opportunity for a zed, because I just had to read this post. What a gleeful, told-ya-so feeling!
Just over at EW’s place reading about the probation recommendation. WTF?????
Those bobbleheads are hilarious, Christy.
It’ll be nice to hear the sentence. I’m pretty sure that if there’s any prison time worth mentioning, Bush will pardon him. He’s basically stood by him anyway, despite the conviction. In fact, the appeal should stretch it out so that he doesn’t have to serve time until right around the end of the Bush presidency, the standard time to issue pardons.
The one on the left is too attractive to be Toensing.
Great, great post, Christy.
Each one of us should write letters to the editor, link to this excellent post, and ask for a prominently placed correction.
allan_in_upstate @ 9
So’s the one on the right.
FFFH also needs to be called to account for still allowing the traitor Novakula to spout HIS lies within the WaPoo editorial pages.
“perjury”
what a concept- throw her scrawny ass in jail..of course she will complain that she was only committing politics.
Morning all. I thought everyone would get a giggle out of the bobblehead dolls. hehehehe
Thank God for Fitz, and his authentic concern for Justice and the rule of law.
“He has expressed no remorse, no acceptance of responsibility, and no recognition that there is anything he should have done differently” –
But that pretty much sums up Bushie and this entire White House administration for the past six years…
Come on Fitzy- indict the fat man- you can do it- we’re all cheering for you- when it comes to crime- the fat man’s where it’s at…
6 x 8 for the shooter!!!
QUICK, LOOK OVER THERE—–LINDSY LOHAN IS DRUNK AGAIN!
AND SPRINGER IS COMING ON SOON WITH MORE PATERNAL DNA TEST!
NOW THAT’S EXCITING!
fuckitwegettheleaderswedeserve
Excellent post..
Little OT
Does Luskin have to turn over the Rove e-mails
or can he lawyer his way out?
Any thoughts on this?
Will Bush be impeached before he can pardon Libby?
George at 8 — You know, we were hearing before the trial that Bush would pardon him before any evidence got presented. Then that Bush would pardon him before a verdict was rendered. I think Bush is more concerned with saving his own miserable ass at the moment, and a pardon, if any at all, will only come at the very end of the Bush presidency on his way out the door — which would be awfully ironic considering Libby was Marc Rich’s attorney who helped to secure his pardon that way and all the little wingnut heads exploded about it.
There will not be a pardon so long as the Democratic Congress is providing oversight, because it would leave Libby without his 5th Amendment protections and he would be forced to testify in open hearings about what he knows under subpoena. Just imagine for a moment how much the Bush folks — especially Cheney — would look forward to that.
rwcole @ 13
What I couldn’t figure out–is why Waxman (or someone) didn’t ask Vicky about her “security clearance” which provided her with info as to whether or not Plame (or any other CIA officer for that matter) was covert. I was shouting at the TV during her testimony–ask her how she knows what she says she know! I know she kept saying that she knew because she supposedly wrote the IIPA statute, but that still didn’t explain how she could claim she knew anything about Plame’s particular situation at the CIA.
Shorter version: it doesn’t take rocket science to see that Vicky couldn’t know what she was talking about; thus she was lying her ass off.
Send Andy Card to the pokey—let’s start a fund!!
Oh, and I meant to mention: the Toensing links above are a veritable treasure trove of old Traitorgate posts. I had some serious fun digging those up for your amusement.
dakine01 @ 12
But according to Lil’ Deb, op-ed contributors to the Post do their own fact checking.
I hope Walton swings for the bleachers.
Woody
She ALWAYS lies her ass off- as does her hubby- which is why they are a destination shop for goopers who have broken the law- most of em.
Of all the cable talking heads, how many do you think will even mention this little fact? I’m guessing none. One or two smart guests will point it out, but the host will blow off the discussion.
Except Olbermann. But he deals with reality, so there ya go.
Love the bobbleheads. These two in particular work on couple of levels. :)
Christy Hardin Smith @ 21
*sigh*
They weren’t just wrong, they lied. The most egregious media outlets were those (including the Post) that presented each of these two as legal experts, who should be given credence because of that expertise. (Toensing presented herself as someone who practically wrote the frickin’ IIPA.)
This is also false. An expert is someone who uses their knowledge of a subject to illuminate. These bozos use their knowledge to dress up a partisan conclusion in impressive-sounding language. They are liars, shills and con men, and any outlet that presents them as anything else is complicit in their lies.
Christy Hardin Smith @ 14
You’ve been saving that one for an appropriate occasion, I’m sure!
Christy, you are awesome. You, Jane, Fitzgerald, all awesome. Relentless truthtellers. Something that is in very short supply in this twisted political environment. Don’t ever doubt for a moment that you’re making a huge contribution and no small difference. You’re the alternative to that crap they’re slinging. And we all know who “they” are, don’t we?
jeeves @ 20
now that’s an idea I can get behind …
rwcole @ 23
A Bully Fund
Glad he was roundly booed at UMASS…
When was the last time Bush spoke to the
common folk rather than The Citadel, West Point, Naval Academy, Air Force Academy, the
American Legion, The Coast Guard Academny, Fort
Bragg, Fort Benning, Fort Carson…
Well, the Fitzgerald filing was sweet for this reason. But seriously, wasn’t this news just head-slappingly obvious?
OT. While searching on Harvard’s website for Harvey “Manly” Mansfield’s home page,
I stumbled upon this little steaming cesspool of neocon dreck.
Enjoy, but please shower afterwards.
noblejoanie @ 10
And you can use the SPOTLIGHT tool at the bottom of the post to send this post to your favorite media folks.
Well done, Christy. We need some apologies, lots of them, every day.
Speaking of bobbleheads and back to Scarecrow’s link (last thread) to the NYT’s call-out on Dobbs:
Too freaking late now! These *ssholes have been allowed to spew their bile and lies around the airways for years now……..there’s no putting *that* genie back in the bottle.
My method of fact checking these days is taking whatever is said by same bobbleheads, rotating it 180 degrees………then I figure I’ve arrived at something roughly approximately the truth.
Christy Hardin Smith @ 21
Wouldn’t the pardon only apply to the convicted crimes? Couldn’t he still use the 5th for any other crime? Not to mention the Presidential powers argument that these guys love to invoke.
On a side note, it’s hard to imagine that loyalty alone is preventing all the current and ex administration hacks (in every department) from coming forward with some evidence, if only because they want to do the right thing. There must be some fear involved, and the implication that if crimes were committed, they did it too. Does that make any sense?
If we can’t get bobbleheads to refute the fake connection between 911 and Iraq, we will indeed be waiting till hell freezes over for a public apology from any of these craven sewer rats, for any of their lies which are legion.
No one who is a part of the GWB caba has any social mores, values, or moral compass.
It astounds me still that a spy working on WMD’s is outed because her husband dared to speak up and tell the public the truth of what was going on. The cabal who outed her and then protected their own are among the worst traitors in our history -IMHO.
That wannabe members of the cabal, like VT and JD would demonstrate their own willingness to lie their way into the graces of power is just more stink from the steaming pile. Fetid and putrid cannot begin to describe the whole scenario.
My faith in what this country should be about is lifted by people like Fitz, like Gore (saw him last night on KO and in a great YouTube clip), and like netroot communities where I can read that there are more and more people who see the need to keep this country from completely herding over the cliff. Keeping it honest is the foundation.
Thanks for this post, Christy. The bobblehead dolls are the perfect metaphor. Don’t be surprised if you can one day auction off the bobbleheads for charity and get a pretty price!
pointecoupeedemocrat @ 5
I couldn’t find the one you were looking for but I found
this gem from the inimitable Michael Medved earlier this month.
Anti-Bush Paranoia Drives Dems Out of Mainstream
a hearty laugh is good for the what ails ya, and BushCrew is ailing me.
GeorgeSimian @ 38
I have wondered what’s keeping them all so quiet. Seems like someone would break. What’s the fear factor?
GeorgeSimian @ 38
You don’t have to be convicted to be pardoned. See Ford’s broad pardon of Nixon for “any and all crimes” as the most obvious example.
RevDeb @ 2
Hi RevDeb.
-uh-
i think you’ve got that elusive sermon topic ;->
Now I can proudly proclaim:
TOESTINK!!!!!!
Mandrake
Thanks ;->
Scarecrow @ 36
well, fix one small typo first:
issue a correction in a prominant place
“prominent”
sorry for the nit-picking.
Check out Sergeant Schultz in Iraq.
He’s over there reporting on the Progress. Too bad he knows nuth-ink.
Peterr @ 43
But he’s already been convicted, so it’s pretty straight forward, isn’t it? I have no idea what I’m talking about here, just guessing from what I do know.
Woodhall Hollow @ 22
[my bold]
That is a very good question!
Christy Hardin Smith @ 24
that’s why we love you! :)
There was an article in our local paper yesterday about DC Dems not wanting to pursue impeachment. At first it looked like a plant from the other side to make the Dems look wishy washy, but then it went on to talk about the growing unrest in the hinterlands – the town councils, state leges demanding it. I will dive in to find it and will link to it in another post.
Good Morning Christy
you want a retraction and an apology from these rockheads ?!?!
bwaahaaahaaa !
Waxman, Schmaxman – she’s gonna argue that “per the statute, Section ___, sub-paragraph ___ . . .”
despite my cynicism, I did just fax Congressman Waxman’s office(s) and all but begged him to follow up – at least in writing
Congressman Waxman – contact info
lee5 @ 42
Try thinking about it without the assumption that they have a sense of right and wrong. If they keep quiet, they’re on the gravy train for life, and can aspire to be the next Paul Wolfowitz or whoever. If they talk, the Bushies will at the very least make sure they never work for Republicans again, and even if they’ve committed no crimes, who else would want them after they’re tainted with being part of this administration?
If they put country before party, they might speak up about the wrongdoing anyway, but if put country before party, would they ever have been appointed by the Bush administration in the first place?
Wasn’t it revealed during the trial that Plame was, in fact, covert? Why is Fitz’s filing stating what was already known news?
Why does V. Toensing deserve months to correct her statements to Waxman’s committee?
If the media can’t even ask the simplest followup questions, what good are they?
So President Bush, why does Karl Rove still have security clearance/employment at the White House? Why does he still have your confidence? Do you condone exposing covert agents of our government? We’d like a real answer this time.
GeorgeSimian @ 49
Nixon was never convicted or even tried for anything. He lost various court cases to keep his tapes and such out of the hands of investigators, but nothing ever reached a trial in terms of criminal acts. Articles of impeachment were voted in the House Judicary committee, but then Nixon resigned and it all ended when Ford issued his blanket pardon.
No doubt Vicky and Joe have the ‘loyalty’ eye infection that blinds them to perception of right and wrong as it would be determined by the facts. They’re Goopers – and they really believe they get ‘fact immunity’ protection from ‘the big boss’ when they demonstrate ‘loyalty.’
Libby is doing the same thing. The difference is he’s doing it Very Arrogantly – posing each morning before Court, and pulling a bait-and-switch on Judge Walton with the ‘memory defense’ turned ‘befuddlement defense.’
Libby is hiding – like a coward who scoffs at the rule of law – behind Bush’s Patronage, pure and simple. Libby has no doubt whatsoever that he will be rewarded for his ‘loyalty’ to Bush as a Fact-Bullet-Catcher who prevented ‘embarrassment of the Crown.’
This is the ‘basic’ litmus test for membership in BushCo, and Bush – the Lord of the Country – enjoys bestowing his beneficience on his loyal servants.
Why talk of how much time Libby should/will get when a ‘pardon’ is almost an inevitability – if for no other reason than to rub the noses of the Rule-of-Law-First crowd in it?
That’s so Bush…
I believe the employment history also says that she worked on weapons proliferation issues in Iraq. Just in case Byron York is having trouble connecting the dots.
I have a funny story for you guys. We have a cat who is an inside kitty (having lost our prior cat to an accident, when we took this one in as a stray, we decided to keep her as an inside girl). As you guys know, my birdfeeders are located near the kitchen window so that I can see the birdies while I blog. This is Rascal (our kitty’s) favorite spot throughout the day — she likes to watch the unattainable morsels fly in and out.
We have this local squirrel who likes to raid my feeder. Yesterday, I heard this noise coming from the kitchen that sounded like a half-growl, half-hacking hairball. So I ran in the kitchen to see what was happening — the squirrel had climbed up the side of our house and was peering in at our kitty, who was incensed that the squirrel would dare to taunt her so cruelly. She was having a hissy fit (literally) and the evil little squirrel was, I swear, waving a paw at her. It was hilarious. Wish I had grabbed our video camera, because it would have made a great YouTube.
Thought you all would get a kick out of it. *g*
The NY Times reported Plame’s covert status in a blog: The Lede.
The wingnuts are already over there with the same old, same old talking points in the comments. Its all Joe’s fault. The best one is the assertion that just because she traveled overseas undercover, it doesn’t mean she was covert.
Badenov: “Allow me to intoro-duce myself…”
Fatale: “Not now, Borees. We must get reed of moose and squirrel.”
Fitzgerald as squirrel works (honest, righteous), but who’s moose (fun, if a little dim)?
JF at 55 — Because it comes with an attached declassifed document from the CIA confirming just that. And because a lot of people weren’t paying attention, and some of the bobbleheads continue to spin fact free idiocy — so it bears repeating for the dimwitted.
Frank Probst @ 59
My five year old could give York some lessons on connecting the dots, if he needs even more help.
Badenov: “Allow me to intoro-duce myself…”
Fatale: “Not now, Borees. We must get reed of moose and squirrel.”
Fitzgerald as squirrel works (honest, righteous), but who’s moose (fun, if a little dim)?
Jean2k @ 62
Sen. Rockefeller
Peterr @ 57
I know all that. I’m just wondering about Libby.
here’s a great take by Glenn Greenwald today in Salon:
Right wing conventional wisdom begins as a lie, repeated over and over again until it is emblazoned on every wingnut cerebral cortex. That’s why over 50% of the public still believe in the 9/11 Saddam link.
We need to keep exposing their lies and demanding apologies, not only from the wingnut idiots themselves but from the cable channels who enable them.
The fight for reality-based discourse that Gore writes about begins with the exposure of all the lies and the lying liars.
Anyone up for a Fred Hiatt blogswarm?
And lest we forget….she wrote the law.
Kevster @ 67
It’s time to give up on Fred.
Either he’s a true believer, or someone has photos of him in bed with an underage goat.
In either case, we’re kidding ourselves to think that he can be persuaded to change his ways.
Bay State Librul @ 33
I sorta think the folks at Benning, Bragg, Carson and the like are part of the “common folk”.
Gnome de Plume @ 52
sure seems like the wrong point in the election cycle for any dems to pursue impeaching. Sucks, but hard to imaging obamary wanting attention anywhere else …
Marcy has some excerpts from the Pre-Sentece report over at TNH.
EvidentlyWells and Jefress “got to” or wore down theguy from the Probation Dpeartment who prepared the pre-sentence report.
The Report seems to be relpeat with pleas for leniency and to outright deviate from the normal guidlines calculation formula.
That’s unusual. Normally, the pre-sentence report is kinda bland and the then the Government’s and the Defense’s responses to it have all the pleas and aruments.
The excerpts repsoned to by the government sound more like they were written by the defnese.
Very few defense lawyers really know how to “work” the pre-sentence phase.
Obviously Libby’s lawyers did. They did well for him here.
Second thouhgt. It not pardon you should worry about, it commutation.
Don’t get blindsided my pups. There are ways and then there are ways to keep Scooter out of jail.
For me, the fight is over bail pending appeal. If he does not go in pending appeal, I doubt he will ever see the inside of a jail cell.
Look for a fall back position involving house arrest with an ankle bracelet.
Last thought, There is something significant–some backstory–about those letters to judge Walton.
Way too much effort is going into arguuing about whether they should be released. There is something in there that we need to see. I have no clue what that might be, but both side are expending too much effort over it–ther must be something in there
GeorgeSimian @ 67
Well, he could never be charged again for lying or obstruction–unless he lied again! So he could not plead the 5th on speaking about his lies. On the other hand, if his testimony could put him in legal jeapardy regarding the actual outing, he would find himself on the horns of quite a dilemna. It would be fun to watch he and his lawyers try to squirm his way through that one…but the Bushies would not enjoy it, so I think Christy is right about this. He will not be pardoned until the last possible moment.
That being said, there is nothing to stop an ‘08 Senate committee from hauling him up there, then. Too late to impeach Cheney–but it is never too late to learn the truth!
I wish you had too, that sounds funny. Bad squirrel, teasing your kitty like that. ;)
“Valerie Plame: Covert Indeed”
http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.c…..rt-indeed/
Christy Hardin Smith @ 63
Imagine how much work went into getting that document declassified?
Time for another blogger ethics panel!
OT but too funny: Tim Griffin is interviewing to run
the new great white hope of the GOP’sFred Thompson’s campaign!Link
Woodhall Hollow @ 74
I’m hoping for a lot of this in 2009. The incoming President will have full access to everything Bush and Cheney got up to and can decide for himself (herself?) whether it is worthy of the Classified shelter it’s been given. Of course, I’m not holding my breath. I’m sure most of these politicians will just want to “move on”.
LHP at 72 — I have been trying to look into the question that was brought up in passing on the letters in the Newsweek story from last week. The question on whether it is lawful for current officials to write letters or attempt to intercede in pending criminal sentencing matters in federal court. Any thoughts on that, because I’ve been unable to turn up regs or precedent on that question to shed any light.
TheOtherWA @ 75
I was at a picnic last week for our local conservation society and had a squirrel park its behind right over my seat – on a branch 30 feet up – and drop pieces of bark and green pecan shells onto my head. They are very naughty creatures.
looseheadprop @ 73
It never occured to me that the Probation Department would be so blatantly corrupt.
I was shocked and digusted when I read that.
Christy Hardin Smith @ 63
Thanks, Christy. I know that it is necessary to repeat this over and over until it sinks in. I was not aware of the CIA doc. The MSNBC.com article says only that Fitz claims the Plame was covert. It does note the CIA document, but not until about 1/3 of the way into the article, and implies that it is not definitive, just Fitz’s part of a he-said/she-said.
Christy Hardin Smith @ 81
Hmmmm. D’ya think it is possible that Gonzo or Harriet wrote one? Or one of their less well known flunkies in the DOJ? Could that be why the probation officer is advocating that Libby be allowed to walk scot-free?
Adie @ 46
You’re welcome! =)
You’d think the media would start getting it right by now, but no. USAToday’s
It seems Richard Willing only read the pages from the Minority of the Minority (as Emptywheel would say) of the SSCI report.
It never stops does it? Blah, I need more coffee.
“Truth, Fiction and Lou Dobbs”
Is “truth” making a little headway?
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05…..hardt.html
JF @ 55
Good question. When the Director of the CIA says that someone was covert, you’d think that’d be enough, no?
Official statement by General Michael Hayden, Director of the Central Intelligence Agency:
How much clearer can it be?
looseheadprop @73
“Way too much effort is going into arguuing about whether they should be released. There is something in there that we need to see. I have no clue what that might be, but both side are expending too much effort over it–ther must be something in there”
Letters from Cheney peh-haps? You know, his specialty, the threatening kind.
Fred Hiatt especially needs to answer for the Toensing op-ed that seemed awfully close to a jury nullification attempt, don’t you think.
The WaPo was just providing balance, CHS. Remember, the day before Fred Hiatt ran Toensing, he had Byron York provide the
opposingexact same viewpoint.lee5 @ 72
I agree, but what happens if enough criminality is uncovered before the end? That article ended by saying that dems want Bush-Cheney to stay until 2008 so that they can have them to kick around in order to take over decisively in 2009.
Woodhall Hollow @ 79
man, you just can’t make this stuff up!
guess he’s the designated BushCo replacement for George W.
Woodhall Hollow @ 78
Maybe they should also hire Monica Goodling to cover up Mrs. Thompson’s decolletage.
Are Marcy & I the only ones who prefer correct grammar? [should be “for whom” — object of a preposition]. Perhaps Feds could invest a little $$$ in education.
Signed, the former 8th grade English teacher.
To quote Paul Simon, “I don’t find this stuff amusing anymore,” humm, isn’t that from “You Can Call Me Al?”
allan at 94 — OMG! That one ought to have come with a spew warning. Mwahahaha….
“Drapes needed on the red carpet…pronto.” In that Monica voice of hers. Too funny!
Christy Hardin Smith @ 60
Oh, lord, are cats fun! That is an incredibly cute story and indeed would have made an awesome YouTube.
There was a cat in my neighborhood that used to enjoy taunting one of my indoor girls, who used to be a “street kitty” so she’s very territorial. This cat would jump up on the outside windowsill, spread eagle, sinking his claws into the screen so he could look as large as possible, all the while my kitty is just SCREAMING at this cat (from the safety of her inside abode, of course), hissing and screaming and panting, leaving little spittle drops on the inside window.
The cat on the other side of the window was always completely non-plussed, just doing it for kicks, to get a rise out of her. He was all like, “yawn.” Then he’d jump down after he got bored and she’d race to the other windows to see where he was going.
I always told her she ran him off, just to feed her ego.
(PS, when she sees squirrels and birds up close, she makes little chattering noises)
Mauimom at 95 — Have you heard the word “typo”? I think you should cut them some slack — it might be an error on MSNBC’s part, given that’s where that particular snippet came from in the first place.
ifthethunderdontgetya @ 91
Because two right[winger]s make a wrong.
I just heard Larry Johnson talking to Stephanie Miller on Air America a few minutes ago.
He called out Toestink and the rest of the wingers to apologise to Valerie and Joe.
He said he had his popcorn and soda out and was waiting.He also talked about Scooters sentencing and mentioned the word traitor.
Woot!
Now is the time to go after all the leaking bastards.
RevDeb @ 2
Well there’s that Rain Wilson bobblehead on The Office.
You know, now that it’s all in Judge Walton’s hands, we really need to step back and admire just how brilliantly Team Fitz has played its hand. You can see it in their most recent filings. Look at how many times they’ve defied the conventional wisdom:
CW: They’ll never find out who the leaker was.
Team Fitz: There were at least three leakers: Armitage, Libby, and Rove. At least two witnesses testified under oath in open court about each leaker.
CW: The leak can’t be prosecuted, because the defense will use greymail to get the charges thrown out.
Team Fitz: We’ll limit our charges to Libby being a lying weasel. There goes your greymail defense.
CW: Perjury is almost impossible to prove.
Team Fitz: Almost.
CW: She wasn’t covert, so there couldn’t have been an underlying crime.
Team Fitz: Now that Libby has been convicted (guilty, guilty, guilty, guilty), we will point out–again–that we were investigating violations of the IIPA and the Espionage Act. She was covert. And now that the defense can’t use the greymail defense, we can say it: C-O-V-E-R-T. Why the hell do you think we’ve been persuing this case for the last three years? She was a covert CIA agent covering weapons proliferation in Iraq. If you brain-dead neo-cons can’t understand why this case is important, then you just can’t be helped.
Christy Hardin Smith @ 97
I am going to wager that when Fred announces his candicacy in July the Mrs will have
decreased to at least a single Dlost some weight as a sacrifice for the cause! Takes about 6-8 weeks to recover from such surgery I am told, so the timing is about right.TheOtherWA @ 87
There is a mailto: link at the botton of the page:
Perhaps someone with more knowledge and energy than me could write to them (politely, of course.)
Apologizing isn’t enough, retractions and corrections aren’t enough. Contempt of Congress would be a good start.
Compare the MSNBC article title you linked to “Plame was ‘covert’ agent at time of name leak.” to the title of the Newsweek/Isikoff/Hosenball article, Was She or Wasn’t She?
Excuse me, but don’t these guys even READ their own article?!?! (That’s my mild response. There may be children present.)
And don’t forget to check out the only 2 comments (so far – wink, wink) in response, and do rate up the article – even if the title is unforgiveable.
Y’know, this is making a pardon look more attractive!!
sofistic @ 106
Frogmarch en mass.
Judge Walton – a Federal Judge with incredible power – is likely to read that pre-sentence probation report and laugh out loud.
He knows – Libby, Fitz, Jeffress all know – exactly what’s going on here.
Walton has no problem ’seeing’ the blatant Obstruction of Justice that Libby engaged in on behalf of his Masters, who first orchestrated the leak of Plame’s name, and are now orchestrating the cover-up.
He’ll be sentencing Libby while talking straight at Cheney and Bush – undoubtedly with some sadness – and knowing exactly what’s really going on.
For his attack on the principles of Justice alone, Libby should get the max under the sentencing guidelines.
Then, Bush can thumb his nose at us with a commutation or pardon…
TheOtherWA says
May 30th, 2007 at 7:55 am
You’d think the media would start getting it right by now, but no. USAToday’s
By Richard Willing, USA TODAY
WASHINGTON — Former CIA officer Valerie Plame should explain “differences” in her various accounts of how her husband was sent to the African nation of Niger in 2002 to investigate reports Iraq was trying to buy uranium there, the vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee said.
Plame’s differing versions have furthered “misinformation” about the origins of the case that roiled official Washington beginning in July 2003, said Sen. Kit Bond, R-Mo.
An exercise in the now-totally irrelevant.
allan_in_upstate @ 94
OMG! Trophy wife and then some! Some people will marry anything if it’s got enough money. Yikes! Just the thought . . . (((((shudder))))
Gag.
Christy Hardin Smith @ 21
Al Kamen in his “In The Loop” column a couple of months ago set up a “Libby Pardon Contest” for folks to predict the date when Libby would be pardoned. My guess was/is 12/24/08. That’s the same time frame that Daddy pardoned all his cronies on the way out the door.
commutation…
damn. Hadn’t thought of that.
Balrog @ 48
You know, when these guys are going to Iraq for photo ops, they really ought to be paying out of their own pockets. The trip, the security, the cost of the time everyone is spending, all of it. I don’t want my tax money going for this crap.
Besides that, good morning!
Shooter is in the cross hairs himself now.
snip
http://rawstory.com/news/2007/….._0529.html
Terre @ 107
No, reporters don’t write the headlines for their stories. Editors do that.
ooh a happy thought . . .
wasn’t Judge Walton the one who gagged Sybil Edmonds under the State Secrets thingy ???
sure hope he’s equally sensitive to Libby’s violation of same
catch y’all tonight
Have a FDL day !!!
Toensing most recently worked to represent Shaha Riza in her attempt to escape the Wolfowitz’s-girlfriend/World Bank stink-up. How did Toensing do on that?
Lies committed in defense of King George W. The Turd are a virtue.
Don’t ever forget it.
-GSD
Bustednuckles @ 116
What is not mentioned (and nor could it be) is the role Rove’s lies played in obstructing slowing down Fitz’s investigation. One gets the sense that Rove played it to the wire, by very gradually cleaning up his testimony before the Grand Jury. One smells coordination here–hence Well’s opening statement that Libby was scapegoated to protect Rove (a statement which was, interestingly, never repeated during the trial).
Terre @ 107
Isikoff is still joined at the hip (or slightly lower down) with Ken Starr
(as is, by the way, Jeff Gerth, who currently has a Hillary-bashing book out.)
Christy Hardin Smith @ 99
Oh, rats. I just wanted to rag on the Feds.
jayt @ 111
Does the article cite the “differences” in her account?
Isikoff is a shitheel. So is Fred Thompson. So is Victoria Toensing. Her husband Joe DiGenova is a shitheel too.
Shitheel nation.
Joe Lieberman is a double shitheel.
-GSD
Fresh thread, up and ready for the reading for everyone.
TheOtherWA at 117:
My apologies to Isikoff and Hosenball, and thumbs down then to the editors, who don’t read their own reporters stories. Or do, and we can classify them as among the group of bobbleheads. A mild term if you ask me.
RE: The “Newsweek” article.
I think that they’re being cagey for a very good reason. A lot of us have always suspected that the defense against an IIPA charge would be that Cheney insta-declassified Plame’s status, told Libby to leak her identity, and then reclassified Plame’s status without ever telling anyone she’d been insta-declassified in the first place. Personally, I believe that such a defense would be complete bullshit, but I can see the logic behind it, and it would take years for all of the legal aspects of it to be ironed out. I suspect that Cheney himself told Fitz something along these lines when he was interviewed. (”I’m Dick Cheney. I can do whatever I want. Go fuck yourself.”)
Note that the defense can still try to play this card. Neither Libby nor Cheney testified, so they can both potentially claim that Cheney used his insta-declassification powers, and thus there was no IIPA violation.
Unfortunately, that’s not really going to help Libby right now, and it all goes back to how brilliantly Team Fitz has prosecuted its case. Libby has been convicted of lying about when and how he learned about Valerie Plame’s identity. If he now tries to claim that Cheney told him he had insta-declassified her, he is essentially admitting his guilt for the crimes for which he was charged. Team Fitz played ALL of Libby’s grand jury testimony for a very good reason: They wanted Walton to know that Libby had never said anything about any declassification scheme.
Did we ever learn more about that ’sealed v sealed’ issue?
Terre @ 107:
MSNBC and Newsweek are different media organizations. They do not share the same writers and editors. However, Newsweek Online is posted on MSNBC’s server. MSNBC sometimes uses Newsweek’s writers as MSNBC analysts, like the inept and inane Howard Fineman.
Hi Biodun,
Yes, I’m aware of that. It was really only the titles (based on basically the same information) that I was comparing. Not that they came from the same organization.
Gnome de Plume @ 92
well, yeah, I’d love to see them all hauled off to spend the rest of the “natural” lives behind bars. War crimes trials along the way are really important too.
But, I just don’t think it’s going to happen. Any fantasies I had about demo spines were washed away last week.
Right now, I think the two important issues are
1) neutralizing bushco over the next 18mos. Keep them out of Iran. Minimize harm in Iraq. Try to hold them back here re environment, what’s left of the constitution, worker protection, etc.
2) position to fight the planned coup of 08. They can’t really be planning to just let the people elect someone. So, there has to be something up their sleeves.
“He has expressed no remorse, no acceptance of responsibility, and no recognition that there is anything he should have done differently….”
This means Libby is STILL LYING! I hope Judge Walton throws the book at him. Why not 10 years? And I hope Valerie and Joe are there to see him sentenced. Just to see the look on his face.
Christy Hardin Smith @ 14
dang. where do you find stuff like that? you amaze on the photos you use here.
Christy Hardin Smith @ 21
yeah. that’s too bad. I kinda think that would ignite the firestorm (to heck with a tipping point, we’re gonna need something a lot bigger).
Sally @ 88
Seems to me, LDobbs has been a “1-trick-pony” for a long time, and an increasingly arrogant one at that. It was inevitable he’d trip hissownself eventually.
‘Bout time.
Wonder if he’ll learn anything from this, or just bluster his way thru calling everyone else an idiot or worse…
Some folks increasingly impress in public life.
Others just get stale or, worse, rancid.
He pontificates. You decide.
I turned him off some time ago.
Wayyy over-the-top pandering to and even inciting blatant racism and bigotry imho.
Christy Hardin Smith @ 21
Hmmm. Just a thought – what’s to stop Congress from getting Libby now? Give him immunity and the 5th amendment goes out the window. hmmm. what’s wrong with this picture (he’s already been convicted, right)? oh right, gotta have evidence.
Well said Christy. For any of the interested among your intrepid readers here is the email for Fred Hiatt at the Washington Post — hiattf@washpost.com. While I fully understand the urge to curse and threaten, I suggest all innundate him with polite pleas to do the decent thing and apologize.
Larry at 138 — Thanks. This sort of thing really ticks me off — especially with folks like you, who trained with and worked with Valerie for years having said otherwise, as well as folks still at the CIA and elsewhere — and yet they still marched around spewing inaccurate filth, enabled by the likes of Fred Hiatt whenever he could possibly shoehorn them onto the printed page. Disgraceful.
Larry Johnson @ 138
What an excellent idea, Larry. And thanks for dropping into the Lake, great to see you.
SPOTLIGHT feature, too, folks, use it to forward a copy of this post along with a demand to the Washington Post and any outlets that use WaPo syndicated content for an apology to both Plame and Fitz as well as the public.
Hi Christy. Please don’t let Novak and Krauthammer off the hook for their numerous editorials in which they insisted (often citing Toensing) that Mrs. Wilson wasn’t a real spy. In one of those editorials, Novak took faux umbrage on Toensing’s behalf at Waxman’s “veiled threat.”
Those guys are too creepy for words.
Let’s start an FDL video petition showing Bush saying that who ever was responsible for leaking the information to the press “will be removed from the administration.” Show him using his own words. Then present some type of statement that this is Black and White issue — there is no grey. Either they did or they did not do anything to reveal this information. List everyone involved — Libby, Rove, Armitage, Cheney, Maitlin, etc. Then state “George W. Bush, if you expect us as Americans to believe you on issues of national security, you must follow through with your promises of protecting our troops and our intelegence resources.
Mr. Bush, your honor and the honor of the United States is at stake. As Americans, we demand that you do exactly what you said you would do, that is remove these individuals from your administration. Today.”
In case anyone wants Newsweek’s take, Isikoff declares,
“Patrick Fitzgerald has finally resolved one of the most disputed issues at the core of the long-running CIA leak controversy”
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18…../newsweek/
but then offers the last word to Richard Carlson, described as “a former chief of the Voice of America”:
“I think it’s certainly unseemly that he is kicking him while he’s down,” Carlson said. “For Fitzgerald, to get on his high horse, it’s disgusting and he should be ashamed of himself.”
The title of the article is also disgusting: “Was She or Wasn’t She?”
Larry Johnson @ 138
Anyone who writes might want to refer to Hiatt’s infamous lead editorial, “A Good Leak”, wherein Hiatt took a good leak all over the reputation of his paper: http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..00895.html
Solai @ 129
I don’t think so, and I would like an answer
before The Leak is put to bed…
Redshift @ 29
If Ms Toensing has not corrected her testimony in the Congressional record it does appear that a charge of perjury would be warranted, should at least be investigated. Her ‘expertise’ should place her at a higher standard of care, as she expects her testimony to be taken more seriously.
And perhaps treason? Here is the def from the Constitution, Article III, Section 3.
While I’m at it, some reporters were helpfully shown Valerie Plames’s W2 forms as proof she worked for Brewster Jennings. Who showed it to them? The only people who should have Valeries’s W2’s are Valerie, Brewster Jennings(= the CIA) and the IRS. W@’s are protected information. Heads should roll on that, but has anyone even investigated?
AND Tim Griffin is still USA in AK, 161 days and counting.
What else. I feel deep contempt for Joe Lieberman. Harry, kick his ass out of the caucus and out of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs chair.
1. The notion that an expert witness will be hit for perjury for expressing to Congress the same opinion she expressed in print continues to be absurd. But if you are desperate for a perjury charge, read down in the Newsweek story:
In an appendix to a new report released last week by the Senate Intelligence Committee about Iraq War intelligence, three Republican senators—including Kit Bond of Missouri, vice chairman of the panel—filed “additional views” harshly criticizing Valerie Wilson and her husband for allegedly misleading the committee in 2004 about the role she played in suggesting her husband’s trip to Niger to investigate reports that Iraq was seeking uranium from that country. Citing allegedly contradictory statements she has made more recently to a House committee, the GOP senators called for a re-interview of Valerie Wilson.
I was away for the weekend – was the coverage of that disclosure extensive here? A link to the smoking gun memo.
2. The notion that something is so because a prosecutor says it is so is absurd. Many liberals recognize this in other contexts. Oh, wee – a foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, and I am sure there are no little minds here.
3. Per an email from the CIA Counsel to Rep. Hoekstra, the CIA Counsel still wasn’t clear, as of April 2007, about Ms. Plame’s status:
On March 21, Hoekstra [Ranking Republican on the House Intel Committee] again requested the CIA to define Mrs. Wilson’s status. A written reply April 5 from Christopher J. Walker, the CIA’s director of congressional affairs, said only that “it is taking longer than expected” to reply because of “the considerable legal complexity required for this tasking.”
brendan @ 143
“getting on his high horse”??
I thought Fitzgerald was doing his job as special prosecutor. Why is prosecution turned into such a personal issue??
Oh. Nevermind.
Tom at 147 — See, e.g., snide. Jeebus…had I been seriouly contemplating a perjury charge for her, I would have laid out the rationale for making it. I doubt she’ll be charged with anything other than yet another abysmal outfit choice from DressBarn.
Rayne @ 148
Yes. It’s a novel view of a prosecutor’s job: kicking criminals when they’re down.
CHS fantastic, insightful, thanks!
Victoria Toensing (natasha) was all over the place undermining Fitz’s case and supporting Judy Miller.
http://mediamatters.org/items/200703070003 It was absolutely disgusting. Toensing and Ginova will never apologize (obviously no conscience) they should be held accountable for making so many statements that were absolute lies and taken to task for their very serious efforts to undermine Fitz’s investigation.
These folks are traitors to U.S. National Security along with the others who outed Valerie Plame’s covert status.
Remember when Bob Woodward was all over the place undermining Fitz’s case, calling it “much to do about nothing”. Bob “groupthink” Woodward was is as guilty as Toensing and DiGenova were in trying to interfere with the Plame outing investigation. http://mediamatters.org/items/200511160013
Woodward on Larry King Live
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITI…..index.html
Why in the hell should we trust anything these people say after their obvious efforts to undermine a very serious investigation?
Even if Libby gets what Fitz recommends, I know people who have done 6 for cultivating marijuana. How about those in prison for years for robbing a local service station. While I am not promoting any of these criminal activities. It is simply outrageous that a whole group of individuals in the Bush administration outed a covert undercover agent whose job it was to follow Weapons of Mass Destruction (the “Bushies” told the world that was what they were after) and they are not only not being held accountable for doing very serious damage to U.S. National Security they continue to walk the halls of our nation. Frightening!
Our justice system is not JUST and the whole world knows it!
If Libby gets off it will only confirm this ONCE AGAIN
brendan @ 150
Libby never demonstrated one ounce of conscience or shame for his illegal and immoral actions. Kicking him would be asking for the maximum, which I believe would be 30. I wish Fitz would do just that. You know make Libby an example ….. like our “supposed” justice systed does for other criminals!
Why did Waxman leave the record open for Toensing after her testimony? Is this so that as David Corn pointed out “so she (Toensing) can replace “her” facts with the one’s backed up by the evidence.
Why leave the record open for Toensing? Why not hold her accountable for her lies, interference, and manipulation of the facts? “Cheney her”
Hold Toensing accountable for running interference in the ever ready to do their part…. MSM.
Kathleen @ 151
Tom Maguire @ 147
So you are a witness in a car wreck case. The lawyer asks you this question: Did the green Ford run the red light?
You answer yes. In fact, you weren’t looking at the light. You merely offered your opinion that it was red.
That is a lie. The correct answer is:”I don’t know.”
Whether Plame was covert is not a matter of opinion. It is a question of fact. Toensing tells the truth if she says “I don’t know whether she was covert.” She lies if she says: “She was not covert.” knowing that she does not actually know whether or not she was covert. Please explain exactly why that isn’t perjury.
“Woodward’s Disgrace”
http://dir.salon.com/story/opi…..index.html
Woodward along with Toensing did his very best to undermine the Plame investigation.
Tom Maguire @ 147
You probably know, of course, that coverage was extensive here:
http://thenexthurrah.typepad.c……html#more
pointecoupeedemocrat @ 5
Do peasants or the common folk have 30 days to revise their testimonies in a case/situation like this?
Or is this special privilige just extended to …..Toensing types?
Oct 27, 2005
Woodward on the Larry King Show. Woodward responding to questions about the Plame investigation
KING: What do you think will happen?
WOODWARD: But Michael’s point is exactly right. There is deep mystery here. It only grows with time and people are speculating and there are — there is so little that people really know.
Now there are a couple of things that I think are true. First of all this began not as somebody launching a smear campaign that it actually — when the story comes out I’m quite confident we’re going to find out that it started kind of as gossip, as chatter and that somebody learned that Joe Wilson’s wife had worked at the CIA and helped him get this job going to Niger to see if there was an Iraq/Niger uranium deal.
And, there’s a lot of innocent actions in all of this but what has happened this prosecutor, I mean I used to call Mike Isikoff when he worked at the “Washington Post” the junkyard dog. Well this is a junkyard dog prosecutor and he goes everywhere and asks every question and turns over rocks and rocks under rocks and so forth.
KING: And doesn’t leak.
WOODWARD: And it doesn’t leak and I think it’s quite possible that though probably unlikely that he will say, you know, there was no malice or criminal intent at the start of this. Some people kind of had convenient memories before the grand jury. Technically they might be able to be charged with perjury.
But I don’t see an underlying crime here and the absence of the underlying crime may cause somebody who is a really thoughtful prosecutor to say, you know, maybe this is not one to go to the court with.
KING: You’re saying this is a maybe.
WOODWARD: A maybe, only a maybe.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRA…..kl.01.html
Christy Hardin Smith @ 21
Heh. Wonder if any of the cons banging the “pardon poor lil’ ol’ Scooter” drums realize this?
Tom Maguire at #147:
I had a hard time putting a finger on what so annoyed me about your point #2.
It’s that non-sequitur, “some liberals”. The people at this site don’t attribute it to “conservatism” that venues like NRO defend Libby and claim Plame wasn’t covert or that Wilson was a dandy or whatever ad-hominem argument of the day is. We recognize the very plain and vital partisan motivation in the need of people like Toensing and Bond and everyone else to defend the administration and counterattack. That’s precisely why Fitzgerald is such a constrast, and, therefore, a credible witness. Mounting a vigorous prosecution doesn’t make him a partisan, even in a case the worst sort of partisan Republican would prefer tried in the political arena, outside of a courtroom and, therefore, outside the law.
Richard Perle lying/spinning his involvement with the invasion of Iraq some more at the Guardian. “We had the very best of intentions”
http://commentisfree.guardian……ot_he.html
How does that go “the path to hell is paved with good intentions”. Perle and his cronies have sure created “hell on earth” for the Iraqi people. If only Perle would suit up and go to Iraq to experience first hand the hell that he helped create.
It was mentioned on LateNight (happy b’day TRex and Patrick Rex!) that Valerie Plame may not have been (was not?) the only person working for Brewster Jennings.
That is a sobering thought.
Add Bay Buchanen’s name to the list. And someone tell me what the hell this women did that qualifies her to be an CNN analyst? Audacious lying ability?
From CHS at 149:
…had I been seriouly contemplating a perjury charge for her, I would have laid out the rationale for making it.
I’m stumped – are you saying that your bluster about a perjury charge is just trash talk meant to entertain but not inform? OK, I agreed, and still agree, and stand by my point that the notion of charging Ms. Toensing with perjury for offering an expert opinion is absurd. Welcome aboard.
Woodhall Hollow @ 79
ON Topic and infuriating:
Waiting for Mr. Griffin’s moment of truth regarding the “caging” of voters.
KR’s smug, lippy, and arguably felonious gofer is collecting a gov’t paycheck as a US atty… and now he wants to be someone’s campaign consultant? Lock that boy up and show him Crest commercials till he rats-out Karl, already!