| Big Govt | Breitbart to AG Holder: Investigate ACORN or We’ll Release More Tapes Just Before 2010 Election |
0 |
| Politico | 0 | |
| Ras. Reports | 0 | |
| Patterico | L.A. Times Columnist Uncritically Quoted Star of Latest ACORN Video |
0 |
| ABC News | Major Hasan’s E-Mail: ‘I Can’t Wait to Join You’ in Afterlife |
0 |
Audacity of Truth
Plamegate update
The blogosphere is buzzing today over this story from the NY Sun that has the headline “Bush Authorized Leak to Times, Libby Told Grand Jury” – here’s a brief snippet from the story:
A former White House aide under indictment for obstructing a leak probe, I. Lewis Libby, testified to a grand jury that he gave information from a closely-guarded “National Intelligence Estimate” on Iraq to a New York Times reporter in 2003 with the specific permission of President Bush, according to a new court filing from the special prosecutor in the case.
The court papers from the prosecutor, Patrick Fitzgerald, do not suggest that Mr. Bush violated any law or rule. However, the new disclosure could be awkward for the president because it places him, for the first time, directly in a chain of events that led to a meeting where prosecutors contend the identity of a CIA employee, Valerie Plame, was provided to a reporter.
Mr. Fitzgerald’s inquiry initially focused on the alleged leak, which occurred after a former ambassador who is Ms. Plame’s husband, Joseph Wilson, wrote an op-ed piece in the New York Times questioning the accuracy of statements Mr. Bush made about Iraq’s nuclear procurement efforts in Africa.
No criminal charges have been brought for the leak itself, but Mr. Libby, a former chief of staff to Vice President Cheney, was indicted in October on charges that he obstructed the investigation, perjured himself in front of the grand jury, and lied to FBI agents who interviewed him. Mr. Libby, who resigned from the White House and pleaded not guilty, is scheduled to go on trial in January 2007.
In a court filing late Wednesday responding to requests from Mr. Libby’s attorneys for government records that might aid his defense, Mr. Fitzgerald shed new light on Mr. Libby’s claims that he was authorized to provide sensitive information to the Times reporter, Judith Miller, at a meeting on July 8, 2003.
Here’s a link to that court filing, which I have not had a chance to read in full. Tom Maguire, however, has and as always on the case. Check out his thoughts here.
RSS feed for comments on this post.
20 Responses to “Plamegate update”
Comments
Blogads
Disclaimer: The views expressed on this blog do not necessarily reflect those of ST's advertisers, nor do their opinions necessarily reflect ST's. Stats
bush, has broken more laws then any other 10 Presidents in the history of the republic, whats one more? Peace
The President can declassify things that are classified by the Executive Branch. Cheney stated this (an EO to this effect exists) in an interview with Brit Hume back during the Shotgun Follies.
The NIE was declassified officially on July 18, ten days after Libby’s conversation with the reporter.
Some things are classified by Congress, it would be inappropriate for the President to declassify those things, but that’s not what happened in this case. This is not a crime.
bush, has broken more laws then any other 10 Presidents in the history of the republic, whats one more? Peace
Prove it.
It is easy enough to spew hatred, mr-I-am-a-christian-anarchist and misinformation, but if you ever want to be taken seriously (after reading your posts I see that you don’t), try backing up your statements with FACTS, PROOF, LINKS.
It will go along way in proving whatever you are trying to prove.
Coming in here and spouting one liners, or idiotic nonsense does nothing ot further discourse. Providing proof to your points helps.
Not sounding like a loon is another way to help be taken seriously.
Valerie Plame’s husband Joe Wilson is really the one to blame. If he didn’t lie and tell everyone Dick Cheney sent him to Nigeria, this whole thing would be a non-issue. I believe the white house was just trying to point out that he went to Nigeria because his wife got him the job. I don’t think Valerie Plame was undercover at the time. The real people that should be investigated are Plame & Wilson. Instead, they are out there getting rich on book deals. Who buys these books anyhow?
Funny thing is, the NYT disclosing classifed information that was ‘leaked’ to them seems to have dropped off the radar.
When it suits a Liberal Agenda it is not a leak, but a ‘whistle blower’.
Well whether it is a leak or whistle blower, the CIA either seems to leaking like a canoe wih a cannonball hole through it or it there is so much hot air blowing from it from whistle blowers, it may reach Katrina proportions.
Either way it is not good to have classified information from the Central Intelligence Agency ‘leaked’ when it is not suppose to.
You can argue all you want about the publics right to know, in alot of cases I will guarantee you there is no such right.
Also, if you think secrets are a Republican only problem then you better think again. Democrats have plenty of secrets of their own. Glass Houses.
I find it interesting that Bush or Cheney knew all along that they authorized the leak, but they denied it, said they would fire any leakers, and hung Libby and another staffer out to dry. I mean, no wonder Libby is singing. They just… crawled into a hole and let Fitzpatrick spend a year or more following the breadcrumbs to Libby. How noble. How brave they were. How proud it must make all the other conservatives of the men they put in office.
You’re still confusing “leaking” Plame’s name with legally declassifying information in order to counter lies that Wilson was telling that were damaging the administrations credibility. Why are you having so much difficulty parsing this? Because you deeply want Bushitler to be guilty of *something*?
Nowhere did Bush ever say he would fire any leakers, he said he would get rid of anyone convicted of a crime, a very specific crime of allegedly “outing” an agent that it now comes to light was never undercover to begin with, and had “outed” herself as she sure wasn’t regarded as covert by anyone in DC. Declassifying information and allowing it to be released is not a leak, leaking the NSA info, now that was a leak. Pity you can’t tell the difference.
Sever him. Ouch!
Another out-of-control special prosecutor.
Libby is singing. His two immediate bosses up the ladder, Cheney and Bush had a few things all along that they could have added to the picture, but they demurred, and Libby was arrested. Is that delicate enough for you? What kind of man does a thing like that?
THE PRESIDENT: Listen, I know of nobody — I don’t know of anybody in my administration who leaked classified information. If somebody did leak classified information, I’d like to know it, and we’ll take the appropriate action.
LINK
Oops. Guess he just didn’t know what classified information everybody was talking about. Must have missed his ears. Perhaps he was talking about troop movements and didn’t realize that Libby was being arrested for the CIA affair, that’s all. Otherwise he surely would have piped up and said, “heh, wait a minute, wait a minute guys…” and had a talk with the prosecuter to explain the WHOLE thing was just a mixup, that HE declassified the info and everything was just peachy.
The NIE document was declassified “10 day’s after” Libby spoke to Judith Miller on orders from Cheney. Giving Miller a not yet declassified NIE document to report on is illegal. On top of that it was bush who was asked about White House leaks and bush knew that he was the leaker when he answered that he would find out who did it. This is corruption and immorality on the scale of Sodom and Gomorrah. Peace
Steve,
The NIE excerpts were released on July 18, 2002.
Do you know when they were declassified?
These are not the same things.
One is an annoucement, the other is a decision.
I’m just asking, I’d be curious to see any documentation that exists as to the actual declassification date of that information.
Libby is swinging in the wind.
That’s the bottom line, guys. It has to be that way. The free world depends on it.
You mean the wimpy, pro-terrorist, dictator loving liberals depend on it…
Sev, I suspect liberals would prefer that Bush be the one to swing.
Sometimes knee-jerk reactions don’t show your excellent features in the best light, Sev. That was sarcasm.
- I notice the ass-hats continue to use the word “leak” in regards to “authorized disclosures”. Guess its all just part of the Liberal “dis-information” brownshirt campaign.
- The fact that this has not a thing to do with the “leaking” of Plames identity by her own husband and several press rats, is also of no importance for the Dimbulbs. As long as they can find some way to skew this into a Bush smear they’ll go for it, happily throwing their own people to the dogs by instigating a true “leak” to the NYTrash on the NSA program. Nice bunch of rabid idiots.
- Before this is all over I think the great unwashed moonbat gang is going to be about as happy as they were when lying LurchKerry got his ass kicked at the ballot box.
- Bang
Strange how many “conservatives” (G Monster, Severian) keep trying to claim that Plame was never under cover. Unfortunately for your argument, she was indeed clandestine (mediamatters.org), which she mentioned once the CIA authorized her to do so.
I thought conservatism was supposed to be about strong national security and conservative federal spending. Please point out where any of that has happened in the last 6 years.
I understand that when the President authorizes the declassification and distribution of previously-classified information, it’s not a crime because he has the authority to declassify material, but you honestly got to ask yourself why he’s been trying to cover up that he did so. And how was doing so considered conservative? He destroyed many undercover relationships in doing so; relationships that were helping to track nuclear materials and protect America. I’m a Democrat and I want a secure place to live too.
Comment to sanity:
We would like to prove the claim about the broken laws. Unlock the oversight committee so we can investigate and we will then have the tools to prove it. You had hundreds of people and millions of dollars investigating a stained, blue dress, isn’t this worth a little look-see?
Comment to Severian:
You said “Nowhere did Bush ever say he would fire any leakers, he said he would get rid of anyone convicted of a crime…” Sorry, you’re wrong. Please read these quotes of President Bushitler, as you call him, and the White House staff, which he commands.
and
These quotes are regarding the leak, and being “no longer involved with [the] administration” sounds like being fired to me. I do not, however, see the word “conviction”.
Comment to Big Bang Hunter:
You stated “I notice the ass-hats continue to use the word ‘leak’ in regards to ‘authorized disclosures’.” Up until Libby testified that the President declassified that info, it was considered to be a leak, including by the White House. “Authorized Disclosures” usually take the form Press Releases with podiums and such, so please forgive us “ass-hats” for not recognizing it. Personally, I think it’s a scam that they came up with after-the-fact to get Libby off the hook. Otherwise, why deny having made an “authorized disclosure” for 3 years?
Late says We would like to prove the claim about the broken laws. Unlock the oversight committee so we can investigate and we will then have the tools to prove it. You had hundreds of people and millions of dollars investigating a stained, blue dress, isn’t this worth a little look-see
First that was in a response to steve saying that President Bush has broken more laws than any 10 presidents in history. It is a claim without merit, unless he can show proof of his stements, that his nothing more than gibberish.
If you have something to prove, write your congressman to open up an investigation on the President on everything. If you find something, fine, I’m all for it, but to defend idiotic statements like steve puts out there without proof is rediculous. Stating that the President has broken more laws than 10 presidents, then you coming in and saying we would like the ability to find out….is putting the cart before the horse. Accusations are made before you have any kind of proof, then you say you would like access to prove your statements. That is rediculous in itself.
As for the whole debacle of Clinton, sorry ST, but I could give a crap less about Clinton. He lied under oath, he was the top law enforcement official in the country, his actions also led to him losing his law license for awhile.
I could care less if he had his hand up the skirt of helen thomas, I would be a bit disgusted and wonder what the heck is wrong with his head, but I could care less UNTIL he is under oath, at which time he damn well better tell the truth to the questions asked to him.
Clinton is a fart in the wind, as time goes by he will disipate, unless of course the democrats get smart and have him take over for Dean. I think that would be an excellent choice for the Democrats to do personally. Clinton is an excellent speaker, and can raise quite a bit of cash, unlike Dean who only seems to pander to the hard liner left.
Hey Late – Late breaking news – But looks like Bush was ..oh …wait for it…..Right again.
Link
Lovely Hat Tip from Big Lizards
But but but..the NIE…released…Plame…Leaked…but but but..
Next Lie please.
Serves me right for listening to a Republican, I suppose; obviously Libby is trying to cover his own butt by pointing fingers every direction he can. I’m still going to take a wait-and-see approach, though, as the investigation is still occurring. I mean, they haven’t even filed against Rove yet, for goodness sake.
I’m counting chickens before they’re hatched. I mean, Bush definitely wants to give Rove a fair shake before following up on his word and taking “appropriate action,” right?
As for your other post regarding oversight, there have been many allegations posed, but the committee has not been able to investigate diddly: the Ohio elections, the $8.8 billion that was embezzled in Iraq, warrantless wiretapping. Now obviously steve’s comment was inflammatory; I mean pick the 10 most honest presidents in history and an eight-year-old could have committed more crimes. My point is that the Senate’s capacity to investigate allegations is currently severely curtailed.
Finally, as to your not-too-subtle insinuation that Bush is always right: Not admitting when you’re wrong does not imply that you’re therefore correct. What about when he dismissed military personnel that were correcting him on needs and costs and expectations? What about the fact that they were right? Didn’t Bush say that this war was only going to cost us less than $2 billion?
You say that you only wanted to get Clinton because he lied under oath about sex? Let’s put Bush under oath and ask him a few hardball questions. Then let’s see if you go after Bush with the same fervor.