
But I’m repeating myself.
The NYT finally responds to the blockbuster news about former Deputy Sec. of State Richard Armitage’s admission – via his lawyer – that it was he who ‘leaked’ la Plame’s name. The title of the NYT’s piece?
A Time For Answers
Well, uh, you’d think that the ‘who’ question – which has been the biggest one had been answered. And indeed it has. But the NYT, as usual, is continuing to carry the torch for the rest of the Bush-hating left and are are still trying to milk this dead story for all it’s worth.
Just one more in a long line of pLamegate desperados.
Hat tip: AJ Strata
Prior:
RSS feed for comments on this post.
I agree with the NYT. It is time for answers, first and foremost I want to see Fitzgerld in front of a Senate Grand Jury for some Answers. I want to see Armatage, and Powell to be in front of that same Grand Jury for some Answers. It is time to take off the kid gloves and kick some tushie. We need some leadership with a spine. Good Lord people lets make these people put up or shut up. The quiet would be worth it alone. – Lorica
Yay…whining about Bush-hating is _so_ in. Couldn’t be that…Bush has done a crappy job. No, that couldn’t be it.
Not like the Dems have done much better, but please, get a new focus.
I wonder if the Times knew this was coming today.
Indpendent Counsel Law (finally) Sunsets
Press release:
OFFICE OF INDEPENDENT COUNSEL DAVID M. BARRETT 1990 K St., N.W., Suite 420 Washington, D.C. 20006 http://barrett.oic.gov
TELEPHONE: (202) 974-5440 FACSIMILE: (202) 974-5459
January 19, 2006
PRESS RELEASE
Today the United States Court of Appeals for the District for Columbia Circuit, Division for the Purpose of Appointing Independent Counsels, approved the release of the Final Report of the Independent Counsel in re: Henry G. Cisneros. The Report can be found on the Office’s website at http://barrett.oic.gov.
This has been a long and difficult investigation. It is my hope that people will read the entire Report and draw their own conclusions. An accurate title for the Report could be, “WHAT WE WERE PREVENTED FROM INVESTIGATING.”
After a thorough reading of the Report it would not be unreasonable to conclude as I have that there was a coverup at high levels of our government and, it appears to have been substantial and coordinated. The question is why? And that question regrettably will go unanswered. Unlike some other coverups, this one succeeded.
I recommend that people begin by reading the memorandum of Mr. John Filan, Chief of the Internal Revenue Service’s Criminal Investigation Division in the South Texas District (Appendix no. 16).
But is there anyone out there that doesn’t believe that Rove and Chaney were encouraging this? They may not have been the initial leakers, but they are hardly innocent in this affair.
MuddywaterConservative
I’d say you have a backwards perspective. The charge that Mr. Plame was making was said to be “explosive” and “false” by the Washington Post.
Seems your issue is with Mr. Plame
He put himself out there making explosive and false charges.
Do you acknowledge the Post’s words? Do you have a problem with the Post’s words?
EXCELLENT COMMENTS BAKLAVA TO MUDDDYWATER.
THE SLIMES THINK CUZ THEY SAY THIS SHOULD BE OVER WE CONSERVATIVES ARE GONNA FORGET THEY AND THE REST OF THE LSM AND MOONBATS KEPT THIS FAKE-ASS STORY ALIVE AND I TOO, WOULD LOVE TO SEE THE SPECIAL PROSECUTER AND POWELL AND BALDY UP BEFORE A SENATE PANEL.
Please don’t post in all caps again. Thanks. –ST
This is the Bush National Guard Scandal, Part Deux.
“This is the Bush National Guard Scandal, Part Deux.” Other than a hit and run obfuscation, WTH does your idea about any facts surrounding that have to do with this post? ADS? BDS? Reading comprehension issues? Note the title, it will enhance your ability to stay on track.
Does anyone know the top sekrut code name for Valerie Plame? Hint: It starts with a V and ends rhyming with flame.