Just one thread up people are talking about how the CIA isn't to be trusted. But here, where it fits your needs, your willing to accept that they wouldn't ever lie!
what does what other people are saying in a completely different thread have to do with me? could you at least pretend like you are trying to make sense?
as far as alternate sources, your use of kristof is amusing. he's an op-ed writer.
and for toensing, i like how you make the first part of that sentence huge and red when the second half calls it a 'serious legal question'. and beyond that, why would toensing know? and furthermore, toensing is cia. you just got finished saying the cia was out to get bush, now you want to use cia?
and the fact remains; patrick fitzgerald has lived and breathed this case for the last 2 years and the first thing out of his mouth when he finally addresses the public is: Valerie Wilson was a CIA officer. In July 2003, the fact that Valerie Wilson was a CIA officer was classified. Not only was it classified, but it was not widely known outside the intelligence community. Valerie Wilson's friends, neighbors, college classmates had no idea she had another life. The fact that she was a CIA officer was not well- known, for her protection or for the benefit of all us. It's important that a CIA officer's identity be protected, that it be protected not just for the officer, but for the nation's security. Valerie Wilson's cover was blown in July 2003. The first sign of that cover being blown was when Mr. Novak published a column on July 14th, 2003.
you have no counter-argument for this other than "i don't know maybe he's a zealot". that's pathetic, elwood, just pathetic. fitzgerald is not someone with an axe to grind. you have no logical reason to disbelieve what he said and you have no source to disprove it, just hot air and noise.
His behavior identifies him as a zealot, I think that goes without saying. Perhaps your confusing "zealot" with "partisan."
i'm quite aware what the word "zealot" means. you're playing semantic games to dance around the fact that you are embarrassingly and tragically off-base
Two dozen Clintonistas were indicted, dozens more fled the country and/or took the Fifth to avoid prosecution. Partisan war? Give me a break. I think there was over a hundred years of jail time before it was all finished, and a pretty significant body count.
"clintonistas"? yeah, you've got no horse in this race mr. "i'm above this partisan stuff"
what does what other people are saying in a completely different thread have to do with me? could you at least pretend like you are trying to make sense?
as far as alternate sources, your use of kristof is amusing. he's an op-ed writer.
and for toensing, i like how you make the first part of that sentence huge and red when the second half calls it a 'serious legal question'. and beyond that, why would toensing know? and furthermore, toensing is cia. you just got finished saying the cia was out to get bush, now you want to use cia?
and the fact remains; patrick fitzgerald has lived and breathed this case for the last 2 years and the first thing out of his mouth when he finally addresses the public is: Valerie Wilson was a CIA officer. In July 2003, the fact that Valerie Wilson was a CIA officer was classified. Not only was it classified, but it was not widely known outside the intelligence community. Valerie Wilson's friends, neighbors, college classmates had no idea she had another life. The fact that she was a CIA officer was not well- known, for her protection or for the benefit of all us. It's important that a CIA officer's identity be protected, that it be protected not just for the officer, but for the nation's security. Valerie Wilson's cover was blown in July 2003. The first sign of that cover being blown was when Mr. Novak published a column on July 14th, 2003.
you have no counter-argument for this other than "i don't know maybe he's a zealot". that's pathetic, elwood, just pathetic. fitzgerald is not someone with an axe to grind. you have no logical reason to disbelieve what he said and you have no source to disprove it, just hot air and noise.
His behavior identifies him as a zealot, I think that goes without saying. Perhaps your confusing "zealot" with "partisan."
i'm quite aware what the word "zealot" means. you're playing semantic games to dance around the fact that you are embarrassingly and tragically off-base
Two dozen Clintonistas were indicted, dozens more fled the country and/or took the Fifth to avoid prosecution. Partisan war? Give me a break. I think there was over a hundred years of jail time before it was all finished, and a pretty significant body count.
"clintonistas"? yeah, you've got no horse in this race mr. "i'm above this partisan stuff"