"Since you're whining absurdly about how none of us are actually responding to your original post, I'm going to take the time to address it."
- - Thanks, but I wasn't even close to whining. I was just pointing out that you pinheads blow smoke without addressing points. You may win a consensus amongst yourselves that I'm a whacko, but you don't win a debate by walking away.
"After that, I'm through playing with you about this, it's too stupid of an argument even for me to spend time on. And that's saying something."
- - Yes, as we will see...
"What I claimed was that if a janitors association with the CIA was classified, it would be a crime to reveal it. Which is true, notwithstanding the fact that a janitor's identity is probably not classified."
- - Yep, you went for hyperbole. Nice of you to ALMOST admit that it was BS. FACT: No janitor has ever nor will ever have classified or covert status at the CIA.
At some point, someone, presumably a highly placed official in the Bush administration, got upset that Joe Wilson was contributing to the "Bush lied/people died" campaign by claiming that he had information proving that Bush and MI-6 were wrong about Saddam trying to buy yellowcake.
Agreed.
- - GASP!!!
In exposing Wilson's dissembling, it was disclosed that Wilson's wife works for the CIA
Agreed. This means, since you don't seem to be grasping the concept, that her identity as a CIA employee was revealed, which was a crime, since that relationship was classified.
- - Only if her status was truly classified, which is refuted soundly in several pieces that I posted or linked. It seems her identity a) is not even well guarded and b) was "leaked" over nine years ago.
Someone (doesn't matter who) cried "foul" over the disclosure mentioned
Agreed.
and Joe Wilson himself has since over-dramatized the effect of this dissemination
Irrelevent.
- - Not when Fitzgerald and Wilson's attorney spend all day last Friday trying this case on the air waves. How do we now get a jury pool that isn't poisoned?
Considering that the two of them were on the cover of Vanity Fair and are now the toast of NY, it's a little hard to swallow that their lives are ruined or that they are in some danger. So the Wilson's have not been damaged.
Irrelevent. The point in criminalizing disclosure of classified information is primarily to protect the security of the nation.
- - I agree. Where I disagree is that there was anything classified about her, and I disagree with his contention that their lives have been ruined, said contention being made to help sweeten the pot.
Plame is not a covert agent and no one really cares that she works for the CIA
Irrelevent. She does not need to be a covert agent for her status to be classified. It matters nothing whether or not anyone cares that she works for the CIA, although I don't see how you've come to that conclusion, other than that you just made it up. Someone cared enough that they assigned a classified status to her association with the CIA.
- - She would, however, need to be a covert agent in order for the Identies Act to apply, which is where this nonsense started. And the question before us today is this: When was her status classified, and has it been so during the past five (or nine) years. I've produced evidence that it was not.
A lot of people seemed to have known about Plame, including whoever told Robert Novak (as Fitz, you know who this person was, and it wasn't Scooter)
What people are you talking about? A lot of people with security clearances, presumably.
- - I don't know who I'm talking about, because Novak gave up his source in secrecy, and said source is NOT being prosecuted. Hmmm, I wonder why that might be... Maybe because he's not a prominent member of the WH staff, so netting him or her wouldn't be worth any good anti-Bush publicity? If you have an alternate explanation, I'd love to hear it, because whoever this person is, they outed Plame before or at least concurrently with Libby.
No secret information was released
Completely wrong. Her identity as a CIA employee was secret. It was released, as you've noted already.
- - And it wasn't secret, as I've posted repeatedly.
Joe Wilson has written an op ed about his Niger trip and has - without proper authorization - revealed details about his mission that were not meant for public consumption.
"Not intended for public consumption" is not, as far as I know, the same thing as "classified."
- - Apparently it's up to the CIA to decide if it's classified or not, right? Since they're working with Wilson, perhaps they don't want to rock their own boat. I would certainly think that an operation such as his (checking on the possible movement of fissionable materials to Iraq) should be a classified matter.
Prosecute Wilson for leaking
For leaking what? Non-classified informartion that the Bush Administration didn't want the public to know? I don't think that's illegal.
- - How about for giving aid and comfort to the enemy, by lying about what occurred there and attempting to inflame anti-US sentiment. Or perhaps his report WAS classified, as I believe it should have been.
Prosecute Judith Miller who reported the story but wouldn't divulge her source
What would the crime be?
- - Same crime. Her story outed Plame also.
Prosecute Novak for publishing the information
What would the crime be?
- - Same crime. His story outed Plame also.
Prosecute a staffer in the VP's office because he makes a convenient scape-goat
A "staffer"? You mean the VP's chief of staff? OK. No, I wouldn't prosecute him because he makes a convenient scapegoat. I'd prosecute him because the grand jury found enough evidence that he lied under oath and to the investigators about an investigation into a crime- the disclosure of classified information.
- - Thank you. You're the only person here who has responded to this post on point.
Determining that no actual damage was done call "no harm, no foul,"
Nope. I don't know, in the first place, that no actual damage was done. I'm working under the assumption that if classified information is revealed, it has the potential to cause damage to national security. That's why information is classified, you know. Besides which, that isn't what I'm prosecuting him for- I'm prosecuting him for lying in an attempt to obstruct an investigation, which in and of itself is damaging to the pursuit of justice.
- - I think that's a valid opinion and once again thank you for manning up and actually answering my post.
However, I must correct your last point. You (Fitz) were indeed prosectuting Libby for info leakage. Once you determine that no actual information was leaked and that Plame's ID was not a classified or secret item, you've got to have way too much time on your hands if you don't just walk away from this and shoot a scathing letter to the CIA about wasting your friggin' time with internicine bickering.
We could make a long list of all the government perjurers who were never prosecuted over the past 10, 20 or 50 years.
Cousin Elwood - Team Over-the-hill Racing
Brought to you by the good folks at Metamucil and Geritol...
- - Thanks, but I wasn't even close to whining. I was just pointing out that you pinheads blow smoke without addressing points. You may win a consensus amongst yourselves that I'm a whacko, but you don't win a debate by walking away.
"After that, I'm through playing with you about this, it's too stupid of an argument even for me to spend time on. And that's saying something."
- - Yes, as we will see...
"What I claimed was that if a janitors association with the CIA was classified, it would be a crime to reveal it. Which is true, notwithstanding the fact that a janitor's identity is probably not classified."
- - Yep, you went for hyperbole. Nice of you to ALMOST admit that it was BS. FACT: No janitor has ever nor will ever have classified or covert status at the CIA.
At some point, someone, presumably a highly placed official in the Bush administration, got upset that Joe Wilson was contributing to the "Bush lied/people died" campaign by claiming that he had information proving that Bush and MI-6 were wrong about Saddam trying to buy yellowcake.
Agreed.
- - GASP!!!
In exposing Wilson's dissembling, it was disclosed that Wilson's wife works for the CIA
Agreed. This means, since you don't seem to be grasping the concept, that her identity as a CIA employee was revealed, which was a crime, since that relationship was classified.
- - Only if her status was truly classified, which is refuted soundly in several pieces that I posted or linked. It seems her identity a) is not even well guarded and b) was "leaked" over nine years ago.
Someone (doesn't matter who) cried "foul" over the disclosure mentioned
Agreed.
and Joe Wilson himself has since over-dramatized the effect of this dissemination
Irrelevent.
- - Not when Fitzgerald and Wilson's attorney spend all day last Friday trying this case on the air waves. How do we now get a jury pool that isn't poisoned?
Considering that the two of them were on the cover of Vanity Fair and are now the toast of NY, it's a little hard to swallow that their lives are ruined or that they are in some danger. So the Wilson's have not been damaged.
Irrelevent. The point in criminalizing disclosure of classified information is primarily to protect the security of the nation.
- - I agree. Where I disagree is that there was anything classified about her, and I disagree with his contention that their lives have been ruined, said contention being made to help sweeten the pot.
Plame is not a covert agent and no one really cares that she works for the CIA
Irrelevent. She does not need to be a covert agent for her status to be classified. It matters nothing whether or not anyone cares that she works for the CIA, although I don't see how you've come to that conclusion, other than that you just made it up. Someone cared enough that they assigned a classified status to her association with the CIA.
- - She would, however, need to be a covert agent in order for the Identies Act to apply, which is where this nonsense started. And the question before us today is this: When was her status classified, and has it been so during the past five (or nine) years. I've produced evidence that it was not.
A lot of people seemed to have known about Plame, including whoever told Robert Novak (as Fitz, you know who this person was, and it wasn't Scooter)
What people are you talking about? A lot of people with security clearances, presumably.
- - I don't know who I'm talking about, because Novak gave up his source in secrecy, and said source is NOT being prosecuted. Hmmm, I wonder why that might be... Maybe because he's not a prominent member of the WH staff, so netting him or her wouldn't be worth any good anti-Bush publicity? If you have an alternate explanation, I'd love to hear it, because whoever this person is, they outed Plame before or at least concurrently with Libby.
No secret information was released
Completely wrong. Her identity as a CIA employee was secret. It was released, as you've noted already.
- - And it wasn't secret, as I've posted repeatedly.
Joe Wilson has written an op ed about his Niger trip and has - without proper authorization - revealed details about his mission that were not meant for public consumption.
"Not intended for public consumption" is not, as far as I know, the same thing as "classified."
- - Apparently it's up to the CIA to decide if it's classified or not, right? Since they're working with Wilson, perhaps they don't want to rock their own boat. I would certainly think that an operation such as his (checking on the possible movement of fissionable materials to Iraq) should be a classified matter.
Prosecute Wilson for leaking
For leaking what? Non-classified informartion that the Bush Administration didn't want the public to know? I don't think that's illegal.
- - How about for giving aid and comfort to the enemy, by lying about what occurred there and attempting to inflame anti-US sentiment. Or perhaps his report WAS classified, as I believe it should have been.
Prosecute Judith Miller who reported the story but wouldn't divulge her source
What would the crime be?
- - Same crime. Her story outed Plame also.
Prosecute Novak for publishing the information
What would the crime be?
- - Same crime. His story outed Plame also.
Prosecute a staffer in the VP's office because he makes a convenient scape-goat
A "staffer"? You mean the VP's chief of staff? OK. No, I wouldn't prosecute him because he makes a convenient scapegoat. I'd prosecute him because the grand jury found enough evidence that he lied under oath and to the investigators about an investigation into a crime- the disclosure of classified information.
- - Thank you. You're the only person here who has responded to this post on point.
Determining that no actual damage was done call "no harm, no foul,"
Nope. I don't know, in the first place, that no actual damage was done. I'm working under the assumption that if classified information is revealed, it has the potential to cause damage to national security. That's why information is classified, you know. Besides which, that isn't what I'm prosecuting him for- I'm prosecuting him for lying in an attempt to obstruct an investigation, which in and of itself is damaging to the pursuit of justice.
- - I think that's a valid opinion and once again thank you for manning up and actually answering my post.
However, I must correct your last point. You (Fitz) were indeed prosectuting Libby for info leakage. Once you determine that no actual information was leaked and that Plame's ID was not a classified or secret item, you've got to have way too much time on your hands if you don't just walk away from this and shoot a scathing letter to the CIA about wasting your friggin' time with internicine bickering.
We could make a long list of all the government perjurers who were never prosecuted over the past 10, 20 or 50 years.
Cousin Elwood - Team Over-the-hill Racing
Brought to you by the good folks at Metamucil and Geritol...
Last edited by:
Cousin Elwood: Nov 4, 05 15:40