Talking Points Memo regarding the Plame case.

[im10ashus]

Yesterday a group of 11 former intelligence officers delivered a letter to the Republican and Democratic leadership in the House and the Senate on the Plame case.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/docs/intel.officers.letter.pdf

[AllegroRondo]

1. Wow - but will anyone notice?

Weve got a Supreme Court nomination going on, the media will drop the Rove story.

[im10ashus]

2. I think we can balance both.

We shouldn't forget that this investigation is ongoing.

Some snips of the memo:

The Republican National Committee has circulated talking points to supporters to use as part of a coordinated strategy to discredit Ambassador Joseph Wilson and his wife. As part of this campaign a common theme is the idea that Ambassador Wilson’s wife, Valerie Plame was not undercover and deserved no protection. The following are four recent examples of this “talking point”:

Michael Medved stated on Larry King Live on July 12, 2005, “And let's be honest about this. Mrs. Plame, Mrs. Wilson, had a desk job
at Langley. She went back and forth every single day.”

Victoria Toensing stated on a Fox News program with John Gibson on
July 12, 2005 that, “Well, they weren't taking affirmative
measures to protect that identity. They gave her a desk job in
Langley. You don't really have somebody deep undercover
going back and forth to Langley, where people can see them.”

These comments reveal an astonishing ignorance of the intelligence community and the role of cover. The fact is that there are thousands of U.S. intelligence officers who “work at a desk” in the Washington, D.C. area every day who are undercover. Some have official cover, and some have non-official cover. Both classes of cover must and should be protected.

[NewJeffCT]

14. yes, it was in The Washington Post today, I believe

I think CNN mentioned it & my local paper (The Hartford Courant) ran the WP story.

[im10ashus]

15. Yeah, I saw the Post did a story on it.

I'll try to find the Hartford Courant on line. Thanks!

[NewJeffCT]

16. link to my post about the Courant - containing link to article

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=4146414&mesg_id=4155188

I hope that works

[im10ashus]

17. THANK YOU!

:yourock:

[MeDeMax]

3. plain text link

http://www.crooksandliars.com/stories/2005/07/19/ciaAgentsLetterToUsSenateAndHouse.html

[im10ashus]

5. Thanks for that.

I think it's important the SCOTUS nominee doesn't trump this investigation or our focus on it anyway.

[SuperWonk]

6. Re:

"Weve got a Supreme Court nomination going on, the media will drop the Rove story."

I don't know if this will be totally true, although I agree that the Supreme Court nominee stories are more important because of their more far-reaching impact.

[im10ashus]

7. Totally agree.

We CAN and MUST focus on both. This is an important memo because it came from former intelligence officers and it is non-partisan.

[jsamuel]

4. cool beans

[im10ashus]

8. Shameless self-kick.

:kick:

[MeDeMax]

9. I'll share your shame :-)

:kick:

[im10ashus]

10. Thanks!

:yourock:

[im10ashus]

11. Kicking this again.

It's important we don't lose sight of this due to the SCOTUS nominee. We can fight both fires at once.

:kick:

[SuperWonk]

12. "We can fight both fires at once."

But don't you agree that the Supreme Court has much more far-reaching implictaions? Shouldn't this be the first priority?

Thoughts?

[im10ashus]

13. The SCOTUS nominee IS important.

I think the Plame leak needs to be first priority. That's just MY opinion though. There is a lot of time for them to dig into the nominee's background and despite what a lot of people here may think, my opinion is that it is a deliberate distraction from the Plame investigation. Although it IS an important distraction. Thoughts?

[sandnsea]

18. And a hearing was scheduled for Friday

Where some of these intelligence officers will speak.

http://www.lightupthedarkness.org/blog/default.asp?view=plink&id=1273

[im10ashus]

19. Thanks for the link!

:yourock: