Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Read a new pro-Rove talking point: Plame was already outed, KGB mole in 97

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Bucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 01:27 AM
Original message
Read a new pro-Rove talking point: Plame was already outed, KGB mole in 97
Edited on Thu Jul-21-05 01:30 AM by Bucky
source: http://www.rightwingrightminded.modblog.com/?show=blogview&blog_id=684341A">really dumb guy

You think I'm shitting you, and I should be. But I'm not. So be ready for this next chatter point: Wingers are now saying Plame wasn't an operative because she was outed by KGB mole Aldrich Ames in 1997. There's a few problems with that excuse, however (even if it's true).

1) The issue isn't only naming her; it involves how Rove ensured publicizing her identity--he went to three different reporters on this. That's not a slip of the tongue. That's a deliberative, premeditated process.

2) While the law states that revealing an agent's identity is only a crime for up to five years after they come off of covert services, it wasn't just the personal damage to Mrs Wilson's career

3) The CIA didn't know Plame was ID'd by Ames, they only suspected it. She was yanked from the field in '97 apparently, but this only counts as a true outing if Russian intelligence shared this information with the people Plame was investigating.
Mrs Wilson was working the Saudi-Aramco-WMD beat thru the CIA cover company Brewster-Jennings & Associates. So who would the Russian-CIS security agencies peddle this information? To Saudis? Just how chummy are we claiming Russian to be with Aramco and the Saudi royals?

Sorry, but that doesn't track.

4) The other outing Rove did was blowing the lid off of the security work done under the aegis of Brewster-Jennings & Associates. When you publicize Plame's identity and work, you pretty much expose everyone who ever used Brewster-Jennings as an NOC cover. the BJA firms work was to keep an eye on the Saudis.

Rove's vendetta against Wilson blinded him to the fact that he was making the country all but intel-blind during the middle of a war on terron.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
tuvor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 01:31 AM
Response to Original message
1. How does this jive with the latest news that ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 09:23 AM
Response to Reply #1
10. Why, it's a Republican point of denial, of course. Who needs facts?
See, the problem is, too many people deal with the real world. You see. But I'm the president. A war time president. I guess you could say I'm a good steward of the environment. But we need to protect families, you see, and that's hard work. And I'm not afraid to do hard work, you see. But we were attacked, so freedom's on the march, you see. And that's hard work.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kagemusha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 01:33 AM
Response to Original message
2. Here's what Pincus' page 1 WP article today tells me.
It tells me that the CIA was taking affirmative measures to protect "Valerie Wilson" 's identity by the simple virtue of the fact that her identity was disclosed in a paragraph in that memo that made it to Air Force 1 which was marked Secret. If it was marked Secret, the CIA didn't want the information spread. Period.

This makes how the relevant law was written make much more sense (i.e. it doesn't punish people for disclosing the identity of an agent they know is covert, but that they know whose employment the US is attempting to keep secret). In other words, just 'cause the KGB might know, doesn't relieve senior US officials from their responsibility to the nation to keep Secret information Secret.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
burrowowl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 01:34 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. Damn Right!
You are!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
writes2000 Donating Member (481 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 01:44 AM
Response to Original message
4. They're WRONG Again.
If they actually did some research they would learn, that the CIA never received proof that Aldrich outed Plame's cover. They thought her cover might have been outed. They never got actual confirmation.

BUT IT WAS HER COVER. NOT VALERIE PLAME'S REAL NAME.

So Valerie's identity was still safe.

Furthermore, this is the domain of the CIA. Just because the REpublican party is desperate to claim that Plame wasn't undercover doesn't make it so. The CIA listed her as undercover. She didn't put the CIA down on her income tax forms. She had a cover company she worked for.

Before the Bush White House outed her, Valerie Plame could assume multiple identities for the CIA. If one of those identities was outed, Plame was still safe.

Not anymore thanks to the deliberate efforts of Rove, Libby and several others, I suspect.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
radfringe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 05:25 AM
Response to Original message
5. spin the wheel
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vickers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 07:07 AM
Response to Reply #5
9. That's a fantastic graphic!
:toast::toast::toast::toast::toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kingofalldems Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 05:53 AM
Response to Original message
6. I read she didn't start til 1986
and Ames was already gone by then??? In which case he would not know her from Adam.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seaglass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 06:13 AM
Response to Original message
7. If you were investigating who outed a covert agent, wouldn't
you first check whether the person was covert or not?

If she isn't covert, there is no need for an investigation, right?




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Justice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 06:56 AM
Response to Original message
8. What matters is what Rove thought at the time, not what he and we
learn after months of investigating and posturing.

On that day when Rove spoke to Novak and on the day he spoke to Cooper and revealed her identity - I guarantee you he was not think - oh, it is okay because her cover was already outed by Aldrich, and if I weigh the risk and benefit, it is okay.

All this stuff now is just desparate attempts to have him avoid jailtime.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Dec 27th 2024, 07:18 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC