"Valerie Plame was not covert, under the act"

[Kingshakabobo]

Or so says that wretched human being, Victoria Toensing.

So now we define Plame's status by the narrow interpretations of a specific criminal law interpreted by a hack attorney?

If my neighbor is found - shot 5 times and stabbed 6 times....can we not call it a "murder under, the act"?.......unless I we have a suspect and enough evidence for a conviction?

Do I have rethuglican logic figured out?:crazy:

Just enough bullshit to pass it along to the Coulter/Malkin crowd so they can regurgitate it....



http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/03/16/waxman-v-toensing/

[rocktivity]

1. She was covert UNDER THE CIA!!!!

The CIA ADMITS it, and if she HADN'T been covert, there wouldn't have been an investigation IN THE FIRST PLACE! Get over it and smell the coffee, will ya?

:crazy:
rocknation

[WinkyDink]

11. Well, then, to quote Mme. DeGenova: "Shame on the CIA!"

Because she IS the expert! Ask Barry!

[Robbien]

2. Victoria Toensing

'nuff said

[tridim]

3. Even Faux News admits Plame was covert now..

Believe it or not, I flipped past a report last night and that's exactly what they said!

This small group of holdouts/deniers are going to begin looking quite crazy even to the GOP base.

[LynnTheDem]

4. And toensing would know Plame's job duties how?

If Plame "wasn't covert under the act", then toensing must have known exactly what Plame's duties were.

Funny how the CIA says Plame wa, in fact, covert.

Obviously, toensing knows better what Plame's duties were than the CIA who employed Plame.

[K8-EEE]

10. That's what I can't figure out....what does she know that the CIA doesn't?

Makes no sense...

[shain from kane]

5. Novak broke his hip, when he fell off the bed.

[Graybeard]

6. Miss Vickie will be the new AG.

At least that is what Toensing thinks in her hair-dye addled mind.

[TomClash]

7. Victoria doesn't know anything about intel

Larry Johnson is right - she's a twit.

[kanrok]

8. I wish Waxman would have allowed her to explain what she meant when she said :

Plame wasn't "covert" under the statute. He had a perfect opportunity to show that she was interpreting something that was not included in the statute's definition. I like watching these proceedings, but sometimes I cringe when congress critters question people. It's as if they forget how to ask a simple, straight-forward question.


Here's the definition from the statute:

(4) The term “covert agent” means—
(A) a present or retired officer or employee of an intelligence agency or a present or retired member of the Armed Forces assigned to duty with an intelligence agency—
(i) whose identity as such an officer, employee, or member is classified information, and
(ii) who is serving outside the United States or has within the last five years served outside the United States;...

Here's Toensing's argument for why Plame was not "covert":

"At the threshold, the agent must truly be covert. Her status as undercover must be classified, and she must have been assigned to duty outside the United States currently or in the past five years. This requirement does not mean jetting to Berlin or Taipei for a week's work. It means permanent assignment in a foreign country. Since Plame had been living in Washington for some time when the July 2003 column was published, and was working at a desk job in Langley (a no-no for a person with a need for cover), there is a serious legal question as to whether she qualifies as "covert.""

Note that Toensing tells us something that is not contained in the definition of "covert" under the statute, i.e, that "assigned to duty outside the United States" means "permanent assignment." Toensing is playing a semantic game here. There is nothing in the statute that spells this out. See how she uses weasel words like " was living in Washington for some time when the 2003 article was published."

See: http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A2305-2005Jan11

It makes absolutely no sense. It is as dishonest as parsing the meaning of the word "is." We are supposed to believe that the only CIA agents worthy of being protected are those who have "permanent assignments." It is an absurd point. Well-crafted, simple questions could have uncovered this bit of obfuscation for what it truly was. Unfortunately, Waxman stayed far away from this and as a result, it gives the far right wing another ridiculous talking point.

[Kingshakabobo]

17. I'm surprised Waxman let that get past him.

You're right. He should have made her state the definition in the statute and then square her testimony against it.

You make excellent points. Thanks!!

[BlackVelvet04]

9. This is really simple.....

If she wasn't covert then why did she have cover employment? She wouldn't have. The CIA doesn't provide a cover for all employees, just those "under cover" or covert.

[WinkyDink]

12. Maybe Waxman could've asked VT what she knows about Brewster-Jennings.

[MGKrebs]

13. And how would VT know this?

Did she check all airline records looking for "V. Plame" or "V. Wilson" for 5 years? And who says she would have traveled under her own name anyway?

Oh wait, somebody must have told her that Plame was not undercover? OK, let's have the name of who told her. How will that person claim to have known?

[orleans]

14. why was she even at this hearing? who the fuck is she anyway?

why not just get coultergiest to testify?

[LSK]

23. I think she was there for the Dems to debunk her shit

[ljm2002]

15. First of all...

...as others have pointed out, Victoria has no way to know what Valerie was doing for the CIA anyway.

Second of all, according to Valerie's sworn testimony, she had been out of country within the 5 year timeframe -- therefore, Valerie *was* covert "under the act" -- the one that Victoria helped to draft, but that she cannot properly interpret at this late date.

And then there is that pesky executive order 12958.

No, Victoria is full of sh*t and Waxman has put her on notice that everyone else, at this point, is on to her.

[ellenfl]

16. according to plame's own testimony,

plame WAS covert under the act, even though no one told her that she was. what toensing and others are seizing on is that a covert agent must serve out of the country within a 5 year period and plame clearly said she was out of the country, periodically, between 3/16/2002 and yesterday.

toensing may have helped write the law but she apparently doesn't know how to read it!

does anyone know where i can see the rest of the hearings? the two recordings i made cut off just when it was getting interesting. i saw all of plame but now the rest of the hearing(s).

tia

ellen fl

oops, i guess i should have read the whole thread first!

[johnnydrama]

18. yah

She's butchering the intent.

She's basically saying that all covert officer's have to live permanently outside the country, which is ridiculous.

It doesn't say live, it says serve.

But I think she knows this.

[niyad]

19. it must really piss VT off that, under VPW's name on the crawl, were "CIA undercover operative"

on c-span. guess they didn't get her memo??

[johnaries]

20. She was "Mission Impossible" type covert.

She was the type of covert that if she was "caught or killed" the CIA would have denied she even worked for the CIA. That's what NOC means. It's hard to get much more covert than that!

[texpatriot2004]

21. And someone sees the person doing the shooting and stabbing

according to that logic.

[LSK]

22. computer says no...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=429211&mesg_id=429211