Originally Posted By gadzuux <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21903753/" target="_blank">http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21 903753/</a> Former spokesman says both president and vice president involved AP WASHINGTON - Former White House press secretary Scott McClellan blames President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney for efforts to mislead the public about the role of White House aides in leaking the identity of a CIA operative. In an excerpt from his forthcoming book, McClellan recount the 2003 news conference in which he told reporters that aides Karl Rove and I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby were "not involved" in the leak involving operative Valerie Plame. "There was one problem. It was not true," McClellan writes. "I had unknowingly passed along false information. And five of the highest-ranking officials in the administration were involved in my doing so: Rove, Libby, the vice president, the president's chief of staff and the president himself." Current White House press secretary Dana Perino said it wasn't clear what McClellan meant in the excerpt and she had no immediate comment. ----------------------------------------- I suppose this is for the last few remaining stragglers who continue to believe bush is a decent and honorable human being. He isn't. And neither is rove, cheney or libby. The white house did this. Then they lied about it. Continuously. Then they sent libby out to perjure himself and hamstring the special prosecutor. More lies. To us - the people they are elected to serve. Then of course came bush's commutation of libby's sentence before he even showed up to serve a single day. Why is this not abuse of office, betrayal of the public's trust, and malfeasance. Why is this not an impeachable offense?
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>Current White House press secretary Dana Perino said it wasn't clear what McClellan meant<< Apparently, during the writer's strike, the White House press secretary will take over writing hilarious, fresh material for the Daily Show.
Originally Posted By ecdc I'm not surprised that this goes all the way to Bush (who could be). I am surprised, and terribly depressed, that Americans don't give a damn. Slap all the magnetic flags on your car you like, you don't have one patriotic bone in your body if you excuse or don't care about outing a CIA spy. It's treason, nothing less.
Originally Posted By DlandDug Americans are, for the most part, well past this scandal, as the mystery has long since been solved. Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage revealed Plame's identity in June, 2003 to Bob Woodward, and in July of that year to Robert Novak. This is all public record. Armitage himself finally admitted that it was he who revealed Plame's identity. If it was still the case that we didn't know who was at the root of this case, stuff like this would, indeed, be surprising and depressing. McClellan was in no position to know who was involved, and he apparently has decided to speculate on something that has already been decided. I suppose it will sell a few more books to credulous people who still really, really want to believe that there's more to this old, long finished story.
Originally Posted By JohnS1 You beat me to the punch, DlandDug. This was all tied up in a neat bow as soon as we heard Armitage's role many months ago. I'm surprised to see McClellan trying to get additional mileage out of this for whatever reason.
Originally Posted By dshyates Except the part where McClellen was told by the President to lie to the American people under direct questioning.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder "I suppose it will sell a few more books to credulous people who still really, really want to believe that there's more to this old, long finished story." ROTFLMAO. And O.J. didn't do it because the jury found him not guilty.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>Americans are, for the most part, well past this scandal, as the mystery has long since been solved. Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage revealed Plame's identity in June, 2003 to Bob Woodward, and in July of that year to Robert Novak. This is all public record. Armitage himself finally admitted that it was he who revealed Plame's identity.<< Americans were never started with this scandal, that's part of the problem. Americans don't seem to care one bit that treason was committed and a CIA agent (one that was responsible for preventing suitcase nukes from getting in the US, BTW) had her cover blown. The mystery of who leaked her name has been solved. Much of the details behind it remain hidden, and plenty of credible questions remain. It's not just "credulous" people who are still interested in it. It's decent Americans who are deeply troubled by what took place. Of all of this White House's sins (and wow, there are many) this is actually the worst. Incompetence and stupidity are one thing; the deliberate assault on our national security for political gain is quite another. It's the height of hypocrisy that the people who so quickly say Democrats can't protect our nation are the ones that turn around and defend this. The question of a cover up is valid; even the jury that found Libby guilty (and Bush immediately made sure he never saw one day behind bars; so much for justice by the people) wondered why Rove, and in some cases, Cheney, was never charged. What's hilarious is that people are just taking the administration's word for it and saying "Well, that's the end of that chapter." Instead, they dismiss a high-placed former administration member's claims in his new book with statements like "I'm surprised to see McClellan trying to get additional mileage out of this for whatever reason." Yeah, it's just some bizarre, unknown reason - it couldn't be because McClellan actually knows what he's talking about and has information to share. That couldn't possibly be it.
Originally Posted By gadzuux Underlying everything else - jeopardizing our nation's security for vindictive political payback, and of course lying - is one other thing. If you've got a dispute with someone, you don't go after their wife, fergawdsakes - at least no one with any decency or honor would. Yet with republicans, it's a favorite ploy - just look how they vilified hillary during bill clinton's term. Even to this day, we've got schmucks like hannity saying that hillary should answer publicly to the claims of a handful of women making spurious claims about her sending goon squads after them as retaliation for accusing bill of harrassment. Even if the claims were true (if unsubstantiated), hillary is the "wronged woman" in all of it. Yet in the imaginations of these republican mouthpieces, she's conducting some kind of behind the scenes intimidation against them, and they are demanding a response from hillary. Some people are beneath contempt.
Originally Posted By jonvn "Of all of this White House's sins (and wow, there are many) this is actually the worst" Yes, of all things this admin has done that has shamed our nation's history, this will go down as the worst. This one act of treason at the highest levels of government is something you'd expect out of some cheap novel. It is simply criminal. What is worse, and really telling, is how very few care, or even understand this. I think this country is basically over at this point, and we're just running on inertia. People think that patriotism is putting a "Support our troops" ribbon on the back of their Suburban, and shopping at Walmart post 9/11. I think that's every bit as bad as blowing the cover of a CIA agent.
Originally Posted By oc_dean IMPEACH! Worst White House Administration ever! The amount of deceit & corruption is horrible! How Bush, Chenney and the rest of the crooks continue to stay in power is beyond me!
Originally Posted By ecdc >>If you've got a dispute with someone, you don't go after their wife...at least no one with any decency or honor would.<< Bill Maher said even the mob doesn't go after your family. Speaking of the Clinton's, can anyone even fathom the outrage if Bill had pulled a stunt like this? They impeached the guy for lying about an affair; I think Republicans would've just swarmed the White House with pitchforks if he'd outed a spy. Oh well. I guess hearing that the story's over is better than the old lie that Plame wasn't really undercover and she was just a secretary or something. I don't even hear some of the most extreme defenders trotting that one out too often.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder "Americans are, for the most part, well past this scandal, as the mystery has long since been solved. Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage revealed Plame's identity in June, 2003 to Bob Woodward, and in July of that year to Robert Novak. This is all public record. Armitage himself finally admitted that it was he who revealed Plame's identity." Yeah, gee, you're right. Upon reflection, it was just all tied up in a neat, tidy, little beau.
Originally Posted By JohnS1 "Yeah, it's just some bizarre, unknown reason - it couldn't be because McClellan actually knows what he's talking about and has information to share. That couldn't possibly be it." Then why didn't he stage a press conference, or go to the media or otherwise expose what he knows in one fell swoop? Instead, he writes a book and releases a few little tantalizing snippets destined to make people want to buy that book and make him a nice pile of cash. In this case, as in most others, follow the money.
Originally Posted By DlandDug Wow, patriotism really is the last refuge of a scoundrel. The reason most people aren't all up in arms over this is not because we don't care-- it's because we know what happened. The jury may have been puzzled over why they didn't get to try Cheney and Rove, but only because of the constant drumbeat in the media that they were somehow the ones who were going down. The reason Cheney and Rove weren't put on trial is because they weren't involved in revealing Plame's identity. As it turned out, even Libby's involvement was tenuous. And no one has produced a shred of credible evidence that links Bush to it. It is simply the case that Armitage leaked the name. The investigation found this in the end, he admitted it, and the two principle sources for the story confirmed it. At this point, the only individuals who are still trying to whip this up into a patriotic frenzy are the Usual Suspects on the left, and a guy who just wrote a book and knows a thing or two about self promotion. This has nothing to do with staunchly defending the Bush administration, and has everything to do with recognizing the facts at hand. Give it a rest.
Originally Posted By jonvn "it's because we know what happened." No, the reason most people don't care is because they just no longer care about anything the government does. It's some other world that no longer seems responsive or interested in the general public.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder "This has nothing to do with staunchly defending the Bush administration, and has everything to do with recognizing the facts at hand. Give it a rest." Dug has spoken. It doesn't bother you that despite all that went on with this matter, Bush gave the middle finger to the entire process and pardoned Libby, especially after saying he'll not tolerate any behavior of this type in his Administration? Moreover, there's no way you can credibly say you'd accept this from a Democratic president. I know I wouldn't.
Originally Posted By jonvn "The reason Cheney and Rove weren't put on trial is because they weren't involved in revealing Plame's identity." The real reason is because Libby perjured himself to cover up their culpability. "a guy who just wrote a book" Yeah, just some random guy. Left winger, I'm sure.
Originally Posted By DlandDug Oh, and for anyone still fantasizing that this is all just right wing blather, here's your homework done for you: CNN: >>Former Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage was the source who revealed the identity of CIA officer Valerie Plame to syndicated columnist Robert Novak in 2003, touching off a federal investigation... The revelation that Armitage was the source of Novak's column is somewhat anticlimactic for Bush administration critics who had used the story as a weapon in Washington's partisan battles.<< <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/08/30/leak.armitage/index.html" target="_blank">http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITI CS/08/30/leak.armitage/index.html</a> New York Times: >>Richard L. Armitage has acknowledged that he was the person who first identified Valerie Wilson as an officer in the C.I.A. to columnist Robert D. Novak.<< <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/glogin?URI=http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/30/washington/30armitage.html&OQ=_rQ3D1&OP=53400071Q2F6XQ5DE6N5GQ2A255sQ246Q24KKQ3A6KW6RK6XQ5EQ2AP-nQ51s5n6RKQ5E2t-sQ5EQ51Q5DQ20PstQ3D" target="_blank">http://www.nytimes.com/glogin? URI=http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/30/washington/30armitage.html&OQ=_rQ3D1&OP=53400071Q2F6XQ5DE6N5GQ2A255sQ246Q24KKQ3A6KW6RK6XQ5EQ2AP-nQ51s5n6RKQ5E2t-sQ5EQ51Q5DQ20PstQ3D</a> The Washington Post (editorial): >>WE'RE RELUCTANT to return to the subject of former CIA employee Valerie Plame because of our oft-stated belief that far too much attention and debate in Washington has been devoted to her story and that of her husband, former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, over the past three years. But all those who have opined on this affair ought to take note of the not-so-surprising disclosure that the primary source of the newspaper column in which Ms. Plame's cover as an agent was purportedly blown in 2003 was former deputy secretary of state Richard L. Armitage. Mr. Armitage was one of the Bush administration officials who supported the invasion of Iraq only reluctantly. He was a political rival of the White House and Pentagon officials who championed the war and whom Mr. Wilson accused of twisting intelligence about Iraq and then plotting to destroy him. Unaware that Ms. Plame's identity was classified information, Mr. Armitage reportedly passed it along to columnist Robert D. Novak "in an offhand manner, virtually as gossip..." It follows that one of the most sensational charges leveled against the Bush White House -- that it orchestrated the leak of Ms. Plame's identity to ruin her career and thus punish Mr. Wilson -- is untrue.<< <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/31/AR2006083101460.html" target="_blank">http://www.washingtonpost.com/ wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/31/AR2006083101460.html</a> CBS News: >>Richard Armitage was the diplomat who leaked undercover CIA agent Valerie Plame's identity to columnist Robert Novak... In an exclusive interview with CBS News national security correspondent David Martin, Richard Armitage, once the No. 2 diplomat at the State Department, couldn't be any blunter. "Oh I feel terrible. Every day, I think I let down the president. I let down the Secretary of State. I let down my department, my family and I also let down Mr. and Mrs. Wilson," he says... In July 2003, Armitage told columnist Robert Novak that Ambassador Wilson's wife worked for the CIA, and Novak mentioned it in a column. It's a crime to knowingly reveal the identity of an undercover CIA officer. But Armitage didn't yet realize what he had done... "First of all, I felt so terrible about what I'd done that I felt I deserved whatever was coming to me. And secondarily, I didn't need an attorney to tell me to tell the truth. I as already doing that," Armitage explains. "I was not intentionally outing anybody. As I say, I have tremendous respect for Ambassador. Wilson's African credentials. I didn't know anything about his wife and made an offhand comment. I didn't try to out anybody." That was nearly three years ago, but the political firestorm over who leaked Valerie Plame's identity continued to burn as Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald began hauling White House officials and journalists before a grand jury. Armitage says he didn't come forward because "the special counsel, once he was appointed, asked me not to discuss this and I honored his request." "I thought every day about how I'd screwed up," he adds. Armitage never did tell the president, but he's talking now because Fitzgerald told him he could.<< <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/09/07/eveningnews/main1981433.shtml" target="_blank">http://www.cbsnews.com/stories /2006/09/07/eveningnews/main1981433.shtml</a> Wikipedia: >>Journalist Bob Woodward of the Washington Post revealed on November 15, 2005 that "a government official with no axe to grind" leaked to him the identity of outed CIA officer Valerie Plame in mid-June 2003... On August 21, 2006, the Associated Press published a story that revealed Armitage met with Bob Woodward in mid-June 2003. The information came from official State Department calendars, provided to The Associated Press under the Freedom of Information Act.[12] In the September 4, 2006 issue of Newsweek magazine, in an article titled "The Man Who Said Too Much", journalist Michael Isikoff, quoting a "source directly familiar with the conversation who asked not to be identified because of legal sensitivities", reported that Armitage was the "primary" source for Robert Novak's piece outing Plame. Armitage apparently mentioned Ms. Wilson's CIA role to Novak in a July 8, 2003 interview after learning about her status from a State Department memo which made no reference to her undercover status.[13] Isikoff also reported that Armitage had also told Bob Woodward of Plame's identity in June 2003, and that special counsel Patrick Fitzgerald investigated Armitage's role "aggressively", but did not charge Armitage with a crime because he "found no evidence that Armitage knew of Plame's covert CIA status when he talked to Novak and Woodward".<< <a href="http://www.google.com/search?q=" target="_blank">http://www.google.com/search?q =</a>%22Richard+Armitage%22+plame&hl=en&safe=off&rls=GGLR,GGLR:2005-51,GGLR:en&start=20&sa=N Or watch Plame and Armitage talk about his actions on YouTube: <a href="http://uk.youtube.com/watchv=OwJCUZHZjV8" target="_blank">http://uk.youtube.com/watchv=O wJCUZHZjV8</a> "Nice and neat," yes, but alas, no "Beau."
