Valerie Plame "was" covert, thats probably true. What you don't understand Basmati is the meaning of the word "is". (I would have thought your leader, Bill Clinton, would have taught you the differences.)
The past tense of the word "is" is the word "was". As in, I "was" a covert agent. This implies that at anytime prior to my testimony in front of my liberal lap dogs, I was covert.

But they didn't ask the right questions, which is shameful that our Republican Congressman were not ready for this.

The fact is. . . Valerie Plame is not now, in the present tence, a covert agent.

She isn't today. She wasn't when Richard Artimage "outed" her. She may have been a covert agent a long time ago, specifically long before she had her set of twins and decided to take a desk job some six or so years before whe was outed. But she wasn't when her husband was doing his exhaustive investigation while sitting in the sun "getting some rays".

As to libel, well, I'll leave that to Valerie's Attorneys. She is a public figure now and is about to sign, or has signed a multi-million dollar book deal, so I'll leave that to her attorneys to contact me. I'm sure she is well deserving of some additional protection that the media will provide her.

The fact also is, is that the defense to a libel charge is the truth. I'd love to get her in the chair and cross examine her as she should have been crossed, rather than being treated like some princess deserving of our accolades.

So, basalmic, err, or whatever your name is that you are too ashamed to share with your own words, I'd suggest to you that maybe you ought to go back to grammar school 101 where Bill Clinton is the teacher.

Hobbs you are crazy!
Once covert agent, always a covert agent.
Do you think there aren't people out there somewhere who now know that she spied upon them and embarassed them?
Anyone she had dealings with then may also be into trouble!

Anyway, you have no way of knowing all of the things she might have done lately.

Quit trying to justify such treason.

Thanks Dollar,

I agree that this is treason, if one uses the definition of words that liberals use, that generally comes straight off the fax machines having been sent directly to them by the DNC.

But you have made my point, if she was once covert then she is always covert, per your post. (I disagree with that issue though.) Therefore, she should be arrested for posing on the front page of Vanity Fair and thereby exposing her identity. I can't wait to see her chained and frog marched out of the CIA building.

But I must remember that I'm arguing with liberals, and the meaning of words have little effect on your own conscience, so let me make this very plain.

The Federal Statute is very specific in the meaning of the words, especially the words "covert" and "knowingly". These words have very common meanings in the dictionary, but the law defines these words very specifically under this statute. (Something called Due Processs) For example, Bill Clinton may have been acting "covertly" when Monica was smoking his cigar, but that doesn't mean he is a covert agent.

Also, one must knowingly "out" the person. To do so, one must know she was covert. All the testimony that came out about Novak's article was that Joe Wilson's wife worked at the CIA. Nothing about being some covert agent with a super secret decoder ring and a poison pill always at the ready.
But then again, leave it to a liberal to expect Libby Scooter and Karl Rove to know that Valerie Plame was a covert agent, even though Valerie Plame testified that she didn't know if she was one pursuant to the statute.

And finally, the CIA is extremely political. I find it hard to believe that LIBERALS are standing up for this branch of our Government, in light of how much you hate big brother, but the CIA knowingly sent an unskilled and untrained former ambassador to Niger to "investigate" this matter. They then allowed him to come back without being debriefed, without writing a formal report and without having to remain confidential. They then let him write a long New York Times article about how the President was lying. Well Excuse Me, that sure sounds political to me.

So the real treason that we should be looking at is, how we let the CIA become political and to be able to 'affect' the outcome of a Presidential election by sending political operatives out to discredit the President.

But then again, the means is justified by the ends when it comes to liberal politics.

All the blather you can muster won't change these facts: Plame was a covert agent and the W.H. knew it; and, there were no yellow cake sales from Africa!
Reminds me of all of these people who get caught at something illegal and then apologize, not for the crime, but for getting caught!

Excellent fact-free response, lying Richard Hobbs!

"The CIA is extremely political"? Hooooo-ha, whatta knee slapper!

The CIA was extremely NON-political (George Tenet excepted) and refused to bless the questionable intelligence the Bush Administration wanted to use to take us to war.

So the amateurs at the Secretary of Defense's office (Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and Feith) set up their own amateur intelligence agency, featuring exactly one operative (Ahmad Chalabi's buddy Curveball) who told them exactly what they wanted to hear.

Remember folks, when it comes to politics:
Richard Hobbs lies.
Richard Hobbs always lies.
Richard Hobbs will always lie.

Basmati,

Keep repeating over and over again your comments without any facts to support them and eventually your propaganda might win out.

I gave you the facts, I gave you the testimony, I gave you the history, I gave you the logical connection between all three and asked you to respond in kind.

Instead, you gave me spin and a slogan.

Man, I love arguing with liberals. Its like arguing with my wife, if I'm right, then I'm wrong, and if I am truely right, I will wish that I wasn't, because I'm going to pay for it.

I think I've wasted enough time with arguing with the ignorant and those that have no desire to seek the truth. So I'll leave you to jump back up on your dryer and spin away.

By the way, with the way you argue, I wouldn't want anyone to know my name either. At least Jeff C isn't ashamed of what he thinks.

The primary difference between us, Richard, is that I base my opinions on facts, and you base your "facts" on opinions.

So we are all to believe that Scooter Libby lied before a grand jury to cover up a non crime. We are to believe that even though the director of the CIA asked for an investigation into the compromising of a "covert agent" that the Director of the CIA was mistaken. We are to believe that even though the President DECLASSIFIED the document he received from the CIA with Ms. Plame's name on it and her position, she was not in a classified role. All promoted by a man that will defend perjury by anyone with a Republican lapel pin. A man who will defend lie after lie after lie from this group of "leaders" with "hazy memories," "cloudy memories," statements contradicted by their own statements. A man that will seemingly defend everything but his country and the rule of law. Mr. Hobbs, you are making a fool of yourself in the public square. You still don't get it. You and many in your party attacking the victim of Mr. Cheney's witch hunt will gain you neither votes, nor support, nor stature. You continue to lash yourself to a sinking ship. And I thank you for that Mr. Hobbs. I thank you.

Kevin "Hack" King

At the time that President George W.Bush opted to jeopardize an existing covert operation and declassify Valerie Plame Wilson's name in order to smear a political opponent, Mrs. Wilson's name was classified.

Even your Republican masters admit this. I can and will produce timelines if you keep this line of questioning up. You may wish to Google "Plame" and "SECRET NOFORN" prior to shooting your mouth off in this area again.

And if your lawyering skill is as lacking as your ability to tell the truth, I dare say that Mrs. Wilson would make you look positively foolish in a court of law.

Now give me another good "but...but...Clinton!" non sequitur, little man!

Classified doesn't mean Covert, per the Statute.
All Governmental Employees are Classified.

Here is a bit of the testimony. Maybe you should put your reading glasses on, because you are having a problem not only in giving your true name, but in proving the true facts.
**********************************************************

REP. DAVIS: The Intelligence Identities Protection Act makes it a crime to knowingly disclose the identity of a covert agent, which has a specific definition under the act. Did anyone ever tell you that you were so designated?

MS. PLAME WILSON: I'm not a lawyer.

REP. DAVIS: That's why I asked if they told you. I'm not asking for your interpretation. (this is where Rep. Davis is asking her to just desribe her true classification, and not to give a legal opinion.)

MS. PLAME WILSON: No, no. But I was covert. I did travel overseas on secret missions within the last five years. (Instead, she goes ahead and says no one said she was, but then she tried to give a "legal" opinion, even though she wasn't a lawyer.)

REP. DAVIS: I'm not arguing with that. What I'm asking is, for purposes of the act -- and maybe this just never occurred to you or anybody else at the time -- but did anybody say that you were so designated under the act? Or was this just after it came to fact?

MS. PLAME WILSON: No, no one told me that. And that --

REP. DAVIS: How about after the disclosure?

MS. PLAME WILSON: Pardon me?

REP. DAVIS: How about after the disclosure, did anyone the n say gee, you were designated under the act, this should not have happened? Did anybody in the CIA tell you at that point?

MS. PLAME WILSON: No.
(She lied here, because the Democratic National Convention and the Liberal Drive by Media told her she was a covert agent and they have operatives in the CIA that she couldn't testify to or otherwise prove the liberal political pressure of the CIA.)

REP. DAVIS: Okay. Since the disclosure of your identity, have you been offered other positions within the CIA?

MS. PLAME WILSON: Yes. I went on to other jobs with commensurate responsibility.

REP. DAVIS: No demotion or anything.

MS. PLAME WILSON: Pardon me? (This is where she is asking Bush to pardon her for her obvious perjury)

REP. DAVIS: No, you didn't experience any demotion.

MS. PLAME WILSON: No.

Okay Basmati-, you know the person too ashamed to acknowledge their real name. . . .

Why was Richard Armitage never prosecuted? Why was the first person who told Fitzgerald that he told Novak about her working at the CIA never prosecuted, unless and except she was never COVERT!

ooohhh! I use my name when I propogate lies. I'm Richard Hobbs. I dare anyone that argues circles around me to use their name, so I can, ummm.. ummm.. Know their real name, I guess. So Richard, exactly who's job is it to travel throughout the country telling each and every covert person which act they are covered by. Are you truely this desparate?

"Hey Joe, you're on call for telling the next 500 agents which acts they are covered by. I have the northeast region next week. I think Ryan is covering Europe." Richard. Embrace the truth. There are dishonest people in every political party. Currently, yours are on parade like a regatta. you can keep grasping at incoherent arguments, or you can start counseling fellow republicans that if they find themselves under oath, it is best to recite facts and not talking points. And Richard, be glad you have not been under oath on this blog of yours.

Kevin "Hack" King

Richard Hobbs wrote: "Classified doesn't mean Covert, per the Statute. All Governmental Employees are Classified.

That may or may not be true. True to form, you don't list any backup for your assertions. Typical.

In Plame's case, her name was classified because she was an (direct quote here) "undercover operative" (end quote). My source is Bill Harlow, CIA spokesman, who testified under oath to Fitzgerald's grand jury.

Another link to back up my claim. Gee, why doesn't the lying Richard Hobbs ever post links to back up HIS claims?

The rest of your post is immaterial. They tried to pin her down and find out exactly who told her she was covert. She didn't rise to the "gotcha" bait.

I finally finished reading the cross examination of Congressman Westmoreland with Valerie Plame. (NPR did not project a very flattering exchange.)

Anyway, he asked her about only months after Novak made this report, she appeared voluntarily on the front page of VANITY FAIR with her husband. (She did wear sunglasses to protect her covert status.)

She then essentially "outed" herself.

Since the statute doesn't specifically state that a covert agent who is "outed" is fair game to be openly discussed with the media, then according to her own testimony her status was that of being covert, period, end of story. Which means she outed herself after she was supposedly outed by Armitage.

She should go to Jail for outing herself.

Richard, as usual, you are totally mistaken; although I know that you will be shocked that I say so. I would like to advance these facts to see if you disagree with any of them:

CIA Director Michael Hayden approved a statement read before the opening of Henry Waxman's Government Reform and Oversight Committee investigating the Valerie Plame affair. The statement from Director Hayden said:

“During her employment at the CIA, Ms. Wilson was under cover. Her employment status with the CIA was classified information prohibited from disclosure under Executive Order 12958. At the time of the publication of Robert Novak's column on July 14, 2003, Ms. Wilson's CIA employment status was covert. This was classified information.”

Valerie Plame testified under oath saying: “Congressman, thank you for the opportunity. I know I'm here under oath and I'm here to say that I was a covert officer of the Central Intelligence Agency.”

Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald told reporters last week, after Libby was found guilty on four of the five counts of perjury and obstruction of justice, that Plame's "relationship with the CIA was classified. And I have 100 percent confidence in that information."

For the lawyers among us, I would also like to post the relevant section from the Intelligence Identities Protection Act which covers the specifics:

(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; or
(B) a United States citizen whose intelligence relationship to the United States is classified information, and—
(i) who resides and acts outside the United States as an agent of, or informant or source of operational assistance to, an intelligence agency, or
(ii) who is at the time of the disclosure acting as an agent of, or informant to, the foreign counterintelligence or foreign counterterrorism components of the Federal Bureau of Investigation; or
(C) an individual, other than a United States citizen, whose past or present intelligence relationship to the United States is classified information and who is a present or former agent of, or a present or former informant or source of operational assistance to, an intelligence agency.

Sorry for such a long post but I felt it clarified the argument to include the relevant law.

Also, as to Richard’s claim that Plame should be prosecuted for “outing” herself, the argument is of course, silly and an apparent attempt to change the subject from the treasonous actions (giving aid to the enemy) of the administration officials. In any event, even if Plame had intentionally exposed her covert status, it is specifically not illegal for her to do so.

Again, from the Intelligence Identities Protection Act:

(d) Disclosure by agent of own identity
It shall not be an offense under section 421 of this title for an individual to disclose information that solely identifies himself as a covert agent.

Jeff C,

Although I did not expect you to necessarily respond to this, I am not surprised that you provided an intellectual and factual response other than the rhetorical self serving comments provided by others.

However, I will still suggest to you that the jury is still out on the propriety of this entire ordeal. Beginning with the CIA sending an untrained and former assistant ambassador to investigate a claim such as this without some type of experience in such matters to the request from the CIA for an investigation into a non-crime, it all reeked of politics. The CIA even made an exception for him by not requiring that his report remain confidential, not requiring a written report, and basically getting a pass when it comes to the normal protocols that are required of these types of operations. It seemed rather suspicious and very political for the CIA to act in this manner, and when we later learned of the fight within the CIA between Tenet and the career diplomats and the fact that Wilson's wife worked there and reportedly offered his name as a candidate for this position, well, one has to wonder. (The liberal media never wondered which I do not find unusual.)

But the statutory requirement for this type of "covert" position is still part and parcel of what this whole ordeal is all about. If Plame was truly covert, then the CIA should have acted immediately to protect her, which they didn't. Instead, they did several things to contradict this covert status from the very beginning. From allowing her to publish her name in the Whose Who of Americans as Joe Wilson's wife, to having her name listed under the FEC's reporting of her contributions to Al Gore, to their response to Novak's first phone call to them when he asked if Joe Wilson's wife worked for them. (Novak didn't even know her name at that point.) Instead, the CIA just shrugged off all of these matters and did nothing pro-active in "protecting" their James Bond desk jockey.

In addition, Wilson himself stated that she was not a covert agent on the day she was outed, and then later re-explained that that was not what he meant to say. (Here is Joseph Wilson himself, talking to Wolf Blitzer on CNN today: "My wife was not a clandestine officer the day that Bob Novak blew her identity." )

In The Politics of Truth, former ambassador Joseph Wilson writes that he and his future wife both returned from overseas assignments in June 1997. Neither spouse, a reading of the book indicates, was again stationed overseas. They appear to have remained in Washington, D.C., where they married and became parents of twins. Six years later, in July 2003, the name of the CIA officer — Valerie Plame — was revealed by columnist Robert Novak. http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-07-14-cia-wilson_x.htm This therefore meant that the five year rule was not in place, not to mention the other many requirements.

And then as you may recall, Fitzgerald put several journalists through hell, including putting one in jail about this matter. During that time, three dozen news organizations, including ABC, CNN, TIME and even the evil FOX filed an amicus brief with the court stating that their journalists should not be threatened with disclosing their confidential sources, unless and until a real crime could be shown occurred. The Brief then goes on to show that many of the statutory requirements of the statute were not followed and therefore, there was no crime. The brief was written by the very attorneys that helped draft the law in 1982, so I suspect they have a special knowledge of the law. http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/opinions/documents/amici_brief_032305.pdf (Mind you, this was before Plame herself testifed that she didn't know what her official status was, only that she thought she was covert, no one had ever told her she was, and she didn't know if she was under the statute.)

Couple all of this with the predictions of these attorneys over three years ago that no crime will be prosecuted save that of a possible obstruction of justice or perjury charge, as was found in Martha Stewart's case, and you have all of the makings of a political witch hunt. Why didn't Fitzgerald ever prosecute someone for the outing?

Oh, and as to Plame outing herself, that was entirely TIC. Yet, the gnashing of teeth that Wilson and Plame have testified they went through after she was outed is highly suspect. In her testimony, she said that she felt like someone punched her in her gut when she read about this in the newspaper. Strange that that was what Hillary said when she read about Monica. Plame also talked about that she was worried about her children's safety, etc., now that she had been outed. Yet, at no time had her picture been shown, until she has her picture taken for the front cover of the Vanity Fair some three or four months later. Doesn't sound like a person in fear for the safety of herself and her family.

The point about this whole matter is that it was a political circus from the very beginning. The CIA sent a political operative to discredit the President. Richard Artimage was asked how someone with such little credentials could be sent and he says, maybe because his wife works at the CIA. Novak reads her name in the Who's Who, and boom we have the name of a person working for the CIA.

What was never proven was the 'evil' and 'manipulative' disclosure of Plame. It was all happenstance. And all of it would never occurred had the career diplomats at the CIA not been so intent on trying to discredit the President. The CIA should at least try and appear unbiased from time to time.

Observe - an essay filled with 'facts' not in evidence.

Well Richard I disagree with some of your post.

You say, “with the CIA sending an untrained and former assistant ambassador to investigate a claim such as this without some type of experience in such matters..”

Joe Wilson served as General Services Officer in Niger beginning in 1976 followed by diplomatic posts in Togo and South Africa before being promoted to Deputy Chief of Mission for Burundi, then Congo and later Iraq. He then served as Ambassador to Gabon and Sao Tome and Principe. After this he became Political Adviser to Commander in Chief U.S. Armed Forces in Europe and then Senior Director for African Affairs for the National Security Council. These seem to me to be acceptable credentials.

You also write that: “The CIA even made an exception for him by not requiring that his report remain confidential, not requiring a written report, and basically getting a pass when it comes to the normal protocols that are required of these types of operations.”

It is my understanding that Wilson could not definitively report that the allegations were untrue and so the CIA left it as a low level matter not requiring a written report particularly after the Niger letters were confirmed as forgeries. Instead the CIA Directorate of Operations produced a March 8, 2002 report based on Wilson's debriefing which was classified and therefore confidential until parts of it were released by VP Cheney.

Valerie testified under oath that she did not recommend Wilson for the trip nor did she have the authority to send him. Except for Novak’s column and others disparaging Wilson, I have not seen any proof otherwise. Since Valerie was under oath and subject to perjury, I lean toward believing her.

Also, you say: “If Plame was truly covert, then the CIA should have acted immediately to protect her…” I believe they did. It was the CIA which originally requested the investigation. Listings in Who’s Who or other public information about Plame in no way compromised her as a covert CIA agent. In fact, wiping the public slate of her marriage to Ambassador Wilson and other information would have been suspicious in itself.

The CIA refuses to admit (in regards to Plame’s upcoming book) that she was a CIA agent before 2002 but does confirm that she was overseas when she worked for them. Ergo, she must have fit within the five year rule. And CIA Director Michael Hayden said. “At the time of the publication of Robert Novak's column on July 14, 2003, Ms. Wilson's CIA employment status was covert. This was classified information.”

I vaguely remember the Brief to which you refer. However, my recollection of it comes from the dispute over the authors claim that covert status requires living outside the US which is how I got the copy of the law which I posted earlier.

Also, you refer to the schism between the administration and the CIA. I won't mention that Bush gave Tenent the Presidential Medal of Freedom. It would be too ironic.

I knew that your outing post was tongue-in-cheek but it did provide me with the opportunity to include the section of the law which specifically allowed her to do so if she wished. I was amazed at the provision and you can understand my delight at finding it! By the way, I wrote the previous piece at work and posted it quickly. Thinking about it on the way home, I regretted the adjective “silly” but by the time I got home (on a different computer) I could not edit it.

Finally, I am not (OK very, very, very rarely) a critic of the CIA so excluding myself from the rest of the left here I would like to answer your initial question: “When did the left fall in love with the CIA?” It was when they realized they could use the CIA stories to bash the Bush administration of course!

Jeff,

I don't know about you, but I feeling a bit queasy in having a diaglogue about political matters that runs the gambit of extremes, but for which no personal attacks have been made.

I feel sort of dirty to have an argument that is civil in nature.

So I'm going to blame you for it. So please direct a few nasty comments in my direction, or use a less than flattering nickname in place of my given name, and we can be back down into the mud pit. Or I might just get sick of this mutual respect and professional behavior.

What will be our next topic? I love global warming, it warms my heart. I'm game for most things, except anything local. These local topics really get people to come out swinging, so I'd rather stay away from that.

Richard, you and your neo-fascist fellow travelers are only interested in global warming to the extent that you can be lapdog tools to the giant corporations which control you and possibly because you know that when the sea level rises it will be a catastrophe for Cuba and for my gay liberal friends in San Francisco. Thank God we have honest and brave Americans like Al Gore willing to stand up to cretins like you and speak truth to the powers that be in the present corrupt administration which stacked the Supreme Court with crazed right-wing fanatics so they could steal the election from him thereby undermining American values while pseudo-patriots like you stood by and applauded.

You’re right, I do feel better!

I already live on a hill on Lake Kedron and its very peaceful, but I need Ocean Front property and I can't afford the current prices. So I figure, in 20 years, the oceans will rise enough to make my property Ocean Front.

So, I'm really hoping that Al Gore's science is accurate.

Oh, and your dad is no longer the best X-President.

I was shocked when you said Dad wasn't the best Ex-Pres. I had to run turn on FOX to see if Bush had resigned...

And then we would have a truly great conservative to step in as President.

Can you Say President Richard Cheney?

hmmmmm. That sounds so very good.

I tried to say "President Cheney" but choked and broke out in hives.

I'm there for you bud. I go through the same panic attacks when I hear someone say President Hitlery Clinton, or Pres. Osama bin Obama, or President (insert name of the dozens of other wannabees from the Democratic party that will have to stand up to the Clintonistas to become president here.)

Now on to bigger and better things. Yep, you guessed it. Left wing wackos showing their stuff in the Democratic House, causing you all alot of problems. I love Code Pink. Are your member?

The American People will slowly realize that your party is nothing but a facade of socialists, pinko, anti-american elitists. All they need is time.

I am not for Hillary. I believe there is a possiblity that she may not be sincere. However, take cheer. There has never been a Dem. front runner this early in the campaign that lasted. Remember President Howard Dean? I'm hoping Gore steps up to save both the Democrats and America. Otherwise, I'm looking at Richardson but I'm uncommitted as of now.

I would like to expand the "slow" part of your last sentence and broaden it to include both parties. After all, look how long it took the American People to wake up to the Bush régime. (My little computer countdown clock says 668 more days!)

Speaking of politics, I have been delighted at how easily the Republican right has apparently tossed aside all of their so-called principles and now are embracing multi-adulterous, pro-choice, gay loving candidates. Can I assume you are a Gulliani person now?

Oh by the way, I object to your use of the word "facade."

And all we got was your last stupid post.

Well, I've gotta edit this. Apparently you have a plethora of last stupid posts dwelling within your hot-air-filled carcus.

Kevin "Hack" King