Don't forget the outing of 'CIA uses chartered jets to transport prisoners' with the lists of the companies involved.

Amen, brutha...

Great timing!

Lott says it was a GOP senator.

Can't wait for the MSM to make the case for "good leaks" (good felonies) versus "bad leaks" (non-felonies which nevertheless hurt a Democrat operative).

If Lott is right, I can't wait for the MSM to ignore the GOP running away from the investigation Frist called.

This could be really, really fun.

I don't care who it is. They should be drawn and quartered. I'm still pissed about Orin Hatch's bloviating right after 9/11 about how we were listening in on Osama's satellite phone. After he made those comments, Osama's satellite phone went silent.

If they can't keep our secrets secret, at least throw them in jail.

Lott's words: "We can not remain silent. We have met the enemy, and it is us."

Put them under oath, and direct the Seargeant at Arms of Congress to escort them to the DC jail if they refuse to answer.

Is this request still operative?

The rumor is that the leak came from Cheney's pro-torture secret session. So the list of names is quite simple to come by.

Would you start with Big Dick, Ace? Waterboarding okay if they evade answering?

I assume due to the above post that 'tubino' is in favor of such an investigation regardless of where it leads?

The fun part about this story will be watching the moonbats contorting themselves as they try to avoid biting themselves in the ass with all their comments about the sheer evilness of Valerie Plame's non-outing. I can't wait to hear why statements like this apply to one case, but not the other:

I would call anyone a traitor who would out a CIA agent, or who would defend outing on the grounds that the CIA is evil/anti-WH.

It's a lot like that game we play where we collect comments from the Donks about the seriousness of the threat posed by Saddam, only in this case the quotes are a lot fresher and juicier.

I'm still pissed about Orin Hatch's bloviating right after 9/11...

I'm still pissed that the DoJ revealed secrets of ongoing investigations (more than once), and blew US contacts. There is even reason to believe that the Brits were closing in on the London bomb group -- till some Cheney admin folks thought a little good PR (short term) was worth more than a successful investigation.

Keep going out on that branch, Turbino...

It's fun for us, Ute, but there's no way you'll ever get any reaction from lefty trolls.

You see, while it looks to us a fairly close parallel, to your average lefty dope, unless the two situations are completely identical, they will seize upon the difference as the factor that excuses the hypocrisy.

If you catch them in a perfect parallel, then they will disappear for a day or two and then pretend it never happened.

It's not just faulty logic skills, it's a complete lack of any moral fiber whatever. This, I feel, results from improper parenting, but then what can you expect when the "parents" are Tijuana donkey-dates and nameless, syphlitic Filipino sailors?

so, how much longer until CNN actually posts this? Or is it on TV?

Hey how do you do that block quote trick? What's the tag?

I said, I would call anyone a traitor who would out a CIA agent, or who would defend outing on the grounds that the CIA is evil/anti-WH.

So far, I don't see how the leak above puts any CIA agent at risk. Is anyone alleging that?

On some other thread I made a distinction between whistleblowing ("good leaks") and other leaks that damage nat'l security. I don't remember if anyone responded -- whatever.

I still believe in the useful power of whistleblower leaks. (Is there anyone who doesn't?) But I'm sure we would disagree about many cases.

Generally I believe in that part of the US Constitution that says the US govt must account for all of its spending of our money. And I lean heavily toward transparency over secrecy AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.

As an example, I was kinda happy yesterday when that intel officer let it slip that intel expenses are about $44 billion/year. The CIA has been sued, unsuccessfully, numerous times to release that figure, and then it slips out. I don't think nat'l security is compromised one whit by that -- althoug h some bureaucrats might be in a little danger of losing their jobs.

And I think we taxpayers have SOME RIGHT to know what is done in our name, with our money, whether it's secret proxy wars, or secret black sites.

So I think an investigation is just fine, but without an actual risk, I don't see the crime. The bar to compel a journalist to testify is still high (Fitzgerald had to have a compelling argument to jail Judith Miller! As it should be!), so I doubt this would go over the bar. But let the cards fall where they may.

Hey, you asked.

everything that guy just said is bullshit.

Season's Greetings to the reality-based community!

Fitzmas is almost here, and Santa's got a shiny lead pipe in his bag just for you.

Odd that the CNN story about the investigation (posted 3:15pm eastern) did not mention Lott's comments

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/11/08/prison.probe/index.html

The story has CNN's Ed Henry and Ted Barrett as contributing to the story....why would Ed not report Lotts statement?

Also McCain was at the lunch right? Why did he say that the newspaper story was the first he had heard of the prisons?

Food for thought.

Whichever party owns him, I want his balls nailed to something. Let's say a grizzly bear.

Who was it outted the fact that Osama was using a satellite phone and we were tracking him that way, causing Osama...not to use satellite phones any more? Was that Hatch? I thought whoever it was should've gone down for that on the spot. Party politics be damned.

No wonder these guys aren't allowed to see any alien autopsies.

I'm with the others here -- I don't care where this leads, senator or admin official. Could be from within the CIA itself.

I'm tired of this crap, and I want people imprisoned for it. Perhaps in one of these secret prisons. That would be poetic justice.

The best possible result, including all Dems: if it was John ("torture!") McCain.

OK, enough daydreaming.

Here's Raw Story on the Lott story.

No wonder these guys aren't allowed to see any alien autopsies.

There's another reason I like this S. Weasel. Weasel, I'm still willing to take long odds on a bet with you -- could be double or nothing. :)

Bet if Lott's right about the source, that this investigation is swept under the rug PRONTO.

I am doubtful that Lott would have been able to say enough, or would have, to fill the Wash Post article. I would question the Post for pursuing the story, and I wonder how hard the CIA asked them not to run the story.

That being said, I don't care if this is gotcha, this is a real pisser of a leak. If there's one thing that keeps me warm at night, its that tangos are being kept in very secret secure locations. And if need be, someone is gonna break their thumbs to find out where that suitcase nuke is (kidnappings and timebombs scenarios people!)

Plenty of bad judgment to go around, but the Post should have killed this story anyway.

Newsday has Frist and Hastert calling for an investigation. That would seem to rule out Frist as the leak at least.

What's amazing in the comments to this thread is the belief on the part of the obvious liberals that, if it turns out that this was a GOP Senator, that somehow, those on the right suddenly won't want an investigation - or that suddenly, those on the right won't be clamoring for balls to be nailed to the wall.

And that seems to me to be the difference today between liberals and conservatives. A liberal only sees the political aspects of such leaks ... how they can be used to advance their agenda.

Conservatives see the damage such leaks do to the country and want it stopped - no matter who is doing it.

Well if its on Raw Story then lets proceed right to the punishment stage. That article was definitive.

This genie is not going back in the bottle. Whoever leaked should swing.

joeindc44, kinda offtopic, but here's some reading about Toensing's law and interp. Sorry if I'm pointing this at the wrong guy.

CNN:
Trent Lott stunned reporters by declaring that this subject was actualy discussed at a Senate Republican luncheon, Republican senators only, last tuesday the day before the story ran in the Washington Post. Lott noted that Vice President Cheney was also in the room for that discussion and Lott said point blank "a lot of it came out of that room last tuesday, pointing to the room where the lunch was held in the capitol." He added of senators "we can't keep our mouths shut." He added about the vice president, "He was up here last wek and talked up here in that room right there in a roomful of nothing but senators and every word that was said in there went right to the newspaper." He said he believes when all is said and done it may wind up as an ethics investigation of a Republican senator, maybe a Republican staffer as well. Senator Frist's office not commenting on this development. The Washington Post not commenting either.

Seems to me we still are in the Fitzmas Season!
Thanks for reminding me, Iowahawk.
Just for you, tubby...

The Night Before Fitzmas
by Uncle Jefe

Twas the night before Fitzmas
Through the whole blogosphere
And we reality-based patriots
Waited to hear
News that was old news
To us in the know;
Proof now at last!
Of that lying Karl Rove.
We’ve been waiting for years
to say ‘I told you so’
about this evil conspirer
who runs Bush’s show.
But ne’er came the day we could pin him with blame
until now that he’s caught outing Double-O Plame!
And Hark! Hear the words of the Times and the Herald-
On the morrow there’s gifts from Prosecutor Fitzgerald!
Settling down to our keyboards, cyber-snuggling with glee
A-taunting the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy.
For the time’s come for payback, as long we’ve been hintin’
For all the harm done to Dear Leader Clinton.
All of us in our kerchief-like tinfoil hats
Hootin’ and hollerin’, barking Moonbats.
Confident of rewards for the offerings we’d made
Mom’s ‘special’ brownies, and Dad’s favorite, Kool-ade.
But on came the morning, and what do we see?
He’s only indicting Scooter Libby?!
Oh, how we wailed, and the gnashing of teeth!
Again he escaped us, the Almighty Thief!
Not Rove?! Not Cheney?! Not BushHitlerChimpy?!!
Why, even Scoot’s charges look rather skimpy!!
We ran to the window, threw open the curtain
“You too, are on the payroll of CheneyHalliburton!!”
As Fitzgerald ignored us, it all came into view-
He must be from Jeebusland-Nascarland too!
And sure enough, he exclaimed “To those I didn’t indict,
Merry Fitzmas, y’all, and to all, a good night!”

rightnumberone:

wanna bet?

Hey how do you do that block quote trick? What's the tag?

The tag is [blockquote], then make sure you close with [/bockquote], except you use

So it looks like this:

The tag is [blockquote], then make sure you close with [/bockquote], except you use

Uncle Jefe:

wanna bet?

I'm still willing to take a bet on Rove.

But what I'd REALLY like is for Bush-Cheney to promise not to pardon Libby.

Then Fitz could have more than an empty threat, and Libby might come clean. The presidential pardon makes this case tough, even for a guy who was successful in prosecuting Al Qaeda AND the mob.

Oops, I misspelled the close tag, but you get the point.

The DU is reporting a full confession by Karl Rove.

They quote Rove saying: "I doctored the Iraq intelligence. I blew Joe Wilson. I shot Kennedy."

Anybody want to come over to my place and watch the frogmarch of the entire Bush Administration? Then we can watch Howard Dean and PM Martin rightfully take over the US government.

Ooooh, this is going to be fun.

Conservatives see the damage such leaks do to the country and want it stopped - no matter who is doing it.

Nail 'em.

OK, I don't do this for a living. You use "

I give up. Hate HTML.

It was probably that weasle Chafee. No offense S.Weasle.

They ought to nail the leaker and the reporters. These elite types have got to learn that there are consequences to their constant games of "gotcha!"

Thanks for the link, tubino. My understand of the law has matured. I think this guy is simply taking a different tack, suggesting that the law is more iron clad than it is. Its one interpretation, and if had the energy, I would go to the USCA to see what case law is on it.

Although, I think we have all been misreading the statute, on fifth view, "knowing that the information disclosed so identifies such covert agent and that the United States is taking affirmative measures to conceal such covert agent's intelligence relationship to the United States,"

It seems to me that Libby/Rove/Bushitler/Cheney had to know there were affirmative measures, not Novak. But who knows, there's been a ton of hatred towards this act on the part of the left before it became the latest get Bush technique.

Hitchens writes a good one, as usual: http://www.slate.com/id/2123411/

If it turned out to be McCain, that would definitely be Fitzmas for wingnuts--"Fasc-tivus" or something. Right now the story still sounds awfully amorphous.

But whoever leaked this needs to be brought down hard. Iblis is right: intelligence is one of those functions of government where partisan politics has no role, and serious people don't play "Gotcha!" with national security.

We can start by squeezing the WaPo reporter until his tubinos squeak.

In all the commotion, I'd sure like the Senate to revist some egregious leaks by Leahy and Rockefeller. And others that are recalled.

Maybe there can be a synchonized frog-march. The U.S. Senate Line Dance.

Cordially...

Tubino I am still confused. You claim that Plame was outed and are relentless in your posting of liberal leaning if not outright far right sites to bolster your claim but you steadfastly ignore the fact that significant people are coming out saying they knew that Valerie Plame worked at the CIA. Some are even willing to state, under threat of lawsuit, that Joe Wilson was the person who told them.

If she was not covert, then there was no crime in the first place. Thats kind of an important point don't you agree? Why are you unwilliing to even acknowledge this point?

Turbino: Use the angle brackets to the right of the M on your keyboard...

Michael: HTML tries to parse or interpret the brackets as code so unless you put in the actual ASCII code for the brackets, they won't show up in the comment.

But what I'd REALLY like is for Bush-Cheney to promise not to pardon Libby.

Libby is small potatoes - you should look at some of Clinton's 11th hour pardons.

If she was not covert, then there was no crime in the first place. Thats kind of an important point don't you agree? Why are you unwilliing to even acknowledge this point?

Uhhh..because he's a dishonest little fuck?

And a Canadian.

For those interesting in my reference to Orin Hatch's perfidy, I give you:
Orin Hatch:

The day of the 9/11 attacks, Sen. Orrin Hatch, a Utah Republican, told the Associated Press that intelligence agencies "have an intercept of some information that includes people associated with [Osama] bin Laden who acknowledged a couple of targets were hit."

He made similar comments to ABC News and said the information had come from officials at the CIA and FBI. White House officials were more than mildly displeased with the Hatch at the time.

"Well, that helps a lot! [Expletive]!" one administration official told the Chicago Tribune.

In November 2001, President Bush accused unnamed lawmakers of leaking secrets last week to the news media. For one day, he ordered that briefings involving sensitive information to be limited to only eight top members of Congress, before changing his mind the following day.

Bush's outrage was stirred by a Washington Post report on a classified briefing. In that story, intelligence officials reportedly told lawmakers there was a "100 percent likelihood of further terrorist strikes." According to some senators, there was much more sensitive information leaked to the Post that they decided not to run.

Take it for what it's worth. I can't find the original AP story online.

If she was not covert, then there was no crime in the first place. Thats kind of an important point don't you agree? Why are you unwilliing to even acknowledge this point?

I addressed it about a dozen times. I don't know if she was covert. Only the CIA does, and they referred the case to DoJ. Fitz got the classified evidence, and the evidence convinced a judge and a grand jury that a crime was committed.

Fitz hasn't leaked. So no one in the media knows what the evidence is.

Maybe she was covert, maybe the CIA doesn't like to reveal what NOCs can be. Maybe her status was only classified info.

But I don't see how a reasonable person can conclude that no crime was committed. Read how the case was referred, and what evidentiary bar Fitz had to hurdle in order to put journalists in jail, and to write that indictment. Did you actually read the indictment? Listen to the press conference?

Seems clear to me that a serious crime was committed, and it that is reinforced by the elaborate fabrication Libby put together, contradicted by all these witnesses.

Why the fabrication if nothing to hide?

Libby's defense (according to what his team is telling the press) doesn't argue that Plame wasn't covert, or wasn't classified status. They argue that journalists have faulty memories. Seriously.

You have to weave a VERY TWISTED conspiracy theory to explain how it got to this point with no crime.

I think it's interesting to read what the prosecutors say about the speaking indictment, with all that detailed narrative.

Some are even willing to state, under threat of lawsuit, that Joe Wilson was the person who told them.

Yet they waited TWO YEARS into a federal investigation to come forward. And they have a history of fabricating, self-aggrandizing, etc..

yeah, that's solid all right. Let's see if they are willing to testify to the FBI.

I addressed it about a dozen times. I don't know if she was covert. Only the CIA does, and they referred the case to DoJ. Fitz got the classified evidence, and the evidence convinced a judge and a grand jury that a crime was committed.

See if you believe that then it explains part of your problem. During the course of his investigation which lasted for 2 years and had hundreds of witnessess and cost millions and millions of dollars, Fitzgerald was unable to prove what you call is a slam dunk fact. That someone knowingly outed a covert agent. The only laws that the grand jury returned indictments on were perjury and obstruction. These are very serious but the underlying crime has not been proven.

So is that your new tact? The left wing slime machine (had to say it)? Call a retired general a hack while putting up Joe Wilson as a paragon of humility and honesty?

Yea, you run with that one. Let the investigation continue.

Tubino - "Libby's defense (according to what his team is telling the press) doesn't argue that Plame wasn't covert, or wasn't classified status. They argue that journalists have faulty memories."

Let's see, maybe that is because there was no crime charged of outing super secret agent Valeri Plame. Instead, the indictment is for perjury, etc. And the evidence of the alleged perjury is that Libby's testimony is at odds with some reporters' testimony. Thus, the defense is spot on.

I will steal a page from you - There was no crime charged for outing Plame. There was no crime charged for outing Plame. There was no crime charged for outing Plame. There was no crime charged for outing Plame. There was no crime charged for outing Plame.

See, I think you'll agree that if Fitzy had the evidence that a crime was comitted when Plame was "outed", he would have charged it. Since he hasn't, it appears that no such crime was committed. That's just my best guess based on the evidence though.

Geez, you guys still don't get it? Fitz made it very clear in his press conference that the indictment doesn't mean Libby did or did not out a covert agent. It means Fitz couldn't indict on the underlying charge because Libby was lying and obstructing justice. This isn't a game where you get away with a crime if you can lie enough. Here's Fit's quote:

"This is a very serious matter and compromising national security information is a very serious matter. But the need to get to the bottom of what happened and whether national security was compromised by inadvertence, by recklessness, by maliciousness is extremely important. We need to know the truth. And anyone who would go into a grand jury and lie, obstruct and impede the investigation has committed a serious crime."

You guys may want to spin that into Libby was found innocent, but that just ain't the case.

And it's not Libby against some reporters. It seems clear that Libby claimed he learned Plame's identity from a reporter, but several people in the White House testified that they discussed it with him prior to his talks with reporters. I think he's screwed.

During the course of his investigation which lasted for 2 years and had hundreds of witnessess and cost millions and millions of dollars, Fitzgerald was unable to prove what you call is a slam dunk fact. That someone knowingly outed a covert agent.

Fitz said the investigation was pretty much done over one year ago, except that hecouldn't get Cooper and Miller's cooperation. Miller's obstruction meant that Fitz didn't have an indictment last October, and instead it was almost one year after the election.

Millions were NOT spent. The tab, last time I checked was under $800,000. Of course, all that could have been saved IF the POTUS had gotten his own staff to tell the truth, and then dealt with it. Curious, isn't it, how all that talk of accountability and personal responsibility just vanished...

If you read the indictment (or even the briefer version Fitz posted), you'll see even more reasons why Chris is right. Fitz lays out the crime that was committed, but admits that he's stuck due to the lying. Okay, I'll grab the text out of the PDF.

Why didn't Bush get to the bottom of this two years ago? What kind of world leader can't manage his own staff in regard to criminal activities involving national security?

It's astounding. The most generous conclusion I come up with to explain Bush's statements and actions is that he was in on the whole deal from the Africa flight on -- but that's because I'd give the edge to evil smarts over stubborn incompetence. Even now, he hasn't done a thing to lift Rove's security clearances!

So did these last-minute right-wingers testify to the FBI yet?

What's amazing in the comments to this thread is the belief on the part of the obvious liberals that, if it turns out that this was a GOP Senator, that somehow, those on the right suddenly won't want an investigation - or that suddenly, those on the right won't be clamoring for balls to be nailed to the wall.

You were smart not to bet me on that.

Looks like I was right.

Senator Seeks to Defer Probe of CIA Prison Leak

In less than a month you'll have forgotten all about this.