Valerie Plame NOT exposed by White House..

Well, well well...

Hmm, I seem to remember millions of lefties shrieking hysterically how the secret agent was exposed by: 1) Rove 2) Cheney 3) Libby 4) Bush

now it turns out her name was given up by Secretary of State Powell's senior most aide. Who just happened to be AGAINST the war in Iraq. Would you like some ketchup with that crow?

http://www.nysun.com/article/38616

Well, well well...

Hmm, I seem to remember millions of lefties shrieking hysterically how the secret agent was exposed by: 1) Rove 2) Cheney 3) Libby 4) Bush

now it turns out her name was given up by Secretary of State Powell's senior most aide. Who just happened to be AGAINST the war in Iraq. Would you like some ketchup with that crow?

http://www.nysun.com/article/38616

This is kinda big news

I wonder why its not being broadcast everywhere? :whoknows:

But its only 11:22 am EST

And yea, AFC, lets hold off on the "gloating" until this is all confirmed

You don't want to look like Rick Sanatroum

Well, well well...

Hmm, I seem to remember millions of lefties shrieking hysterically how the secret agent was exposed by: 1) Rove 2) Cheney 3) Libby 4) Bush

now it turns out her name was given up by Secretary of State Powell's senior most aide. Who just happened to be AGAINST the war in Iraq. Would you like some ketchup with that crow?

http://www.nysun.com/article/38616

Well, if this is true all I can say is my bad. It still doesn't

dissuade me of the belief that we were deceived into

this war. But whatever...

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

You guys are freakin' hilarious!

A top State Department official, Richard Armitage, disclosed the identity of a CIA officer, Valerie Plame, to at least two prominent reporters and failed to tell prosecutors about one of those contacts for more than two years, according to an account in Newsweek magazine.

Do you even know who Dick Armitage is?!? He is a founding member of the Bush administration. He came in with the Bushies. He signed the PNAC letter advising Clinton to invade Iraq in 1998.

AFC, sorry to inform you, Armitage was FOR the war in Iraq. In fact, he is well-documented to have pushed for the war in Iraq for 5 freakin' years!

Lastly, if you guys actually bothered to leave your Republican bubbles and read the regular media like regular folks, you would have known this 5 months ago:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/13/AR2006031301904.html

By Jim VandeHei

Washington Post Staff Writer

Tuesday, March 14, 2006; Page A02

Vanity Fair is reporting that former Washington Post executive editor Ben Bradlee says it is reasonable to assume former State Department official Richard L. Armitage is likely the source who revealed CIA operative Valerie Plame's name to Post Assistant Managing Editor Bob Woodward.

In an article to be published in the magazine today, Bradlee is quoted as saying: "That Armitage is the likely source is a fair assumption." Armitage was deputy secretary of state in President Bush's first term.

Seeing as how Novak's source is still unidentified, your thread title is false, innacurate, wishful thinking from a partisan Republican.

Republican folk are really grasping at straws these days.

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

You guys are freakin' hilarious!

Do you even know who Dick Armitage is?!? He is a founding member of the Bush administration. He came in with the Bushies. He signed the PNAC letter advising Clinton to invade Iraq in 1998.

AFC, sorry to inform you, Armitage was FOR the war in Iraq. In fact, he is well-documented to have pushed for the war in Iraq for 5 freakin' years!

Lastly, if you guys actually bothered to leave your Republican bubbles and read the regular media like regular folks, you would have known this 5 months ago:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/13/AR2006031301904.html

Republican folk are really grasping at straws these days.

Richard Armitage?! That's what I get for taking the Repubs at their

word and not actually reading the article.

Can someone show me something that says Armitage was against the War in Iraq? Everything I've read to date lists him as a strong supporter of the US removing Saddam from power.

Richard Armitage?! That's what I get for taking the Repubs at their

word and not actually reading the article.

Plus, we already know about Rove and Libby. Let's see if our boy comes back to back his bs. I doubt it.

P.S.- And NOW she's a "secret agent". Friggin hilarious. These guys NEVER fail to entertain.

This thread title is at the very least misleading, if not blatantly and utterly false. Bob Novak was on the Meet the Press yesterday (yet another great source of information you guys have been told to hate) that his source had not yet come forward and in Novak's opinion, it was way overdue for that source to come forward. Armitage may have been Woodward's source but he may or may not have been Bob Novak's source. Based on Novak's statements on Meet the Press, it would seem Novak had a different source.

Again, :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: Armitage not part of the Bush administration. bwahahahahahahaaaa you guys are great.

Another hit and run thread by AFC - you might want to come defend your claim there fly boy.

Another hit and run thread by AFC - you might want to come defend your claim there fly boy.

He's back at base, painting the kill.

(OK, off-topic and cheap shot. Darn.)

Can someone show me something that says Armitage was against the War in Iraq? Everything I've read to date lists him as a strong supporter of the US removing Saddam from power.

Here's an excerpt from the article:

Mr. Libby's backers argued that Mr. Armitage's alleged role and the lack of any charges against him indicated prosecutors had applied a double standard. "If you were against the war, it was okay to forget or to reveal details about Valerie Plame, but if you supported the war, you get indicted," a Justice Department official in the Reagan administration, Victoria Toensing, said in an interview yesterday. "It's a simple as that."

I'm not sure if Armitage was against the war, but this former Justice Dept official alleges he was.

All of them... Republicrats and Democans... will be backpeddling about the war....they are all the same, liars and manipulators. I still find it amazing that people get all hyped up about these polititians especially those that work for campaigns...there must be a bunch of disillusioned and dissappointed campaign workers over the years.

Dan

Here's an excerpt from the article:

I'm not sure if Armitage was against the war, but this former Justice Dept official alleges he was.

Armitage is though known as a "necon" One of those old Jewish liberals who became conservative to take over the world. Or something like that

But it looks like it didn't come from the White House, or the Veep office

I am still one who is pointing the finger at Joe Wilson himself, plenty of evidence points to him being "the source"

Don't care who it was:

Valerie Plame wasnt OUT long enough to ensure her contacts were safe.

It was still outing a CIA agent...

He must Fry....

Who is gloating? The lamestream media, lefties and their amen corner on the internet were all over convicting the White House with almost zero evidence.

Now it turns out they were all WRONG, that it was the left's favorite guy Colin Powell and his anti-Iraq liberation aide Dick Armitage who outed Plame.

here are more sources reporting it:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14533384/site/newsweek/

http://www.alternet.org/story/40929/

It's interesting how AFC completely ignores any argument disproving his own and just keeps repeating himself. It's like debating a parrot.

I think he has no idea who Dick Armitage is.

Leave him alone...he just wants that internet "love"...smile.

Wait:

In reading the article:

EVERYONE in the investigation KNEW who leaked it?

So why was Libby and Rove gone after so hard?

CNN reporting it today

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/08/30/leak.armitage/index.html

WASHINGTON (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, two sources familiar with Armitage's role tell CNN.

The sources said Armitage revealed Plame's role at the CIA almost inadvertently in a casual conversation with Novak, and it is not clear if he knew her identity was classified at the time.

Armitage was not indicted by the federal grand jury that investigated the disclosure of Plame's name to Novak and other journalists. Deliberately revealing the identify of a CIA operative can be a crime.

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.

During the run-up to the Iraq war in 2003, Armitage was viewed as one of the more skeptical voices in the administration about the need to depose Saddam Hussein by force.

In a July 14, 2003, column, Novak noted that Plame was a CIA operative, citing two senior administration officials. The column was primarily about Plame's husband, Joe Wilson, a former career diplomat and critic of the intelligence underlying the invasion of Iraq.

Wilson and some Democrats contend Plame's identity was released by the White House to retaliate against her husband for writing a July 2003 column in The New York Times that questioned the administration's use of prewar intelligence on Iraq. (Full story)

Last month, Plame and Wilson filed a civil lawsuit alleging a conspiracy that "was motivated by an invidiously discriminatory animus towards those who had publicly criticized the administration's stated justifications for going to war with Iraq" and culminated with the disclosure that Plame worked at the CIA. This revelation destroyed Plame's career with the agency, according to the suit.

The scenario described by the sources familiar with Armitage's role, however, appears to contradict those arguments.

But the Wilsons' attorney, Melanie Sloan of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, said the revelation that Armitage was the original source for the leak did not undercut the charge that Vice President Dick Cheney, Cheney's former chief of staff I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby and White House adviser Karl Rove acted to retaliate against Wilson by engaging in a "whispering campaign" about his wife.

The couple plans to proceed with the lawsuit, Sloan said.

"Mr. Armitage's conduct does not change the facts of what Libby, Cheney and Rove did," Sloan told CNN. "The case is about the abuse of government power."

Novak has never revealed the original source of the information about Plame. However, he has said that Rove confirmed the information and was the second source cited in the column.

Novak has said he would not reveal the identity of the original source unless the source came forward. However, he said the special counsel in the CIA leak investigation, Patrick Fitzgerald, learned who the source was independently.

Fitzgerald has said he does not plan to bring any charges against Novak's original source.

Calls to Armitage for comment were not returned Tuesday.

The Armitage connection to the Novak column is also outlined in a new book titled "Hubris" by Michael Isikoff and David Korn.

In the book, Armitage is quoted as telling former Assistant Secretary of State Carl Ford that "I'm afraid I may be the guy that caused this whole thing."

Calls to Ford for comment also were not returned Tuesday.

In September 2003, Fitzgerald, the U.S. attorney in Chicago, Illinois, was appointed as a special counsel to investigate whether any laws were broken with the disclosure.

No one has been indicted for leaking Plame's identity, but Libby has been charged with perjury, obstruction of justice and lying to investigators for allegedly giving false information about his discussions with journalists about Plame.

Libby has denied any wrongdoing and pleaded not guilty.

Fitzgerald notified Rove that he wouldn't be charged in the case, Rove's attorney, Robert Luskin, said in June.

As part of his investigation, Fitzgerald subpoenaed then-New York Times reporter Judith Miller and then-Time magazine reporter Matthew Cooper. In 2005, Miller spent nearly 12 weeks in jail after she refused to testify to identify her source to Fitzgerald. (View a timeline of the CIA leak case)

Miller was released after her source, Libby, called her and personally waived their confidentially agreement.

Armitage, 65, was No. 2 at the State Department under former Secretary of State Colin Powell from 2001 to 2005.

He left his post after Powell resigned at the beginning of Bush's second term.

Who is gloating? The lamestream media, lefties and their amen corner on the internet were all over convicting the White House with almost zero evidence.

Now it turns out they were all WRONG, that it was the left's favorite guy Colin Powell and his anti-Iraq liberation aide Dick Armitage who outed Plame.

here are more sources reporting it:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14533384/site/newsweek/

http://www.alternet.org/story/40929/

Let it never be said that Air Force Cain lacks courage.

Only he has come boldly forward to accuse Colin Powell of outing Valerie Plame, with the help of his anti-Iraq liberation aide Dick Armitage.

Air Force Cain, I know that you can prove this, since you said it. Thererfore I suggest that you announce a press conference, and go public with it. It's your duty.

isn't it weird that Libby also admitted it, but said he was told her could say it?

Almost like the 2 sides didn't realize they were both leaking the info.

Can the President retract the declassification of this? We were told by the WH that he did do that before the story came out, so his peeps shouldn't be in trouble. Not that it might not just be them. Maybe he can make it only declassified for the people he picks.

OK - I had to repost this from the wrong thread!

Originally Posted by Baculus

AFC, do you know who Richard Armitage is and his connections? First of all, he is deeply connected to this administration, as well as the previous Bush and Reagan administrations. This isn't a no-name that we are talking about. Second, why would anyone at crow? What does this prove? That the finger has been pointed at another person, once again, while the White House has side-stepped the whole issue and used tactics that shifted enough blame that a lot of folks have lost interest in the whole story? Are you this desparate to defend the Bush administration?

And have you even been following the chain of events? Maybe you should actually try to educate yourself about the players in the story, eh?

By the way, Richard Armitage is a perfect person to "take the heat." This isn't the first time, in fact, that he has been willing to be the fall guy for someone else. Also, Armitage is total scum - previously he was under investigation for hiring prostitutes and gambling, has been fingered as being involved in Golden Triangle heroin smuggling, and was described, as a Seal, as someone who "enjoyed killing." If Armitage is involved, I would suspect the White House even more, considering his ties to the current, and past, administrations.

Eat crow? Hardly.

A little information on the man's "unofficial" background:

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKarmitage.htm

Look at his history of scandal involvement - does it really seem *good* that Armitage is involved?

Oh, by the way, it is actually a bit silly to suggest that Armitage was against ousting Saddam Hussein. After all, Armitage was one of the signers of a PNAC letter sent to Clinton that stated Saddam Hussein needed to be deposed.

More smoke and mirrors...let's see who is so quickly and naively ready to believe any of this guff.