Crybaby Democrats in the Senate

Ok, first and foremost anonymous comments are now off here. One poster here or three? Looks like one, trying to "pump up the volume." Sorry, nope. I put my name on my words, you can do likewise.Second, you obviously didn't listen to the news conference Fitzgerald gave. He clearly stated that he would not comment beyond the four corners of the indictment - so claiming that he thinks that Plame was illegally outed is pure horsehocket. There is no evidence for this and the grand jury has gone home.Third, I happen to know Fitzgerald's reputation and have researched him thoroughly. He's a hard-ass no-bullshit prosecutor with no political leanings. If he thought he had a case, he'd bring the charges. He didn't. The conclusion is obvious.As for Reid and company, the committee that he was howling about notified him four days prior to this stunt that they were starting on exactly what he demanded during his little coup d'etat.There was only one reason for Reid and Durbin to pull this stunt - they wanted the news cycle back, having completely lost it to Alito's nomination and not getting their intended and desired result from Fitzgerald's investigation. In addition, yesterday, just prior to them springing this surprise, they had defections from their "Gang of 14" who stated publically that they will not permit a fillibuster of Alito to occur - they will instead vote for the Constitutional Option should the Democrats attempt it.As for "who outed Plame", that's simple. It was Wilson himself, who allowed himself and his wife to be photographed and their pictures to run on the front cover of Vanity Fair.Gee, you don't think that might cause people to ask just who his wife might be, do 'ya?Never mind that there's an entire story here that hasn't been covered at all - how a man known to be rabidly anti-administration and anti-war gets "recommended" by his wife in the CIA for a mission with these sorts of national security implications, and why said individual is then permitted (he was operating at the behest of the CIA at the time, so was effectively an agent of same, whether sworn or not) to falsely represent the contents of the very report he wrote!Unfortunately for Wilson, there are an increasing number of media folks who have now read his report, and whom are now calling him on the carpet for his incessant misrepresentations.On the substance of the matter regarding Wilson, and his continued claim that there was no attempt by Iraq to buy Uranium from Niger..... Its false by his own admission - his own report states that Iraq sent a delegation to Niger and that the Prime Minister of that nation believed that the purpose of said delegation was an attempt to do so.Go look it up.Finally, as to the quality of intelligence or lack thereof, and who believed what - I strongly suggest you go do some research.The fact of the matter is that both Kerry and Clinton - going back to the 1990s, long before Bush was in office - are on the record stating that Saddam had WMDs.Was the intelligence wrong? I'm not sure we can get a solid answer to that question. What I do know is that the military, last year, moved over a ton of nuclear material that they found out of Iraq under fairly good secrecy, and that in the weeks before the war there were convoys of trucks photographed by our satellites leaving Iraq bound for Syria and Iran. What was in them? That's a good question, isn't it?

You gotta be really outraged about your identity being known to allow yourself to be photographed for the cover of a magazine.Of course Wilson said "she would rather chop off her right arm than say anything to the press and she will not allow herself to be photographed" - this, of course, before Vanity Fair came calling.Serious people don't do self-promoting spreads in magazines Dan. Nor do they twist their own words regarding what was and was not found in Niger. Wilson's own report said that he found evidence that Iraq tried to buy Uranium - that they failed isn't the point now, is it? What use - other than for weapons - did Iraq have for that material?As for Fitzgerald and the law in question, there are very narrow circumstances under which "outing" a CIA employee is illegal. They must be undercover at the time and the person doing the outing must know of this.If Libby - or Rove - named Plame but did not know she had NOC status, or if she was not undercover at the time, then no law was broken by them doing so.We do not have an "offical secrets act" in the United States (Britain does) - some would say this is a bug, but I would say it is a feature.Dan, you may think there was a crime committed, but there has been no indictment issued relating to the release of Plame's identity. None. Zero. Zip. Nada. Nor is there likely to be, since the grand jury's term has expired.Never mind that an indictment is not proof either - one is entitled to be considered innocent until proven guilty at trial.Or do you suspend the law - and the rules of civility - only for republicans who are accused of crimes?The charges that were brought are all related to making intentionally false statements.But let's remember - Fitzgerald wasn't chartered to find out how something came to happen, and whether someone lied or not.He was chartered to find out if releasing Plame's identity was a crime, and if so, to indict the person(s) responsible.He has issued a grand total of zero indictments on that point.Again, the real story here is how the CIA manages to send a third-rate hack to Niger on a mission of national security importance on the recommendation of his wife (nepotism anyone?), and then allows that person to run around for two+ years misrepresenting what he PERSONALLY WROTE in his report without official rebuttal.The Press, however, is not being nearly so kind to Wilson. They are increasingly reading that report and considering Wilson to be just another crackpot intentionally misleading the public - just like Bill Burkette with the forged Rathergate documents.

Please read for content.I did not say that Plame "selected" Wilson to go.The Station Chief made that election; Plame was not the Station Chief.However, it is indisputable that the CIA - and Plame - both knew of Wilson's rabid hatred for the administration and their designs on Iraq. Further, it is beyond reasonable belief that his wife would not know where he stood on these issues.The issue, as I said, is:How the CIA manages to send a third-rate hack to Niger on a mission of national security importance on the recommendation of his wife (nepotism anyone?), and then allows that person to run around for two+ years misrepresenting what he PERSONALLY WROTE in his report without official rebuttal.From Novak's column: "The CIA says its counter-proliferation officials selected Wilson and asked his wife to contact him." (http://www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/robertnovak/2003/07/14/160881.html)Not involved? Yeah. Ok.The CIA report itself is classified.You might want to ask Wilson some time how come he's prancing around "outing" classified documents on a daily basis.Second, Wilson has been discredited by two special inquiries, one in the US and one in the UK. From the bi-partisan Senate Intelligence Committe's July 7th 2004 Report: (http://intelligence.senate.gov/iraqreport2.pdf)-The Committee report notes that the CIA intelligence report "did not refute the possibility that Iraq had approached Niger to purchase uranium." (page 44)-The Committee report notes that Wilson admitted that he may have "misspoken" or become "confused" about documents he claimed were forged, since he never saw them (page 45)-Undermining Wilson's claim to have debunked the Niger-uranium story, the Committee report states that "DIA and CIA analysts said that when they saw the intelligence report they did not believe that it supplied much new information and did not think that it clarified the story on the alleged Iraq-Niger uranium deal." (page 46)-And, disproving critics who claim the Administration twisted the intelligence or ignored it altogether, the Committee report states that "Because CIA analysts did not believe that the report added any new information to clarify the issue...CIA's briefer did not brief the Vice President on the report, despite the Vice President's previous questions about the issue." (page 46)-And, despite Wilson's assertions that his wife had nothing to do with his selection for the mission, the Committee report finds that "the former ambassador's wife 'offered up his name' and a memorandum to the Deputy Chief of the CPD [Counter-Proliferation, where Wilson's wife worked] on February 12, 2002, from the former ambassador's wife says, 'my husband has good relations with the PM and the former Minister of Mines (not to mention lots of French contacts), both of whom could possibly shed light on this sort of activity." (page 39)The Butler Review (http://www.butlerreview.org.uk/report/report.pdf) also found the claim that Iraq was seeking Uranium from Niger credible.I accept the word of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence that Plame suggested her husband for the mission, since they actually investigated the matter, before I will accept unsubstantiated claims made while not under oath - unlike the testimony taken before the committee.Stop reading liberal blogs Dan and start reading from the facts produced by government agencies who are able to compel people to testify under oath.