Yo!! Thunder...
 

"NOYB" wrote in message
nk.net...

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 16 Nov 2005 19:22:50 +0000, NOYB wrote:


http://www.editorandpublisher.com/ea..._id=1001523334

The only people who Pincus was talking about the case to prior to
Novak's
column were likely Wilson and Woodward. Woodward testified that he
discussed Plame's identity with Pincus 1 month before Plame's name was
made public by Novak. Pincus said that he never heard about Plame's
identity and her role at the CIA until Novak's column.

What Woodward's testimony does is blow a huge hole through Fitzgerald's
timeline laid out during his press conference:

NOYB, not a "huge hole". Look, this article has no effect on the charges
Libby is facing.

Sure it does. Libby says that he spoke with Russert, and Russert told him
that "all of the reporters in Washington" already knew Plame's identity.
Russert denies this is how the conversation transpired. But Woodward's
testimony would certainly support Libby's statement that he was hearing
about Plame from the reporters themselves.

I think that Russert's ass is on the line because as NBC News Washington,
D.C. Bureau Chief he was in a position to know everything that the
reporters knew.

Russert is looking at a purgery charge in the future.

Yo!! Thunder...
 

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 16 Nov 2005 18:25:20 +0000, NOYB wrote:


So when will Fitz indict either Woodward or Pincus for lying or
obstruction
of justice?

Did Pincus already testify before the grand jury? If so, he's sunk.

LOL, you had better read the legal definition of perjury. Before you go
wetting yourself with excitement, I'd point out, Libby is still facing 30
years and the investigation is just getting deeper. More charges may, in
fact, be coming as a result of Woodward's testimony, but I seriously doubt
that they will be against Pincus.

Reporters are now looking at a conspiracy and purgery charges.

Yo!! Thunder...
 

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 16 Nov 2005 21:25:52 +0000, NOYB wrote:


It is certainly appearing as if Fitzgerald jumped the gun on his
indictment. 2 years and a unlimited budget to investigate this thing, and
he gets his sole indictment wrong!

Really? Let's see how it fits, Woodward was told about Plame in mid-June,
2003. In Fitzgerald's indictment, on May 29, 2003, Libby was informed
that Wilson was the former ambassador who took the Niger trip. The clock
starts ticking.




On June 11, or 12, an Under Secretary of State advised Libby that Plame
worked at the CIA.

On June 11, a CIA officer advised Libby that Plame worked at the CIA.

On June 12, Cheney told Libby that Plame worked at CIA.

On June 12, the Pincus' article was published.



On June 12th, Walter Pincus published an article about Wilson's trip. The
source for his article was Wilson (as conceded and referenced in the Senate
Select Committee on Intelligence report). But remember that Kristof
published an article on May 6th about the Niger trip...and *his* source was
likely Wilson as well.

Libby didn't learn about Wilson's wife until June 11th or 12th...so he
certainly wasn't the source of any Plame leak that may have occurred to the
press prior to when Pincus's article went to press.

I believe that while Wilson was telling the Niger fairy tale story to
Kristof and Pincus, Wilson outed his own wife as early as May 2003.

But Pincus denied under oath that he knew Plame's identity prior to Novak's
article. Of course, Pincus's testimony (which was already suspect because
of the fact that he used Plame's husband as his source) is shot to **** by
Woodward's testimony...which said that he discussed Plame's identity with
Pincus in mid-June.

Any way you look at it, Walter Pincus is lying. So now ask yourself "why?"






On June 14, Libby discussed Plame with a CIA briefer.




On June 19, the New Republic publishes an article about the Niger
documents.

On June 23, Libby meets with Judith Miller and informs her that Wilson's
wife "might" work at the CIA.


Now, tell me again how Fitzgerald has it wrong. Woodward's timing seems
to fit rather well with the doing of the day.

Woodward knew about Plame sometime before Libby spoke with Judith Miller.
Pincus knew because Woodward told him (and I believe Wilson told Pincus
too). If Woodward knew, and Pincus knew, it's safe to say that "all the
reporters in Washington" knew. And in his testimony, Libby said that
Russert told Libby that "all the reporters in Washington" knew. It appears
that Libby was telling the truth.

Yo!! Thunder...
 

"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
. ..

"NOYB" wrote in message
nk.net...

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 16 Nov 2005 19:22:50 +0000, NOYB wrote:


http://www.editorandpublisher.com/ea..._id=1001523334

The only people who Pincus was talking about the case to prior to
Novak's
column were likely Wilson and Woodward. Woodward testified that he
discussed Plame's identity with Pincus 1 month before Plame's name was
made public by Novak. Pincus said that he never heard about Plame's
identity and her role at the CIA until Novak's column.

What Woodward's testimony does is blow a huge hole through Fitzgerald's
timeline laid out during his press conference:

NOYB, not a "huge hole". Look, this article has no effect on the
charges
Libby is facing.

Sure it does. Libby says that he spoke with Russert, and Russert told
him that "all of the reporters in Washington" already knew Plame's
identity. Russert denies this is how the conversation transpired. But
Woodward's testimony would certainly support Libby's statement that he
was hearing about Plame from the reporters themselves.

I think that Russert's ass is on the line because as NBC News Washington,
D.C. Bureau Chief he was in a position to know everything that the
reporters knew.

Russert is looking at a purgery charge in the future.

Russert, Pincus, and possibly Kristof.

And certainly Wilson.

Yo!! Thunder...
 

On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 01:58:15 +0000, NOYB wrote:


I believe that while Wilson was telling the Niger fairy tale story to
Kristof and Pincus, Wilson outed his own wife as early as May 2003.

LOL, the Niger fairy tale, from Wilson? Lost is all of this Plame mess,
is the fact that there were two other officials that were in Niger
checking on the purchase of yellowcake. Both agreed with Wilson's
assessment, that Niger yellowcake was secure. Funny this administration
didn't drag their names through the mud. Perhaps, it's because one of
them was a Marine Four Star. Any fairy tales about Niger, were from this
administration.


But Pincus denied under oath that he knew Plame's identity prior to
Novak's article. Of course, Pincus's testimony (which was already suspect
because of the fact that he used Plame's husband as his source) is shot to
**** by Woodward's testimony...which said that he discussed Plame's
identity with Pincus in mid-June.

Any way you look at it, Walter Pincus is lying. So now ask yourself
"why?"

The way I look at it, as much as you would like there to be, there is no
evidence that Wilson outed his wife, none. And because you prefer
Woodward's recollection doesn't necessarily make it so. Woodward could be
mistaken, and Pincus could be correct. Neither of us knows for sure.



Woodward knew about Plame sometime before Libby spoke with Judith Miller.
Pincus knew because Woodward told him (and I believe Wilson told Pincus
too). If Woodward knew, and Pincus knew, it's safe to say that "all the
reporters in Washington" knew. And in his testimony, Libby said that
Russert told Libby that "all the reporters in Washington" knew. It
appears that Libby was telling the truth.

I know your dentist's mind isn't that logically challenged, therefore, I'm
assuming you know you are full of it. *If* all the reporters in
Washington knew, you have to ask how they all knew. Reporter'
s sources and information is their bread and butter. They keep then
close, and it's unlikely they would be spreading that kind of scoop
amongst themselves.

However, in your scenario, reporter's either gossip to each other, or you
have to place Wilson spreading the information around. There isn't any
evidence that is so. On the other hand, there is considerable evidence
that several officials in this administration were spreading Plame's
status around, a la conspiracy. We'll just have to wait and see.

Yo!! Thunder...
 

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 01:58:15 +0000, NOYB wrote:


I believe that while Wilson was telling the Niger fairy tale story to
Kristof and Pincus, Wilson outed his own wife as early as May 2003.

LOL, the Niger fairy tale, from Wilson? Lost is all of this Plame mess,
is the fact that there were two other officials that were in Niger
checking on the purchase of yellowcake. Both agreed with Wilson's
assessment, that Niger yellowcake was secure. Funny this administration
didn't drag their names through the mud. Perhaps, it's because one of
them was a Marine Four Star. Any fairy tales about Niger, were from this
administration.

Do you have some sources, preferably documented, for these two other people
that agreed with Wilson's verbal report?

But Pincus denied under oath that he knew Plame's identity prior to
Novak's article. Of course, Pincus's testimony (which was already
suspect
because of the fact that he used Plame's husband as his source) is shot
to
**** by Woodward's testimony...which said that he discussed Plame's
identity with Pincus in mid-June.

Any way you look at it, Walter Pincus is lying. So now ask yourself
"why?"

The way I look at it, as much as you would like there to be, there is no
evidence that Wilson outed his wife, none. And because you prefer
Woodward's recollection doesn't necessarily make it so. Woodward could be
mistaken, and Pincus could be correct. Neither of us knows for sure.

There has already been an Army two-star General that has said that Wilson
told him that his wife, Wilson's wife, worked for the CIA in the WMD section
on or before May of 2003.


Woodward knew about Plame sometime before Libby spoke with Judith Miller.
Pincus knew because Woodward told him (and I believe Wilson told Pincus
too). If Woodward knew, and Pincus knew, it's safe to say that "all the
reporters in Washington" knew. And in his testimony, Libby said that
Russert told Libby that "all the reporters in Washington" knew. It
appears that Libby was telling the truth.

I know your dentist's mind isn't that logically challenged, therefore, I'm
assuming you know you are full of it. *If* all the reporters in
Washington knew, you have to ask how they all knew. Reporter'
s sources and information is their bread and butter. They keep then
close, and it's unlikely they would be spreading that kind of scoop
amongst themselves.

You don't live in the DC area do you? The pecking order is determined by how
much you know and that can't be determined until you open your mouth and let
everybody know what you know. The reporters are no different.

However, in your scenario, reporter's either gossip to each other, or you
have to place Wilson spreading the information around. There isn't any
evidence that is so. On the other hand, there is considerable evidence
that several officials in this administration were spreading Plame's
status around, a la conspiracy. We'll just have to wait and see.

Both! Reporters gossip, it determines the peckiing order. And, Wilson
blabbed to anyone that would listen that his wife worked for the CIA, again
the pecking order thing comes up again.

Yo!! Thunder...
 

On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 07:47:27 -0500, Bert Robbins wrote:


Do you have some sources, preferably documented, for these two other
people that agreed with Wilson's verbal report?

The General was Carlton W. Fulford. The other official was Ambassador
Barbro Owens-Kirkpatrick. A google search should produce plenty of
information. You could start he

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/e...521846767-1866


There has already been an Army two-star General that has said that Wilson
told him that his wife, Wilson's wife, worked for the CIA in the WMD
section on or before May of 2003.

Yeah, I've read about Gen. Vallely. Wilson and Vallely are both
threatening to sue each other. Personally, I'll wait and see how it
unfolds. It sounds a little hokey to me. Vallely seems to have
"qualified" his statements, and it seems to me, if Wilson was that loose
with his wife's status, there would be many more witnesses.


Both! Reporters gossip, it determines the peckiing order. And, Wilson
blabbed to anyone that would listen that his wife worked for the CIA,
again the pecking order thing comes up again.


If Wilson blabbed to anyone who would listen, where are they? So far, we
have the Vallely claim, but no others. It is not publicly known if Wilson
told any reporters. It is publicly known that administration officials
did.

Yo!! Thunder...
 

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 07:47:27 -0500, Bert Robbins wrote:


Do you have some sources, preferably documented, for these two other
people that agreed with Wilson's verbal report?

The General was Carlton W. Fulford. The other official was Ambassador
Barbro Owens-Kirkpatrick. A google search should produce plenty of
information. You could start he

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/e...521846767-1866

Niger's chief product is yellow cake urainium do you think that they are
going to come out and say that they are in contact with Iraq about selling
their chief product.

There has already been an Army two-star General that has said that Wilson
told him that his wife, Wilson's wife, worked for the CIA in the WMD
section on or before May of 2003.

Yeah, I've read about Gen. Vallely. Wilson and Vallely are both
threatening to sue each other. Personally, I'll wait and see how it
unfolds. It sounds a little hokey to me. Vallely seems to have
"qualified" his statements, and it seems to me, if Wilson was that loose
with his wife's status, there would be many more witnesses.

Get both of then in front of Fitzgerald under oath and the tiff can be
resolved quickly.

Both! Reporters gossip, it determines the peckiing order. And, Wilson
blabbed to anyone that would listen that his wife worked for the CIA,
again the pecking order thing comes up again.


If Wilson blabbed to anyone who would listen, where are they? So far, we
have the Vallely claim, but no others. It is not publicly known if Wilson
told any reporters. It is publicly known that administration officials
did.

The reporters are looking for a juciy storry, the longer it plays out the
better for them.

Yo!! Thunder...
 

On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 19:08:39 -0500, Bert Robbins wrote:


Niger's chief product is yellow cake urainium do you think that they are
going to come out and say that they are in contact with Iraq about selling
their chief product.

Guy, it has been well established that there was no Niger yellowcake going
to Iraq, none, zip, nada. Rather than clinging to the hope that it could
have happened, you really should be wondering how this bogus claim was
ever raised to the surface. If you are going to disregard 250 years of
precedent, and have a preemptive invasion, you should, at a minimum, have
a better line of BS.


If Wilson blabbed to anyone who would listen, where are they? So far,
we have the Vallely claim, but no others. It is not publicly known if
Wilson told any reporters. It is publicly known that administration
officials did.

The reporters are looking for a juciy storry, the longer it plays out the
better for them.

Come on, I'll ask again, if Wilson blabbed to anyone who would listen,
where are they? You can right off all of the worthless "liebral" media,
but you would think NewsMax or Rush could at least give us a few names.
Don't you think?

Yo!! Thunder...
 

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 19:08:39 -0500, Bert Robbins wrote:


Niger's chief product is yellow cake urainium do you think that they are
going to come out and say that they are in contact with Iraq about
selling
their chief product.

Guy, it has been well established that there was no Niger yellowcake going
to Iraq, none, zip, nada. Rather than clinging to the hope that it could
have happened, you really should be wondering how this bogus claim was
ever raised to the surface. If you are going to disregard 250 years of
precedent, and have a preemptive invasion, you should, at a minimum, have
a better line of BS.

You have no proof that that yellowcake was or was not exported from Niger to
Iraq. It bas been accepted in some circles that no yellowcake went from
Niger to Iraq.

There is no line of BS. Iraq was still under the terms and conditions of a
surrender from the first gulf war. Iraq's failure to abide by the terms and
conditions there was enough reason to resume hostilities. Iraq was engaged
in acquiring nuclear weapons against the UN's own resolutions not to.

If Wilson blabbed to anyone who would listen, where are they? So far,
we have the Vallely claim, but no others. It is not publicly known if
Wilson told any reporters. It is publicly known that administration
officials did.

The reporters are looking for a juciy storry, the longer it plays out the
better for them.

Come on, I'll ask again, if Wilson blabbed to anyone who would listen,
where are they? You can right off all of the worthless "liebral" media,
but you would think NewsMax or Rush could at least give us a few names.
Don't you think?

Put Wilson under oath and let him answer the questions. This one simple
activity will bring clarity to this whole mess.