Larry Johnson:Right Wing World's Plame Fantasy

[cal04]

(In process, I'm drafting and need to save)
Senators Bond, Hatch, and Burr have sent the rightwing nuts into a frenzy with their comments challenging the truthfulness of Valerie Wilson in one of the appedices to the latest report from the Senate Intelligence Committee on pre-war Intelligence about post-war Iraq. If dumb is forever then the three intrepid Senators are guaranteed eternal life. Bond can be excused because, like Bil "Bolangles" Robinson, "he drinks a bit". Orin Hatch's failing mental faculties are probably the result of his advanced year--he has become more shrill with each passing year. And Senator Burr? Okay, just plain dumb.

With feigned outrage, the three Senators assert they are trying to clear up confusion about the Committee's original report (see July 2004) but proceed to issue a new bunch of disingenuous stupidity and fluff to try to further cloud the picture and accuse Ambassador Wilson and his wife of acting dishonestly. First, let's recall the specific facts presented in the original report:

1. Several officials from the CIA's Counterproliferation Division in the Directorate of Operations said that the decision to contact Ambassador Joseph Wilson came in response to questions raised by the Vice President's Office, the Department of State, and the Department of Defense.
2. Following these queries Valerie Wilson "offered up the name" of her husband as a possible candidate for a trip to Niger.
3. Valerie Wilson gave her boss a memo on 12 February 2002 regarding her husband's availability to make the trip to Niger.
4. The Counterproliferation Division hosted a meeting at CIA with Ambassador Wilson and other representatives of the intelligence community.
5. Notes by an INR analyst (a State Department Officer named Doug Rohn) stated that the meeting "was apparently" convened by Valerie Wilson but Valerie told the Senate Intelligence Committee that she only introduced her husband and left the meeting.
6. Several attendees at the meeting argued that the Embassy was quite capable of dealing with this matter and doubted that a trip by Joe Wilson would clarify the matter.
7. Joe Wilson made the trip, returned to the United States in early March, met with two CIA officers and was debriefed.
8. In early March Vice President Cheney asked his CIA briefer for an update on the Niger uranium issue and was given a written report on 5 March 2002.
9. Joe Wilson's debriefing was turned into an intelligence report and disseminated to the intelligence community on 8 March 2002.

There is nothing terribly alarming in these facts. However, we cannot forget that the July 2004 SSCI report was produced in part to provide cover to the Bush Administration, who was under fire on the eve of the 2004 elections, for cooking the intel to take us to war in Iraq. The Republican authors of the 2004 report were deliberately deceptive in three critical areas:

* They sought to create the impression, as expressed in Vice President Cheney's notes on the Joe Wilson July 2003 New York Times op-ed, that Valerie Wilson sent her husband on a boondoggle.
* They neglected to mention that Joe Wilson agreed with State Department that his trip to Niger was unnecessary.
* They stated that there was nothing in Joe Wilson's intelligence report worth telling the Vice President.

Let's look first at the "boondoggle" charge. Here's what Kit Bond said during a 14 July 2005 news conference with Senator Norm Coleman. Bond said:


The reports about his -- report he made from his trip actually lent more credibility, not less, to the prospect that possibly Niger was involved in a uranium sale. Wilson's assertion that his wife Valerie Plame had nothing to do with his selection to lead a fact-finding trip is in direct conflict -- what we learned in the Senate Intelligence Committee investigation and what he told investigators. The real question is whether Mr. Wilson and his wife will tell the truth about how he was selected and what he did.

Anyone confused that Bond believed that Valerie played a key role in selecting Joe. But let's go back to the facts. We now have Valerie's memo. Are you sitting down? Ready yourself for a shock. Valerie wrote to her boss:

My husband is willing to help if it makes sense, but no problem if not. End of story. . . . may be in a position to assist. Therefore, request your thoughts on what, if anything, to pursue here.

Now, only a complete fucking moron would read these comments and jump to the conclusion that "Valerie sent her husband on that mission". Speaking of morons, consider Fred Thompson's recent comments:

As you may recall, for some inexplicable reason, the CIA sent the husband of one of its employees to Niger on a sensitive mission. She had suggested it. He came back to the U.S. and proceeded to publicly blast the administration. Naturally, everyone wanted to know "who is this guy?" and "why was he sent to Niger?" Just as naturally, the fact that he was married to Valerie Plame at the CIA was leaked.

And Thompson wants to be President? But I digress. The basic point is that Valerie was not part of a conspiracy to send her husband. Valerie also is on the record testifying under oath that a Reports Officer in her unit came to her to brainstorm on how to answer a query from the Vice President. It was in that context that Joe Wilson's name was raised. Valerie discussed the matter with her immediate boss, who in turn asks her to send note up the chain of command. She produces the memo that now appears in the latest SSCI report.

Valerie also testified that one of her junior employees was called by the office of the VP prior to the VP being personally briefed. (The call came on 12 February). Valerie's boss then directed her to prepare the email that was sent to the Chief of the Counterproliferation Division and a cable to Niger requesting country clearance for Joe Wilson for a possible trip to Niamey.

Bond, Hatch, and Burr can barely conceal their erections as they indignantly insist that a document released during the Libby trial somehow undermines Valerie's testimony and raises the specter that she has joined Libby and committed perjury. (Jesus Christ! Are folks like Bond and Hatch really this stupid). They write:

"However, the Committee now knows, based on information released during the Scooter Libby trial, that the Vice President had not even asked about the Iraq-Niger uranium deal until the following day. . . .the Vice President asked for CIA's assessment (nb: not an investigation) of the matter.

No wonder these clowns were conned into believing that Iraq had ample piles of WMD ready to strike the United States. The document does not challenge Valerie's veracity, in fact, it supports her story. Apparently Bond, Hatch and Burr were too busy to actually read the CIA memo (I bet they haven't read alot of important documents). The 14 February 2003 briefing contains (see page 3) the following paragraph:

We have tasked our clandestine sources with ties to the Nigerien Government and consortium officials to seek additional information on the contract.

That boys and girls is called an INVESTIGATION. A clandestine one at that. That's why Valerie sent out the cable to Niger on 13 February 2002, as confirmed even by Senators Bond, Hatch, and Burr. Morons! They have not deposed the Vice President or Scooter Libby or any other member of the Vice President's staff and asked who called the CIA on 12 February 2002. The Senators have not reviewed phone records to verify whether or not a phone call took place. Nope, they use disingenuous weasel words to try to impugn the integrity of a woman who conducted herself, in the words of another CIA officer who worked with her in CPD as, "the consummate professional".

But consider how Republican twits like Bond and Hatch do their work. The original SSCI report stated that

updated by Larry Johnson
http://noquarter.typepad.com/my_weblog/2007/05/right_wing_worl.html

[FogerRox]

1. I read some of the 2004 Senate Intell report

In 2007 I can easily say its clearly a sham.

[bleever]

2. Larry Johnson is a hero too, unafraid to call out the establishment liars.

K&R.

[Coexist]

3. knr

[Usrename]

4. Bond, Hatch, and Burr

Those three senators added a section to the original SCSI report claiming there was evidence that Valerie initiated the request to send her husband to Africa. Now, under Waxman's inquiries, there seems to be mounting evidence that no such evidence ever existed.

It is becomming increasingly clear that they just made up their claims, and fabricated any evidence they supposedly have relating to this. Perhaps they were parroting accusations that were made during conversations with the VP's office or something. You know, trying to come up with a story that could be interpreted in a manner that would support the VP's (and Libby's) stated political position about the genesis of Wilson's trip.

It was all part of the choreographed effort to discredit him.

In any event, putting that stuff into the original SCSI report was a very, very bad idea, if you ask me.

It is a crime:

TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 47

CHAPTER 47—FRAUD AND FALSE STATEMENTS

§ 1001. Statements or entries generally
(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly and willfully—
(1) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact;
(2) makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or
(3) makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry;
shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years or, if the offense involves international or domestic terrorism (as defined in section 2331), imprisoned not more than 8 years, or both.
(b) Subsection (a) does not apply to a party to a judicial proceeding, or that party’s counsel, for statements, representations, writings or documents submitted by such party or counsel to a judge or magistrate in that proceeding.
(c) With respect to any matter within the jurisdiction of the legislative branch, subsection (a) shall apply only to—
(1) administrative matters, including a claim for payment, a matter related to the procurement of property or services, personnel or employment practices, or support services, or a document required by law, rule, or regulation to be submitted to the Congress or any office or officer within the legislative branch; or
(2) any investigation or review, conducted pursuant to the authority of any committee, subcommittee, commission or office of the Congress, consistent with applicable rules of the House or Senate.


http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/h...1----000-.html