Another Huge Hole In The Right's Argument...

They are desperate to try to paint Wilson as a liar based on whether his wife authorized the trip to Niger or not (since Wilson said that she didn't). Now, here's the thing -- if Valerie Plame had the authority to send Joe Wilson and someone hypothetically comes out with full documentary evidence to prove that she did, it still doesn't prove that Joe Wilson was a liar -- it just proves that he was wrong.

I don't think that I'm going out on a limb by saying that the CIA is a rather clandestine organization, so it hardly seems out of the realm of possibility that Valerie Plame (or someone close to her) could have authorized Wilson's trip without telling him they did so. In order to prove Joe Wilson lied, you would have to show that he KNEW what went on behind closed doors at the CIA. Good luck on that.

And when you cut through all this fog and distraction, nothing about who sent who changes the fact that a CIA op's cover was blown for political reasons. During a time of war. I still can't get the thought out of my head about what would have happened if the Clinton White House did something like this.

Do you think she's lying when she says she offered her husband's services and then did not attend the meeting in which the decision was discussed and made? If she made the decision on her own, don't you think that the CIA would toss her to the wolves? She was not at a level to make these decisions according to what I have heard about her role.

but had no authority to authorize the trip or his inclusion.

He was just married to the victim of this crime. And now Wilson is being demonized?

The only reason I can see by calling Wilson a liar is to somehow suggest that "he had it coming", which is not justifiable in law or in civilised society.

(and it's total BS) is Joe Wilson made up/altered/whatever the findings in Niger to contradict bush when he was trying to protect our security against Iraq and it's horrible horrible weapons(that didn't exist). Wilson and his wife were in it together - that's why she sent him. In other words, she was a CIA agent gone bad and needed to be stopped. Uberpatriot Karl Rove outed her so that she would be forced to stop betrying our country. Yes, this makes perfect sense! Only democrats and American haters can't see the truth :sarcasm:

Sound like an episode of Twilight Zone.

How would that alter his findings? Are they saying his findings would be more suitable to the administrations needs if Cheney had sent him? Doesn't seem like a very good argument to me!

Besides that point, all of the evidence is against them on this. Why are they right and the whole world is wrong - again - for about the millionth time? Do any republicans stop to think about that!?

file clerks the world over don't have that kind of pull within an organization.

And if she did, so what? Does that mean that the administration doesn't trust the CIA? Our fearless leader who talks to Gawd to keep us safe? If they don't trust the CIA on who to send on a mission, then is that why they ignored the PDB that told Bin laden was going to strike? And if they don't trust the CIA, why did Shrub give Tenent a medal?

And what does any of this have to do with Rove disclosing classified info?

removed from office, tried for high treason, convicted, sentenced to death and executed.

Meanwhile Shrub gets a free pass. :grr: :mad: :nuke:

She was an operative, not an administrator.