Talking Points Memo regarding the Plame case.

im10ashus

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jul-20-05 09:57 AM
Original message

Talking Points Memo regarding the Plame case.

Yesterday a group of 11 former intelligence officers delivered a letter to the Republican and Democratic leadership in the House and the Senate on the Plame case.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/docs/intel.officers.letter.pdf

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

AllegroRondo

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jul-20-05 10:02 AM
Response to Original message

1. Wow - but will anyone notice?

Weve got a Supreme Court nomination going on, the media will drop the Rove story.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

im10ashus

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jul-20-05 10:10 AM
Response to Reply #1

2. I think we can balance both.

We shouldn't forget that this investigation is ongoing.

Some snips of the memo:

The Republican National Committee has circulated talking points to supporters to use as part of a coordinated strategy to discredit Ambassador Joseph Wilson and his wife. As part of this campaign a common theme is the idea that Ambassador Wilson’s wife, Valerie Plame was not undercover and deserved no protection. The following are four recent examples of this “talking point”:

Michael Medved stated on Larry King Live on July 12, 2005, “And let's be honest about this. Mrs. Plame, Mrs. Wilson, had a desk job
at Langley. She went back and forth every single day.”

Victoria Toensing stated on a Fox News program with John Gibson on
July 12, 2005 that, “Well, they weren't taking affirmative
measures to protect that identity. They gave her a desk job in
Langley. You don't really have somebody deep undercover
going back and forth to Langley, where people can see them.”

These comments reveal an astonishing ignorance of the intelligence community and the role of cover. The fact is that there are thousands of U.S. intelligence officers who “work at a desk” in the Washington, D.C. area every day who are undercover. Some have official cover, and some have non-official cover. Both classes of cover must and should be protected.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

NewJeffCT

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Jul-21-05 11:25 AM
Response to Reply #1

14. yes, it was in The Washington Post today, I believe

I think CNN mentioned it & my local paper (The Hartford Courant) ran the WP story.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

im10ashus

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Jul-21-05 11:28 AM
Response to Reply #14

15. Yeah, I saw the Post did a story on it.

I'll try to find the Hartford Courant on line. Thanks!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

NewJeffCT

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Jul-21-05 11:29 AM
Response to Reply #15

16. link to my post about the Courant - containing link to article

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=4146414&mesg_id=4155188

I hope that works

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

im10ashus

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Jul-21-05 11:30 AM
Response to Reply #16

17. THANK YOU!

:yourock:

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

MeDeMax

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jul-20-05 10:15 AM
Response to Original message

3. plain text link

http://www.crooksandliars.com/stories/2005/07/19/ciaAgentsLetterToUsSenateAndHouse.html

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

im10ashus

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jul-20-05 10:19 AM
Response to Reply #3

5. Thanks for that.

I think it's important the SCOTUS nominee doesn't trump this investigation or our focus on it anyway.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

SuperWonk

(355 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jul-20-05 10:21 AM
Response to Reply #3

6. Re:

"Weve got a Supreme Court nomination going on, the media will drop the Rove story."

I don't know if this will be totally true, although I agree that the Supreme Court nominee stories are more important because of their more far-reaching impact.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

im10ashus

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jul-20-05 10:26 AM
Response to Reply #6

7. Totally agree.

We CAN and MUST focus on both. This is an important memo because it came from former intelligence officers and it is non-partisan.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

jsamuel

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jul-20-05 10:18 AM
Response to Original message

4. cool beans

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

im10ashus

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jul-20-05 10:50 AM
Response to Reply #4

8. Shameless self-kick.

:kick:

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

MeDeMax

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jul-20-05 10:52 AM
Response to Reply #8

9. I'll share your shame :-)

:kick:

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

im10ashus

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jul-20-05 11:24 AM
Response to Reply #9

10. Thanks!

:yourock:

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

im10ashus

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jul-20-05 01:10 PM
Response to Reply #10

11. Kicking this again.

It's important we don't lose sight of this due to the SCOTUS nominee. We can fight both fires at once.

:kick:

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

SuperWonk

(355 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Jul-21-05 11:01 AM
Response to Reply #11

12. "We can fight both fires at once."

But don't you agree that the Supreme Court has much more far-reaching implictaions? Shouldn't this be the first priority?

Thoughts?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

im10ashus

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Jul-21-05 11:23 AM
Response to Reply #12

13. The SCOTUS nominee IS important.

I think the Plame leak needs to be first priority. That's just MY opinion though. There is a lot of time for them to dig into the nominee's background and despite what a lot of people here may think, my opinion is that it is a deliberate distraction from the Plame investigation. Although it IS an important distraction. Thoughts?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

sandnsea

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Jul-21-05 11:32 AM
Response to Original message

18. And a hearing was scheduled for Friday

Where some of these intelligence officers will speak.

http://www.lightupthedarkness.org/blog/default.asp?view=plink&id=1273

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

im10ashus

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Jul-21-05 12:21 PM
Response to Reply #18

19. Thanks for the link!

:yourock:

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DU AdBot (1000+ posts)

Sat May 04th 2024, 08:17 AM
Response to Original message

Advertisements [?]

Top

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.