Citizenspook: Wilson and Plame in cahoots with White House

[Frederik]

http://www.citizenspook.blogspot.com /

I would encourage everyone to read this before dismissing it. And also, to read CS's previous postings on the Plame/Wilson scandal. Sadly, I think he may be right about this. Though it is, admittedly, a conspiracy theory, his reasoning is very lucid. Judge for yourselves.

The big question is whether Fitzgerald is, too... Which is why this fall is going to be an interesting one.

[Burried News]

1. Sorry too CONfusing for me.

[democracyindanger]

2. Fairly easy read

It's just all the laughing you do while reading it that's a bit difficult.

[Burried News]

3. Just enough truth to get you 5 pages into it. I'll let Fitz sort it out.

[Frederik]

4. What in particular did you find funny

if I may ask?

[democracyindanger]

13. Everything after and including the headline

Pointing to a Clifford May article in National Review as evidence, however, was particularly gutbusting.

[Frederik]

23. I don't think it was meant to be "evidence"

The whole article is obviously pure conjecture.

[lvx35]

5. Cui Bono?

Who benefits? Certainly not the Bush administration, this whole thing has been key in driving his numbers down. IMHO if its a conspiracy, its an incompetant one. Nevertheless, I do admit it was a thought provoking read, it makes you think. I enjoyed that. It is really wierd, when you look at the facts, at least as they are presented here:

Aldrich Ames is serving life in prison for his violation of 18 USC 794. He leaked the identity of several NOC CIA Officers to the Soviets. So, Ambassador Joseph Wilson IV, if you are so outraged at the Bush administration, why aren't you screaming for a prosecution of the
people responsible for outing your wife under the same statute? You've compared the crimes of Aldrich Ames to those involved with the outing of your wife, so why aren't you pounding your fist for the special prosecutor to invoke the same law which put Ames away for life? You've
never even mentioned it.

[jsamuel]

8. HAHA, There is a major difference between one individual outing NOC CIA

officers and THE ENTIRE ADMINISTRATION OF THE US EXECUTIVE BRANCH.

[lvx35]

11. hehe. But what if Ames didn't KNOWINGLY do it, like Karl Rove???

They would have just let it slide, right? Right?

[nashville_brook]

39. maybe they have a longview -- interesting, yes.

i wonder if they care about polls at all. they have the voting machines. poll numbers are a nuisance.

[Gay Green]

61. "they have the voting machines. poll numbers are a nuisance."

so are the voters.

[lvx35]

83. Even a dictator has to control some public opinion.

If he loses a certain % of popular support even a dictator is screwed. I would say public support always matters to some degree.

[The Doctor.]

48. Because Wilson is far more savvy than to force the hand

of someone who is most likely working toward the best interests of the country.

No, this is indicative of nothing.

{oe}Remember Peggy Say?

Her Brother was held hostage in Lebannon from 1985 to 1991. Peggy became a major activist in bringing attention to her brother's plight in order to get the US government to 'do more' to secure his release.

The attention she brought to his captivity, and the subsequent pressure that put on the government, served to increase Terry's value as a hostage. As a result of her activism, Terry was the last hostage to be realeased by his captors...

The more she spoke out, the more valuable he became as a hostage, the harder it was for the government to secure his release.

It is not always a good thing to make noise.

[RoyGBiv]

6. Lucid reasoning ...

I am thoroughly failing to see the lucid reasoning. I see a lot of disjointed rambling, repetitive use of code words that suggest a conclusion where one has not been argued, vast leaps of logic, non sequiturs, half-truths, irrelevant information, and, I will add, an inflated sense of self-importance. Citing yourself in support of an argument you are making, especially one as difficult to legitimize as this, doesn't do much to advance it, IOW. I understand, in a certain context anyway, why an author would refer back to a previously written document to avoid repetition. The problem with this author is that he or she does this and then repeats anyway. That's bizarre.

On that note, I'll also add that navigating the complicated language of Title 18, 793 & 794 is extremely difficult even for lawyers. I don't believe this author's interpretation is entirely sound based on a casual reading of the relevant codes, and I certainly do not see how the author justifies the "no wiggle room" approach that is one of the fundamental pillars of the argument. Every law has "wiggle room," and laws that include such subjective terms as the ones referenced in this article have more than most.

This is essentially one, very long stream of unsupported assertions based on dubious logic and little to no actual evidence. IMO.

[ellenfl]

66. laws are deliberatley written to be open to interpretation.

Every law has "wiggle room," and laws that include such subjective terms as the ones referenced in this article have more than most.

it is the nature of laws to have 'wiggle room'.

ellen fl

[DELUSIONAL]

7. OK this guy has gone over the edge -- he also links Novak & David Corn

TREASONGATE: IN CAHOOTS -- How The White House, Wilson, Novak, Corn and Plame Conspired for Treason

From my quick reading -- he is selectively quoting Wilson.

This is a bunch of garbage.

These slams against Plame and Wilson remind me of the cops who blame the rape victim -- well she was wearing a revealing dress, short dress, tight dress, she wiggled her butt while she walked, she didn't fight hard enough, and on and on and on.

Then to link David Corn with Novak??

At least we KNOW who David Corn is but this blogger's identity is a secret -- could be a group of people or just one person who forgot to take his/her meds.

The problem with schizophrenics is that in the beginning they can sound so sane and rational -- but let them talk/write long enough and their disease becomes obvious.

[jsamuel]

9. I call BS!

[Frederik]

14. Corn

has been suspected of being CIA for a long time.

[H2O Man]

18. By who? n/t

[Frederik]

19. Conspiracy theorists

[H2O Man]

28. No names?

Hard to gage if they are rational people, paranoid misfits, or those who enjoy spreading misinformation.

[starroute]

67. The other day I happened to ask my husband about Corn

Just in a "what do you know about" sort of way. And his immediate response was "CIA." It's not like my husband is exactly a heavy-duty conspiracy theorist, either. It's an old and well-established rumor.

Here's a typical example of the charges against Corn:
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/012505_mole_m...

And here's a page that includes his self-defense against the charge of having hounded Gary Webb to death:
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKwebbG.htm

Make up your own mind.

[dbeach]

74. and others at nation mag

Operation mockingbird was CIA effort to get reporters to tow their company line and ya can bet old dogs do the same tricks..

[H2O Man]

88. Thank you.

I had never heard that before. I have never paid a great deal of attention to his work, although I did just buy a book he authored on the lies of this president. I have had some concerns with articles in The Nation, though they are by other people; a recent example being Laura Rozen's "The Big Chill," which I felt was either purposely filled with errors, or written by someone who doesn't get it.

The article mentioned here is nonsense, too. The legal case has absolutely nothing to do with Corn's article. The CI attorney who requested the DoJ investigation does his/her job without depending on Corn's articles.

People would also do well to consider Fitzgerald has prosecuted an al Qaeda operative in 2001, who readily admitted they were working on chemical weapons in a series of factories in Sudan. He knows what CI operatives and analysts exposing such things does to protect this country. This isn't a game with him.

[Frederik]

94. Fitzgerald

also prosecuted Ali Mohamed, the US Special Forces officer who became Bin Laden's most trusted lieutenant in the 1990s. He was convicted for taking part in the 1998 embassy bombings. Fitzgerald, for whatever reason, clearly misrepresented and downplayed Mohamed's relationship with the FBI. For whatever it's worth.

The legal case certainly has nothing to do with Corn's article, but the public debate is being steered by people like Corn. If Fitzgerald is "in on it", then the legal case is worthless anyway. If he isn't, then Corn is irrelevant. We'll know soon enough.

[Frederik]

93. It's pretty much a consensus view

among those who have studied American parapolitics. Personally, I think it's pretty obvious. He's the quintessential "gatekeeper", along with Chip Berlet. Corn is one of those who crucified Gary Webb for his well-researched series on CIA-sanctioned drug trafficking.

I think it's significant that two Company men, Corn and Novak, have played crucial roles in the Wilson/Plame story, on opposite sides of the debate of course.

[fujiyama]

84. By those on the extreme far left

that like to label anyone that goes against their orthodoxy as a CIA mole. I'm sick of this shit. Wilson is a traitor and this is all a show. Yeah, Wilson exposes the administration false claim of yellowcake and now he's denounced as a traitor by both the right and the extreme left.

[H2O Man]

90. I think I am

at the edges of the left wing. I do not think that this type of thinking represents the far left. It is representative of irrational, paranoid thinking.

[Walt Starr]

10. He's gone over the edge, call in the psychotherapists

The man is out of his mind.

[whosinpower]

12. Nope - he is just trying to obscure the whole affair

I don't buy it.

In a nutshell, he is stating that because Wilson did not refer to a law that does apply to the affair that carries the weight of life in prison and TREASON - therefore because Wilson did not mention this law - that must mean that Wilson and his wife is in cahoots with Bushco.

I never really understood exactly WHY Wilson and Plame would do this - nor can I understand how this scandal could be helpful to Bushco....other than the lesser IIPA law does not carry the death penalty or life in prison.

[Humor_In_Cuneiform]

29. CS = KR ?

Dya think?

[globalvillage]

40. That would make more sense to me

than the Joe Wilson (super secret) double agent claim.
But I doubt it.

[napi21]

15. I'm not buyin this story.

I'll wait to see what shows up with the Fitz investigation, but it was the CIA that requested the investigation, and there are many of them that are very angry about this leak. There's just too many reasons on shrub's side of the argument and not enough on the other side to convince me!

[pretzel4gore]

16. the ny times is the biggest mediawhore, who use their rep

to help the bush criminals....so if the nytimes published joe wilson, the question is why?
every day the busheviks try something to occupy the mediawhores' attention, fillup the newstime and give them another few hours/days/weeks to scheme against the american people. period. there was some nonsense about al gore and clinton believing there were wmd's in iraq which proved bush's intelligence was flawed, otherwise bush would plant wmd's and so on...remember colleen rowley(?) and her letter about the terrorists and fbi dereliction of duty? re moussouia? she was an fbi agent and...and...hmmm...and...yep...and...hmmm....yessir...and yes!...no...and...and so on(?) there was news yesterday that a US marine was saying that the saddam capture was staged for american audience etc, a US marine! the point is the only 'crime' to concern ourself with, the crime the busheviks are already caught red handed with, is the theft of the 2000 election, and the easily documented criminal conspiracy that was involved in that!
arrest them all, shoot them all, let satan sortem out (911? nothing happened on 911!) it was nov7/00 that something happened...that's only date that matters, and all this endless confusing crap, including '911' iraq, plamegate and bush's blunders is to stop us from looking at nov7/00))

[dbeach]

42. pretzel logic by steely dan

obviously biased for me

U ROCK!!
Gore is president and working behind scenes to expose the TREASON from both parties.

don't understand collen rowley refernce but did hear she is runnin for conjob ...oops pardon my sarong..congess

[globalvillage]

17. Bull.

What was Wilson's rationale if the writer's claim is true?
Is the writer saying there really was a yellowcake deal between Niger and Iraq, and that Wilson lied? That is the reason Wilson provides for the "outing" of Valerie. Why would he do that if he was aligned with the WH? The uranium deal would have bolstered bush*'s WMD claims.
Am I missing something?

[Frederik]

20. No yellowcake deal

Something would obviously be more important than the yellowcake story, for this to be true. What Wilson gains? Money, I would presume.

Never trust a spook.

[pretzel4gore]

22. but why would nytimes publish joe's article?

those guys have been committing death penalty quality treason for years...why would they cut their own throats?
the hinge everything the nytimes/mediawhores promote is some idea of their basic integrity as news orgs, and ...well the ny times editorial board will, hopefully, one day be tried/executed for treason in helping put the criminal bush in the white house....

[nashville_brook]

38. good question. why indeed.

[bpilgrim]

21. thats CRAZY

wilson story exposes the BIGGEST LIE (NUKES) and his LIE to the american people in the 03 SOTU.

he wants to see karl rove FROG-MARCHED out of the WH and just may get his wish.

by outing his wife they put EVERY american in danger.

peace

[dbeach]

43. biggest lie

was the stolen election of 11/00 when ted olson lied of his conflict of interest before scalia..

that let the TREASON in the door..EVERYTHING since is more cover-up of the first TREASON

[never_get_over_it]

70. I think I have to disagree

the biggest lie was probably Baker's the votes have been counted and counted and counted again - LIAR LIAR LIAR - man I can still see that freak saying that over and over and over again.


Oh and another BIG LIE from our side - John Kerry - we'll make sure every vote is counted!!! Now if I had to put on a tin foil hat I'm beginning to believe that Kerry was in on the stealing of the 04 election. And Kerry fans don't yell at me I'm just really pissed off that nobody can stop these freaking criminals and Kerry disappointed me in a big way.

[Holly_Hobby]

72. That's what a skull & bones election looks like

We've yet to hear from Kerry's army of lawyers.

[rosesaylavee]

73. Welcome Holly_Hobby!

[dbeach]

76. do any of these guys fish??

always thought fisherman were the biggest liars..

turns out to be treasury looters or war profiteers as they are more commonly known..

[Wind Dancer]

24. Hmmmmmmmmmmmm!

"Political payback can be spun, espionage cannot. This is why Joe Wilson, David Corn and all of the liberal media have steered wide of calling this leak exactly what it is, Treason:"

more


That statement alone causes me to dismiss this guy's rants - no need to read any more............

[wishlist]

25. I have some points in disagreement with Citizen spook:

I already posted this in another thread, but here goes again:

I have a few points of disagreement with spook's arguments:

#1--- Citizen spook says that Bob Novak did not reveal that Valerie Plame was an undercover agent for the CIA even though Novak reported that she was an "Agency operative on weapons of mass destruction". This strikes me as semantics because almost everyone would assume that a CIA operative is by definition someone working on classified undercover activities.

#2--- Spook wrote this article without realizing that Corn has written about statutes regarding treason including section 793 and how this could apply to Rove and WH leakers:

David Corn wrote on August 8th-"But worse for Rove--from a legal perspective--is section 793. Rove did communicate classified information which could be used "to the injury of the United States" to a person "not entitled to receive it." The information was the identity of an undercover intelligence official working on anti-WMD operations. Such information could be used to thwart or undermine past or present CIA operations and assets connected to Valerie Wilson. The persons "not entitled" to received this info were Robert Novak and Matt Cooper (and perhaps there were more).

I am--as I've said before--no lawyer. But given the letter of the law in section 793, it seems to me there is a case to be made that Rove essentially did what Franklin did. There may be a difference in intent or awareness. Perhaps Rove did not know he was passing on classified information that could be used to the detriment of the United States (though he should have realized that had he given the matter a moment or two of thought), and it seems that Franklin had to know he was sharing classified material with outsiders. But section 793 does not say a violator must be aware he or she is passing on information that could cause harm to the United States if exposed. It only sets as a criterion that the violator "willfully" communicates this information. I assume that means a purely accidental slip of the lip would not be a crime. But Rove--who told at least two reporters about Valerie Wilson's CIA position--cannot argue he was not "willfully" communicating this information to others.

So might Fitzgerald have a case under section 793? Journalists don't like these sorts of prosecutions, for it brings us close to an official secrets act (like the one that exists in Britain). If prosecutors chased after government leakers--say those who leaked intelligence showing that the White House's case for war in Iraq was weak--the public would suffer. And the Justice Department's indictment of Rosen and Weissman--nongovernment officials--for passing along classified information is also worrisome for reporters who pass along classified information by publishing and airing stories that contain secret information. But Fitzgerald has certainly demonstrated he's not too concerned about pursuing legal cases and setting legal precedents that are bad for journalism. And that's why Rove ought to be sweating the Franklin indictment."

http://www.davidcorn.com/archives/2005/08/why_the_aipac ...

#3--- As far as spook's comments on Joe Wilson- there are things I have been puzzled over too and shook my head about such as the Vanity Fair article. One explanation for that publicity by the Wilsons is that by then Valerie had been exposed and her activities stopped and contacts compromised already by that time but they might have felt like Sibel Edmonds that the public needed to be more aware and that media exposure might provide them some protection as whistleblowers.

As far as what Joe Wilson told David Corn after the Novak leak, if Joe refused to talk about her, that alone would have signaled to Corn that her activities were covert and what Novak had written about her WMD activity would have given Corn enough to be able to speculate about the rest on his own without any specifics from Wilson.

Hopefully we will hear more from David Corn and Joe Wilson in response to these inflammatory charges and important questions raised by Citizen Spook.

[klyon]

26. definitely a nut case

Hopefully the truth will come out and some in the White House will be convicted of treason. David Corn? Say what? The liberal media comment tipped me off after that it went start down hill.

KL

[dbeach]

27. CS came to shake this ship

not DU the ship of bush.

this is his latest..pure disinfo/ or he's on to it??

corn is a insider as is nation mag , mother jones ..
NONE disputed 11/00.9/11.11/02/04.7/7/05..

Biggest story in US history is the bush crimes yet the MM is as AWOL as bush in the NG.

corn mocked the 11/02/04 recount eforts and used the tried and true method of labeling..calling dissenters kooks .. Cters..needs meds...ect..When was the last time Nation focused on a bush scandal and got something out..

both parties march along to bushs war expecting to get re-elected.

biden,kerry,clinton are more hawk than liberal but with a twist and shout.

last time I looked freedom of speech is still alive but taking quite a beating.

Who is benefitting?

Th elites control both sides of the arguement..and the commoners plunge deeper into the police state .
LESS than 1% of the worlds population conntrol over 90% of the wealth

the elites divide and conquer and don't expect to be challenged.

Yes who is CS?? I bet ya won't hear it on the MM.

[nashville_brook]

31. people treat Corn like an icon

i think his writing is boring and his politics, way too freemarkety. soulless.

[nashville_brook]

30. i just despise Corn

stuff like this is Reason enough for me...

http://www.reason.com/hitandrun/2005/02/david_corn_coun...

will the commie hunters ever quit?

[nashville_brook]

32. corn just loves him some bush

"George W. Bush knows what to do with a bully pulpit. From the days of Thomas Jefferson to those of William Taft, the State of the Union was a written message delivered by presidents to Congress. Woodrow Wilson turned it into a speech. Subsequent presidents used the State of the Union as a high-profile opportunity to promote their political agendas. Bush went beyond that this evening. He produced grand and effective political theater."

02/03/2005

http://www.thenation.com/blogs/capitalgames?bid=3&pid=2...

[dbeach]

53. beneath EVERY bush is dirt

and dirt is needed to grow corn.

its a botany lesson!

david corn is a liberal and bush loves freedom..SURE!!
Believe what ya want and at your own risk..if ya think bush is playin for funsies THINK AGAIN!!

[mmonk]

33. Sorry but

he lost credibility with me on this one.

[nashville_brook]

34. corn mole?

http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/012505_mole_m...


Corn's contributor status with Fox News Channel and his almost constant use of that tag line is also problematic. It's certainly not in Rupert Murdoch's interest to have independent journalists running around throwing stones at his man in the White House. -WM]

[LibertyorDeath]

35. Thanks for this Frederik

I think CS raises some legitimate questions that need answering
by Wilson.

[Cocoa]

36. can you explain it in your own words?

[nashville_brook]

37. Corn also tried to discredit the early antiwar movement

by smearing it's organizers as "socialist."

the man has no morals. he would work for bush if there was enough cabbage involved.

[Beam Me Up]

41. EVERYONE PLEASE READ THIS BLOG!!!

I understand that it is a commitment of time but DO IT. Follow the citizenspooks instructions and read the accompanying earlier blog posts so that it will all begin to make sense. I read part of it yesterday and then the rest today. IT IS WORTH THE READ

He is making a COMPELLING CASE that we are ALL (Left AND Right) being HAD.

Here is the real clincher: When does "incompetence" cease to be an EXCUSE FOR TREASON?
Treason that puts OUR NATIONAL SECURITY--that is your life, and the lives of those you love--at risk.

. . .though the heavens fall!

[seemslikeadream]

44. Espionage, Treason has been committed You know that, I know that

Where is the press?

[seemslikeadream]

45. Diebold hires top Dem for PR blitz (former DNC chair)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

[Karenina]

47. Say WHAAAA???

'Scuse me while I go chase that rabbit down the hole...

[Beam Me Up]

50. Oh we're WAY down that rabbit hole by now.

When the procession came opposite to Alice, they all stopped and looked at her, and the Queen said severely `Who is this?' She said it to the Knave of Hearts, who only bowed and smiled in reply.

`Idiot!' said the Queen, tossing her head impatiently; and, turning to Alice, she went on, `What's your name, child?'

`My name is Alice, so please your Majesty,' said Alice very politely; but she added, to herself, `Why, they're only a pack of cards, after all. I needn't be afraid of them!'

`And who are THESE?' said the Queen, pointing to the three gardeners who were lying round the rosetree; for, you see, as they were lying on their faces, and the pattern on their backs was the same as the rest of the pack, she could not tell whether they were gardeners, or soldiers, or courtiers, or three of her own children.

`How should I know?' said Alice, surprised at her own courage. `It's no business of MINE.'

The Queen turned crimson with fury, and, after glaring at her for a moment like a wild beast, screamed `Off with her head! Off--'

`Nonsense!' said Alice, very loudly and decidedly, and the Queen was silent.

After all, they're only a 'pack of cards'.

Which is to say, a man is NOT the office he holds and that THE AUTHORITY OF THAT OFFICE IS ONLY AS PERSUASIVE AS THOSE WHO ACCEPT ITS PERSUASION.

[Beam Me Up]

49. Forget the press. They serve consumerist corporatism, not the people.

If the word is going to get out, we'll have to get it out ourselves.

"Who ever controls our perception of reality controls you."

[LibertyorDeath]

51. Sadly your post is beyond the grasp of way to many "informed" people

You know how they know they're informed they read the NYT & watch
CNN "the most trusted name in" "News"

"Forget the press. They serve consumerist corporatism, not the people."

[Beam Me Up]

59. Thanks for the toast and the acknowledgement. I NEED THAT!

I killed my TV after the 2000 coup. Fuck 'em and their 24/7 multichannel mind control.

Some of us saw 9/11 coming and weren't the least fooled when it hit.

The National Security State is a PARANOID DELUSION
that now threatens the whole of humanity.

"THOU SHALL NOT PASS!"

[dbeach]

52. wow!

CS has info that if true underlines what some say that the elites control both sides of the aguement from the Nation to spectator to national review.

Nadar said tweedle dee tweedle dum but all we could muster was Gore then kerry.
.MAYBE as Nadar suggests both parties are in it together and if this is TREASON and the USA becomes 1984 in reality then its all a grand charade that both parties deceived us and in facte we pay for our own prisons ..

[nashville_brook]

54. i thought nader too, reading this

[Beam Me Up]

60. Swallowing the red pill, I see.

Glad you're out of the matrix?

[Holly_Hobby]

69. Nader is a kick ass attorney

He took on the auto biz when they actually were relevent.

[progressoid]

46. Hmmm...Too much fiber in his diet I think.

[Just Me]

55. I read it twice. I adjudge this particular "conspiracy theory" - bullshit

"liberal media" = massive red flag

Too bad. I actually enjoyed reading ole' CS. Now, I feel compelled to avoid him/her.

[Frederik]

85. Liberal media

I think he's referring to the Nation, among others. The Nation is liberal media (at least, they pretend to be).

[burythehatchet]

56. I will reserve judgment

but I will concede that I have had the same thoughts about Wilson and Plame. Why? because of the risk/reward ratio. "Smearing" someone is a small reward for the risk of being caught committing treason.

[Dynasty_At_Passes]

57. If Joe Wilson is in cahoots with 'em, lets see him go down too.

And go to jail as he deserves. But from where I'm sitting, the only thing that matters is the 9/11 whitewash and CIA operations having their cover blown. That's against the law and under our articles. These folks want to tear up the constitution, so we have to tear them up instead....I understand the prosecutors know this, and if Wilson is a crook he'll be going down too.

[lovuian]

58. Judges has seen proof that there is a conspiracy Yes

but I have not heard Fitzgerald is going after the Wilsons!!!

I certainly know why Bush would want to punish them and shut them up though!!!

So Sorry not buying into this one!!!

[natrat]

62. that is bad writing regardless of its veracity

[KittyWampus]

63. This is great comic relief! Thanks....

[mmonk]

64. It appears to me

he's just mad because no one has come to his conclusion about what law Fitz is going to seek indictments under. So he figures if they aren't coming to his conclusion, then they are all in cahoots including the victims of the crimes.

[RoyGBiv]

80. I think this is correct ...

I read the author's original expositions on Title 18, and what seems clear is that the author, using a skewed definition of the legal term "controlling law," decided without having any actual knowledge of the evidence Fitzgerald has collected what laws should be used in prosecuting anyone caught in this web. Since that appears not to be happening, the author seems to have gone off on a wild and often bizarre tangent, developing a theory that might be good for a mystery novel but is incredibly poor legal advice.

My intellect is insulted by having read through so much of this individual's writing now, but it's like a car wreck. It's hard not to look.

And, FWIW, people who advance theories like this in this manner(*) and refer to themselves in the third person always raise a COINTELPRO flag in my mind.

(*) An analysis of this individual's writing might actually be fascinating. That's why I'm drawn to gawking at it. On closer examination, it strikes me as well constructed in a deliberately bizarre way. The length is part of it. All the stuff that gets people fired up is summarized early and often; the rest is rambling repetition with a lot of unnecessarily capitalized, bolded, or otherwise highlighted words and phrases that give the appearance of commanding authority but which actually do nothing of substance for the argument itself.

[Singular73]

65. This is idiotic

Sorry, but its a load of crap.

[Eloriel]

68. One of two things, both demonstrating the danger of living now

a. It's hard to know when NOT to be paranoid, who NOT to mistrust, and you can make mistakes;

b. This guy's a player himself, and HIS agenda is to smear Wilson, etc.

Really not much if anything in there I'm buying. And he looked esp. silly when he had a weak innuendo about The Nation. David Corn, not so much (I don't know if I could believe h's CIA, but I DO know he's a jerk, mainly).

[starroute]

71. More on David Corn and the CIA

I recently saved a few paragraphs from a CounterPunch story -- though the link isn't coming up at the moment -- which says:

Another important point in the politics of this campaign is that Webb's fiercest assailants were not on the right. They were mainstream liberals, such as Walter Pincus and Richard Cohen of the Washington Post and David Corn of the Nation, There has always been a certain conservative suspicion of the CIA, even if conservatives ­ outside the libertarian wing ­ heartily applaud the Agency's imperial role. The CIA's most effective friends have always been the liberal center, on the editorial pages of the Washington Post and the New York Times and in the endorsement of a person like the Washington Post's president, Katharine Graham.

There are some heavy implications in that statement.

I don't believe Wilson and Plame are in cahoots with the Bush administration. I *do* think that the CIA is playing a game of its own to bring down the administration, and that Wilson and Corn are both part of it.

I also really wonder about Novak's role in all this -- since he's had his own ties to the CIA for a long, long time, and it seems strange that he would play a central role in trashing them now. There have been a few moments lately when I've speculated that Novak might have seen what was coming down the pike and arranged to be the person who would release the Plame information in a way that would ultimately give the CIA the most ammunition in its war against the administration.

So while I don't think citizenspook has hit the nail on the head, I do believe he's right in suggesting there's more here than meets the eye.

[Starfury]

77. I agree.

While I don't agree with CS regarding the Wilsons' complicity (for example, why would it be necessary to expose Valerie's folks to protect BushCo if she's already a double agent working for BushCo?), I *do* think he's asking some interesting question. His previous posts on controlling law look very solid to me. If you read the text of those statutes, it would seem to be a slam dunk to convict Rove et al with them. The Ames example is a good one. So why isn't anyone else (Wilson, MSM, etc.) talking about those laws? There does seem to be more than meets the eye, but I don't know what that something is.

So even if his conclusion in this particular post is suspect, I'll keep reading his blog for useful information that doesn't appear anywhere else.

[earth mom]

75. Thanks for posting this!

It's all starting to fit together....

Though OBVIOUSLY some people don't want it to....

[OKJackson]

78. Thanks as well! This makes sense! WILSON = TRAITOR

Please people, don't get so caught up in your desire to believe the lies that you've been told that you end up just like one of these moronic neo con followers that swallow two year old lies even today.

Wilson's behavior doesn't make complete sense until you factor Title 18 USC 793 & 794. He knows about these and would be pushing for these if he really wanted to get the Bush boys. But he doesn't. He's not only allowing, but encouraging it to stay inside that little box that sets itself up to be defeated in court and be a nice, pansy target for the Repugniks to point, screach and say "there's the evil guy!" It's all too convenient for the administration, but if you have been watching Fitzerald move, I keep reading that people are taking him very seriously based on the evidence he has privately layed out for them and the charges he has told them he is pursuing. Fitzerald probably does know about Title 18 USC 793 & 794, the man does seem to be worth his salt.

So when you look at Wilson from here on out, drop the word "ally" from your mind when you think of him. Examine him as cold and indifferently as you would examine Bush. What does he say? How consistant has he been? What is his mood like? If you were in his shoes what would you do? How does that differ from what he would do?

And most importantly...

...why is he quiet on Title 18 UCS 793 & 794?

If he is off base and this law just doesn't exist, please show how!

[dbeach]

79. most of the elites are in on the gig

'we're only in it for the money" and everything else that goes with it..its about preserving and protecting their life style
and the american royalty is as corrupt as any of their euro cousins.

Soemeone at RI forum said they heard him speak and he ducked questions and was big time arrgant..sound familiar?/


http://p097.ezboard.com/frigorousintuitionfrm10.showMes...

[Dynasty_At_Passes]

81. I'm convinced Wilson is in on the scam...

But who the hell cares? This was never about Wilson right? It was about the CIA operation being compromised and an illegal war!

Everyone keep that in focus, please.

[Frederik]

95. Exactly

"It was about the CIA operation being compromised"

More than that, the entire counter-WMD proliferation network of the CIA in the Middle East has probably been compromised by the outing of Brewster Jennings as a CIA front company. They didn't do that to retaliate against Joe Wilson. And if they had other reasons to out the network, that means that their desire to compromise this network most have predated Wilson's article. So the question is, did Wilson's article just happen to appear at the perfect moment to be opportunistically used by the Bush administration to out his wife's company? That would be some coincidence.

I understand the need to have a hero, but looking at the case objectively, I think it is more likely that Wilson and Plame are accomplices.

[Dynasty_At_Passes]

99. How else would we have figured out they were smuggling WMDs?

Read up on the latest news from the United Nations....This is coming from a mafia terrorist organization, destroying brewster jennings had to do with making us blind. All the Wilson stuff is pure bullshit fluff.

[kanrok]

82. Does he get this nonsense through the fillings in his teeth?

What a convoluted piece of crap.

[ngGale]

86. Although I do think some Dems are involved ...

the disinformation campaign is the very fact of making the investigation seem more complex than it is. Trying to make the public solve the case is a tactic. When in fact, the story is very clear and simple. Rove very well could go the way of Franklin, outing Plame who had the goods on AQ and his network. The whole affair leads right to the oval office. It's that simple. If you listened to the DSM hearings and the CIA officer's talk, also simple.
We've never had our national security breached by our own Oval office before. It's a first. I'm cutting Fitz slack until I know for sure.

[WeHoldTheseTruths]

87. For the thinkers among us...

(and I confess that after years of this nightmare, I'm certainly not among the top thinkers, though I don't think my BS detector is any the less able)...

I have not read this, and am unlikely to force the time to do so, but is smells to me like BS.

So for you who are less burnt out: Is this below relevant?

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/8/21/41121/7766

It's about the scum who want to start nuclear wars using the Plame leak to advance the march towards the US using nuclear weapons. It's a pretty easy read.

[Frederik]

92. The Kos article

Also assumed that there's more to the Plame outing, but the author still asumes that it was somehow "retaliation" for Wilson's article.

"A more complete answer to the question of Hadley's and Joseph's motive for both the inclusion of the sixteen words and the leak of all Plame-related information seems to lie in an even more dangerous ongoing campaign by key individuals in this administration... to promote their vision for the use of tactical nuclear weapons and to muzzle opponents of that vision - opponents that included Valerie Plame and her WMD team at the CIA."

Ok, so the intention was to "muzzle" (actually incapacitate - outing the network has more serious consequences than just "muzzling" them) the CIA WMD team, and so we must assume that Wilson's article just happened to appear at the right time to be used opportunistically as a pretext for outing Brewster Jennings and the entire network that was connected to it.

I think it's a mistake to see Plame's team as "opponents" who might "speak out" against the use of tactical nukes, and so had to be "muzzled". It's not what this is about. The Bush administration deliberately sabotaged the CIA's ability to prevent the spreading of nuclear materials in the Middle East. Just like they let Islamist terrorists get away by "outing" Naeem Noor Khan last year. Why? What are they up to? Who knows, but I'm sure it's not something nice.

[zippy890]

89. I don't trust CS - people shouldn't read it

or give it any credibility.

Who is 'citizenspook'? - they don't say, anonymous, unverifiable, platitudes about 'pacifist who believes in the constitution'

don't read/believe/quote/reference any source of information you don't know who they are.

[tx_dem41]

97. But people eat up everything they say and don't trust anyone else.

Odd that.

[Frederik]

100. Forget Citizenspook

He doesn't claim to have any special insider knowledge, so who he might be is irrelevant. His arguments can be judged on their own merits. He opened my eyes to the possibility that Wilson and Plame might be in cahoots with the White House, which, I'm ashamed to say, hadn't occurred to me before. But I don't "trust" him - I don't have to.

Don't read any source of information you don't know who are? That's a little strict, isn't it Zippy?

[Frederik]

91. What I think is obvious

is that Plame wasn't outed in "retaliation" for Wilson's NYT article. That's a fairy tale for the inexusably naïve. What we're talking about here is the deliberate sabotage of the CIA's counter-nuclear proliferation efforts in the Middle East. That's not something the Bush administration would do in petty retribution against Joe Wilson. Yet, that is the angle Wilson himself is pushing. It's just a personal thing between him and the Bushistas, nothing more. They are mad at him for speaking truth to power, you see.

Then there's the roles played by Novak and Corn, both old Company men, assuming, of course, opposite sides in the media debate. For Corn, too, it's about retaliation for Wilson's truth-telling. For both sides, Wilson is the centre of attention. To the right-wing, he's a charlatan and Bush-hater, to the left-wing, he's a hero in shining armour. The media debate is a my team-your team contest about yellowcake, Plame's status and Joe Wilson. The consequences of outing Plame and Brewster Jennings is rarely a subject of discussion. And it is never brought up by Wilson. How fortunate for the Bush administration.

Is it a spectacle, ready-made for thoughtless consumption, in which the actors play their designated roles? Who knows, but I don't trust Joe Wilson or David Corn for a second.

There's an interesting parallel in the "outing" of Naeem Noor Khan, which looks like a deliberate sabotage of multinational anti-terrorism efforts.

For the above to make any sense, one must of course assume that sabotaging WMD counter-proliferation, by the outing of Brewster Jennings, was more important than the loss of prestige from the yellowcake story. And that the whole yellowcake affair, or at least Wilson's NYT article, was a cover story to distract from the horrible treason that was about to be committed, in war-time at that.

Note the timing, by the way. Wilson's article appeared in July, 2003, only after it had become clear that no WMD would be found in Iraq. He could have written it in late 2002, after the Niger yellowcake story emerged in the British "white paper" and was used by Bush in his propaganda. Then, it could even have had an impact on the willingness of Congress to pass the Iraq War Resolution. But he didn't.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

96. I believe that Brewster-Jennings was the target also. Not only

in regard to matters of WMDs, but it is also possible that the operation was close to finding out exactly who financed 9/11 and "Al Queda".

[Frederik]

98. And if Brewster Jennings was the target

it was a target before Wilson wrote his article in the New York Times in July 2003. It was some coincidence, then, that the husband of one of the agents working through Brewster Jennings should write an article that was critical of the Bush administration, giving them a pretext to out his wife and her network, making it look like just petty retaliation.

[Moderator]

101. Locking...

Please feel free to repost when you
have a reliable source.