Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 120
  1. #61  
    trea·son ( P )
    Pronunciation Key (trzn)
    n.
    Violation of allegiance toward one's country or sovereign, especially the betrayal of one's country by waging war against it or by consciously and purposely acting to aid its enemies.

    Sounds like the democratic party.
    Freedom of some speech in the US, through someone in the UK.
  2.    #62  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE
    by definition, no act can be treasonable if it advances the interests of junior and the GOP.
    You have to break a few eggs to make an omelet.
  3. #63  
    Quote Originally Posted by clairegrrl
    "'There is not one fact that I have seen that there could be a violation of the agent identity act,' said Victoria Toensing, a lawyer who helped draft the 1982 act." The Washington Times, October 10, 2005

    I would suspect that she would have a better understanding of the law than ya'll
    more on Victoria Toensing:

    ...On Hardball, Toensing distorted the scope of Fitzgerald's investigation by narrowing it to a single law. Responding to host Chris Matthews's claim that Fitzgerald's case deals with the Bush administration's rationale for the Iraq war, Toesning said: "No it doesn't. Don't say that. It doesn't. It has to do with whether somebody violated the criminal law and gave a name of an undercover agent as defined by the law and whether that person knew that she was undercover." Toensing was apparently referring to a law she helped draft as chief counsel on the Senate intelligence committee, the 1982 Intelligence Identities Protection Act (IIPA), which states that it is unlawful for someone to knowingly divulge the identity of an agent whose "intelligence relationship to the United States" is being actively concealed...

    But Fitzgerald was given broad authority to investigate leaks of Plame's identity. He was not restricted to investigating possible violations of the IIPA, and he is reportedly considering a number of possible charges. According to an October 12 Washington Post article: "Numerous lawyers involved in the 22-month investigation said they are bracing for Fitzgerald to bring criminal charges against administration officials. They speculated, based on his questions, that he may be focused on charges of false statements, obstruction of justice or violations of the Espionage Act involving the release of classified government information to unauthorized persons."

    Toensing then repeated dubious claims about Wilson's credentials in an attempt to undermine his credibility and to frame the leak of Plame's identity as an attempt by the White House and Novak to expose a case of nepotism, rather than as an act of political retribution against Wilson for publicly refuting the administration's case for war...
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  4. #64  
    Quote Originally Posted by samkim
    I think her status was officially classified, or whatever they call it. I don't think anyone disputes that. But the implications of the leak are entirely speculation. We don't know the nature of her NOC work, whether she recruited any spies, or even whether anyone she dealt with did anything that could be seen as improper to give her information. It's all speculation.

    And there's been no offiicial word that I can recall on any damage if any caused by the leak.
    I wouldn't think the type of work she was doing would be relavant? And if there was damage done, I wouldn't think that they would want that public? Oh well, I guess we'll see what comes of it.
  5.    #65  
    Quote Originally Posted by gaffa
    I wouldn't think the type of work she was doing would be relavant? And if there was damage done, I wouldn't think that they would want that public? Oh well, I guess we'll see what comes of it.
    It is like catching someone stealing a car, then getting in to an argument about whether it was a standard or an automatic. Helps you forget that he just stole a car.
  6. cardio's Avatar
    Posts
    779 Posts
    Global Posts
    787 Global Posts
    #66  
    I am so glad we have all these experts here at TC to show us the mistakes those laymen keep making in the court systems. Maybe they can become advisors to the Supreme Court, the special prosecutors, heck even congress maybe, then they could teach them how to do some real research (google) from real respected research material and jounals (MSM like MSNBC, Dallasnews.com, news.nationjournal, washpost, ect) instead of those bothersome law books, case files, and judicial opinons.
    "If It Weren't For The United States Military"
    "There Would Be NO United States of America"
  7. #67  
    Quote Originally Posted by gaffa
    I wouldn't think the type of work she was doing would be relavant? And if there was damage done, I wouldn't think that they would want that public? Oh well, I guess we'll see what comes of it.
    People are making claims about the damage done by the leak, about people's lives being endangered. But that's all based on assumptions about what work she did.
  8. #68  
    Quote Originally Posted by clairegrrl
    "'There is not one fact that I have seen that there could be a violation of the agent identity act,' said Victoria Toensing, a lawyer who helped draft the 1982 act." The Washington Times, October 10, 2005

    I would suspect that she would have a better understanding of the law than ya'll
    I would suspect that she doesn't have any more information than we do. Nor does she have a better understanding of the case than Fitzgerald. We see this in practically every criminal case that makes headlines. Pundits come out to draw conclusions without enough information to draw a conclusion.

    To her favor, if the claims of the whitehouse being the leak, and Bush or Cheney "de-classifying" her status, then there was no violation. "Technically." I would still hope that people demand justification for such an action. You can't claim to be security conscious and play politics with things like that. Look at how much this has cost the public.
  9. #69  
    Quote Originally Posted by theBlaze74
    It is like catching someone stealing a car, then getting in to an argument about whether it was a standard or an automatic. Helps you forget that he just stole a car.
    Excellent point.
  10.    #70  
    It was definitely a standard btw.
  11. #71  
    Quote Originally Posted by theBlaze74
    It is like catching someone stealing a car, then getting in to an argument about whether it was a standard or an automatic. Helps you forget that he just stole a car.
    Since it became clear early on that no crime was committed, the libs shifted focus on what she did and the damage done by the leak. The only problem is that we still don't know what she did and what damage was done by the leak.
  12.    #72  
    Quote Originally Posted by samkim
    Since it became clear early on that no crime was committed, the libs shifted focus on what she did and the damage done by the leak. The only problem is that we still don't know what she did and what damage was done by the leak.
    Lol, he just keeps doing it. It was a Chevy, noooo, it was a Toyota.

    Who cares? Who cares what law was broken?

    Carl Rove revealed the identity of an undercover CIA agent to the news media because her husband had pointed out that the president's Yellow Cake Story was False!

    This is as silly as you standard versus non-standard data mining diatribe. I don't care who goes to jail, I don't care who gets sued. I don't care if it was a Datsun or a Hundai. The man is a slime ball, and the fact that he still works in the White House tells us all we need to know about this administration.
  13. #73  
    Quote Originally Posted by theBlaze74
    Who cares?
    Barye does.

    He said: "Needless to say any foriegn contact she might have had has been compromised -- whether or not they ever cooperated with Plame -- knowingly or not."

    1. Someone makes a dumb or unsupported statement.
    2. I explain that it's wrong.
    3. You say, "Who cares?"


    Who cares what law was broken?
    Libs did when they thought a law was broken.

    1. Libs make a false accusation.
    2. Libs turn out to be wrong.
    3. You say, "Who cares?"


    Carl Rove revealed the identity of an undercover CIA agent to the news media because her husband had pointed out that the president's Yellow Cake Story was False!
    Apparently you believe Joe Wilson's accusations about the motive.
  14.    #74  
    Here we'll just do this ... we'll just keep bringing it home.

    Somebody stole a car!
    Somebody stole a car!
    Somebody stole a car!
    Somebody stole a car!
    Somebody stole a car!
    Look, he just stole a car!
    He's getting away?
    Is it a ford? Or a Datsun?
    Who cares! He's right there.
    Somebody stole a car!
    Somebody stole a car!
    Somebody stole a car!
    Somebody stole a car!

    Carl Rove revealed the identity of an undercover CIA agent to the news media because her husband had pointed out that the president's Yellow Cake Story was False. The man is a slime ball, and the fact that he still works in the White House tells us all we need to know about this administration.
  15. #75  
    Quote Originally Posted by theBlaze74
    Carl Rove revealed the identity of an undercover CIA agent to the news media because her husband had pointed out that the president's Yellow Cake Story was False. The man is a slime ball, and the fact that he still works in the White House tells us all we need to know about this administration.
    Apparently you believe Joe Wilson's accusations about the motive.
  16.    #76  
    Quote Originally Posted by samkim
    Apparently you believe Joe Wilson's accusations about the motive.
    Oh for God's sake.
  17. #77  
    Yeah, let's go with your gut feelings.
  18. #78  
    Go on and on and on, bottom line - Carl Rove did nothing illegal according to Fitzgerald. Liberals look stupid for their baseless charges and lose another one. LOL!
    Freedom of some speech in the US, through someone in the UK.
  19. #79  
    Quote Originally Posted by geatches
    Go on and on and on, bottom line - Carl Rove did nothing illegal according to Fitzgerald. Liberals look stupid for their baseless charges and lose another one. LOL!
    Again!
    Well behaved women rarely make history
  20.    #80  
    Quote Originally Posted by clairegrrl
    Again!
    So ... Carl Rove revealed the identity of an undercover CIA agent to the news media after her husband had pointed out that the president's Yellow Cake Story was False.

    But the fact that he escaped a prision sentence makes the liberals look stupid? omg lol
Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Posting Permissions