Jan 02 2007

The Plame Trial

Published by at 11:49 am under All General Discussions,Plame Game

One of the more interesting stories that will play out this month is the start of the Scooter Libby Trial, which will showcase much of the media propaganda effort that came to be known to many as “The Plame Game”. We know that VP Cheney is expected to be called to bear witness on what a marginal nutcase Joe Wilson was with his string of lies and unanswered questions. And we will see a string of journalists paraded to the witness stand as well. More on them in a moment.

For the record I hope someone asks Joe – in order to establish his credibility as a witness – how it is he was debunking forgeries in February 2002 that would not actually surface until October 2002, as was his claims in the articles he had written about him and he wrote. It was the claims, after all, which supposeldy caused all the concern at the WH and the alleged retribution. And I hope someone questions Joe Wilson’s accounts of the role of his wife – who, as lead of the IC-wide Iraq Task Force – was in a very powerful position to determine who would check out rumors of illicit nuclear trade with Iraq. These questions go directly at Wilson’s credibility as a witness, and would shed some much needed light on this issue. We may even learn how many times Wilson went to Niger and for what reasons did Valerie send him.

But the jounralists will be much more interesting and humorous. We can all watch as these reporters get grilled and must actually, for once in their lives, be publically honest about what they know. I suspect we will get confirmation that it was both Joe and Valerie as sources for the early stories by Kristof and Pincus. She seems to be the inside CIA source for most of these early stories. Judith Miller, Tim Russert and Mathew Cooper will expose journalism as the facade it is, as they blunder and stumble through their testimony and lack of recollections.

Armitage will be one of the most intriguing witnesses because he probably talked to a lot of reporters, or maybe it was his deputy Grossman. But someone I would wager was talking to Pincus and Miller who has yet to be named. And it will become clear Prosecutor Fitzgerald knew of these exculpatory events and hid them from Libby’s defense team, and the judge. Because what I truly hope comes from this is ethics charges against Fitzgerald for lying in his briefs to the US Court of Appeals and the US Supreme Court. Because Fitzgerald did lie to those courts. He claimed he needed to know who leaked the information about Plame to Novak, when he knew full well it was Armitage. He knew the day he took office. He went on a fishing expidition and made wild claims no less criminal than those made in the Duke rape case by another out of control prosecutor. If the lawyers would like to have the jokes stop, they should take this opportunity to start cleaning up their profession. Duke prosecutor Nifong is only one example of prosecutors running amok. But I am sure he took his cue from Fitzgerald and that buffoon Ronnie Earle in Texas who went after Tom Delay. That is why these mad prosecutors need to be charged and tried. They are setting a very, very dangerous precedence. I know a lot of good, honorable lawyers and prosecutors and they do not deserve to be associated with these clowns.

29 responses so far

29 Responses to “The Plame Trial”

  1. conesplif says:

    Well, who was besting who is a matter of opinion I guess, but what is all this about your REAL lawyer and prosecutor buddies complaining about Fitzgerald. Why haven’t they filed a disciplinary complaint with the DoJ? Why haven’t YOU filed a disciplinary complaint. You can walk right in and fill out the form. The Department of Justice is part of the Executive Branch, and one would imagine they would be sympathetic to a complaint about abuse of the Executive Branch by an employee. Speedy Gonzales is not exactly the most ethical attorney general, what with opining that the President does not have to obey the laws of the United States under a unitary executive theory that was rendered inapplicable in 1649 when Parliament chopped off Charles I’s head, so it seems to me he would be apt to fire Fitzgerald muy pronto if anyone could demonstrate an ethical lapse on Fitzgerald’s part. Seems strange to me with your 1,000 registered users you would be a force to be reckoned with in the District.

  2. AJStrata says:


    Who said they complained? I said they agreed to the acts were unethical. And who says some haven\’t filed complaints? Who said Fitz is not under scrutiny?

  3. conesplif says:


    If they agreed the acts were unethical and failed to report them then they have committed an ethical violation by failing to act as an officer of the court in reporting said violations. You should report them.

    I mention that because I have checked with my sources in the Justice Department and no one there is aware of any complaints having been filed against Fitzgerald (they are a public record).

    Are you saying you have some DoJ source that indicates that Fitzgerald is under scrutiny, and if so, by whom? You’d think Fox News would splash that all over the Tube.

  4. AJStrata says:


    LOL! What a joke. These people are not witnesses – they are simply sharing their opinions of the incident as captured in the filings. Did I say complaints were filed? I asked you a question – your vivid imagination is doing all the rest. There was a publicized effort to lodge various complaints against Fitz Magoo by lawyers. To tell the truth I don’t know what happened to them, though I am certain they were communicated to DoJ. What DoJ did with them I don’t know. You care more about this than I do. I simply pointed out Fitzgerald deliberately misled the courts and an investigation was in order. Invetigations should always be in order when there is an indication of serious malfeasence. Personally I think he is going to get his head handed to him in court and everyone is waiting until Libby wins – to add icing on the cake. Fitz has been losing terrible in the pre-trials and admits Cooper and Grossman have serious credibility problems (you do know Grosssman and Joe Wilson are old buddies – don’t you?). The case is a joke any junior lawyer would know better than to touch. Fitz fell for the DC dazzle of power – typical. You can think what you like – free c0untry.

  5. conesplif says:

    So – since they aren’t witnesses – the whole sum and total of your diatribe against Fitzgerald is that in YOUR OPINION – which you admit is not legally informed – YOU THINK Fitzgerald lied to the court – and some friends of yours agree with you.


    “Fitz has been losing terrible in the pre-trials”

    Not my perception of events – and upon conviction and sentencing of the traitorous and perjurious Scooter Libby – I shall call upon you to eat crow.

  6. robert lewis says:

    Poor Bobby has had to move on . . . I don’t pay for this site just to listen people rant.

    Unless, of course, they are part of the incestuous cult of Kool-Ade drinkers who come again and again to slake their thirsts and drink deeply of the Waters of Nepenthe.

    Meanwhile – I seem to be having quite a fine time as Banquo’s ghost.

  7. robert lewis says:

    Bikerken opines:

    Was Valerie Plames identity as a CIA employee classified? I believe she was an analyst and not an operative. Analysts identities are not classified.

    Sorry to let you know you’re wrong again –

    A CIA panel has told former officer Valerie Plame she can’t write about her undercover work for the agency, a position that may threaten a lucrative book project with her publisher, Newsweek’s Michael Isikoff reports in Monday edition of the magazine. The panel refused Plame permission to even mention that she worked for the CIA because she served as a “nonofficial cover” officer (or NOC) posing as a private businesswoman.

    I think the CIA probably knows what her job description was.

  8. AJStrata says:


    You seem to have confused Plame’s time as a covert agent in the mid 1990’s with her non-covert job from 1999 onward. For someone who acts like such a subject matter expert on things Plame, you should know she left the covert world when she married Wilson and had her twins in 1998 (which are only a few months apart in age from mine). Therefore she was not covert and covered under the law covering CIA agents in 2003. This is Plame 101 Robert. She of course cannot write about her covert activities, and no one (except obviously her) has attempted to expose her covert activities.

  9. robert lewis says:

    AJ –

    You, of course, could not be more wrong about Plame – thus regrettable failing Remedial Plame. At the time her identity was revealed, Plame continued to be an NOC – her position was not that of an analyst, and her position at the CIA-created and funded front entity Brewster Jennings was her operative identity – according to the CIA – who filed the complaint with the Justice Department that launched the investigation.

    Interestingly, at the time her identity was revealed by an employee of the Bush Administration – she was working on deep intelligence regarding Iran’s nuclear program. It is impossible to determine how th3e revelation of her identity may have harmed efforts to gather reliable informaiton on the Iran nuke program.

    If you have any information that substantiates your claim she was not an NOC – I respectfully suggest you reveal it. Lacking any such documentation, the official position of the United States of America is – and I quote:

    Prior to July 14, 2003, Valerie [Plame] Wilson’s employment was classified. Prior to that date her affiliation with the CIA was not common knowledge outside the intelligence community . . . In an investigation concerning the compromise of a CIA officer’s [note the use of the term “officer” rather than “employee”] identity, it is especially important that grand jurors learn what really happened.