Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ziggytrix
That is disputed by everyone who isn't in (goose)step with Republican talking points.
|
Riiight. It's a good thing we only get the MoveOn talking points here.
I believe her former boss at the CIA even verified this. She supposedly was doing some intelligence gathering that had her fronting as a made-up corporation, which was essentially a phone line she answered as a front.
My point was that we shouldn't focus on whether or not outing her would cause a world war or get her family executed. That's not the point. The point is that the CIA called for this investigation, feeling that a law may have been broken (regardless of whether or not the breaking of that law put her or her family in immediate danger).
Rove has testified five times over two years, I believe. He has supposedly given all journalists etc. involved the green light to say whatever they wish. I think we should be fair and let the investigation takes its course before we publicly execute the man.
EDIT: On the point about what her role may have been at the CIA when Novak's op-ed came out, Wilson had this to say four days ago to Wolf Blitzer of CNN:
BLITZER: But the other argument that's been made against you is that you've sought to capitalize on this extravaganza, having that photo shoot with your wife, who was a clandestine officer of the CIA, and that you've tried to enrich yourself writing this book and all of that.
What do you make of those accusations, which are serious accusations, as you know, that have been leveled against you?
WILSON: My wife was not a clandestine officer the day that Bob Novak blew her identity.
BLITZER: But she hadn't been a clandestine officer for some time before that?
WILSON: That's not anything that I can talk about. And, indeed, I'll go back to what I said earlier, the CIA believed that a possible crime had been committed, and that's why they referred it to the Justice Department.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIP...14/wbr.01.html
--