Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Some Guy)   Columnist: The revelation that Richard Armitage leaked Valerie Plame's name, not Rove or Libby, does not fit the facts as I wish they existed, so it's not true   (huffingtonpost.com) divider line
    More: Dumbass  
•       •       •

676 clicks; posted to Politics » on 28 Aug 2006 at 4:52 PM (16 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



35 Comments     (+0 »)
 
2006-08-28 4:54:09 PM  
You can say that again.
 
2006-08-28 4:55:13 PM  
well said, sort of, kinda, not really

/sad thing is that some people out there think that way
 
2006-08-28 4:59:24 PM  
Apparently the article didn't fit the submitter's headline either but that didn't stop the greenlight.
 
2006-08-28 4:59:38 PM  
Didn't Libby admit that he leaked the name? It's bad enough when they retcon Battlestar Galactica, but now they're retconning scandals?
 
2006-08-28 5:06:28 PM  
I didn't see anything in the column about the Armitage leak being not true.

Apparently just typing what one imagines that the 'moonbats' are doing or thinking, instead of actually reading the column, is the best way to write headlines.
 
2006-08-28 5:09:19 PM  
Uh, yeah, article has nothing to do with headline. Not to mention that instead of "columnist", it's "co-author of the book that named Armitage".

Smitty needs a good cock-punchin'.
 
2006-08-28 5:09:38 PM  
Can we have some blatantly left-wing/moonbat headlines for a change? This right-wing stuff is too easy to shoot down...
 
2006-08-28 5:12:04 PM  
*repeatedly cockpunches shrubmitter while patiently waiting for 2007 and the congressional hearings to get the bottom of this treachery*
 
2006-08-28 5:13:35 PM  
Despite all the chances this administration has given me to practice distinguishing opportunism from conspiracy, I'm afraid that I haven't gotten any better at it.
 
2006-08-28 5:18:13 PM  
eden express: Can we have some blatantly left-wing/moonbat headlines for a change?

(Ad Age) Obvious Schwarzenegger campaign ad is a "cruel masterpiece" (11)
Slate Interesting Now, for the ADD generation: The 9/11 Commission Report, in comic book format (20)
Yahoo Interesting Bush to mark Katrina anniversary with some cake and a rousing acoustic guitar solo (173)
CNN Unlikely Bush vows to "learn lessons of Katrina"; says he already knows first verse of "Walking on Sunshine" (17)
(American Thinker) Obvious Duh alert: Bush should change his strategy in Iraq (12)
 
2006-08-28 5:19:38 PM  
Where does the author say that it's not true?

subby been drinkin the Kool Ade again.
 
2006-08-28 5:21:41 PM  
Sloth_DC, no those are just unremarkable middle of the road headlines.

But I bet your planet has beautiful sunsets.
 
2006-08-28 5:38:53 PM  
Yet again, the defenders of this Administration have ceded the fields of reality and are tenaciously fighting from the land of abstraction.

A good tactical move, if not terribly honest.
 
2006-08-28 5:43:44 PM  
flaEsq

*repeatedly cockpunches shrubmitter while patiently waiting for 2007 and the congressional hearings to get the bottom of this treachery*

*snickers*

*snickers*

*snickers*

It's like the "Liberal Left's" version of the Rapture. Except without a 2000+ year old book to back it up.

*snickers*

*snickers*

*snickers*
 
2006-08-28 5:44:02 PM  
uh_clem: Sloth_DC, no those are just unremarkable middle of the road headlines.

But I bet your planet has beautiful sunsets.


The best part about that planet is that everyone is an independent!
 
2006-08-28 5:49:27 PM  
All right then, I'll just have to start trolling for the left. Hell, it beats working.
 
2006-08-28 5:51:44 PM  
eden express "Can we have some blatantly left-wing/moonbat headlines for a change?"


Please.

This is fark. If you don't like the political slant on the headlines, just wait a few minutes.
 
2006-08-28 5:55:05 PM  
I haven't been keeping up with this story, but last I left the blame was on Libby as the person who leaked it out first. Now the consensus is that Armitage leaked it out first. Back then everyone wanted Libby's head. Is everyone out to get Armitage's head now?
 
2006-08-28 5:57:24 PM  
Sloth_DC:
Most of your exemples are debatable, but what's left-wing/moonbat about popularizing the 9/11 Commission report?
 
2006-08-28 5:58:59 PM  
If you’re Mr. Commonsense you won’t believe me when I tell you I have an envelope that clean you car while you’re driving at home to work.
 
2006-08-28 6:01:13 PM  
monster87: I haven't been keeping up with this story, but last I left the blame was on Libby as the person who leaked it out first. Now the consensus is that Armitage leaked it out first. Back then everyone wanted Libby's head. Is everyone out to get Armitage's head now?

According to the article:

The Armitage leak was not directly a part of the White House's fierce anti-Wilson crusade. But as Hubris notes, it was, in a way, linked to the White House effort, for Amitage had been sent a key memo about Wilson's trip that referred to his wife and her CIA connection, and this memo had been written, according to special counsel Patrick Fitzgerald, at the request of I. Lewis Scooter Libby, the vice president's chief of staff. Libby had asked for the memo because he was looking to protect his boss from the mounting criticism that Bush and Cheney had misrepresented the WMD intelligence to garner public support for the invasion of Iraq.

The memo included information on Valerie Wilson's role in a meeting at the CIA that led to her husband's trip. This critical memo was--as Hubris discloses--based on notes that were not accurate. (You're going to have to read the book for more on this.) But because of Libby's request, a memo did circulate among State Department officials, including Armitage, that briefly mentioned Wilson's wife.

Armitage's role aside, the public record is without question: senior White House aides wanted to use Valerie Wilson's CIA employment against her husband. Rove leaked the information to Cooper, and Libby confirmed Rove's leak to Cooper. Libby also disclosed information on Wilson's wife to New York Times reporter Judith Miller.


Armitage learned about it from Libby.

Oh, and it's not common practice to circulate the name of covert agents widely throughout the administration unless there is some overriding issue of great importance that requires those officials to know the name of the agent.
 
2006-08-28 6:03:47 PM  
Oh, and:

The outing of Armitage does change the contours of the leak case. The initial leaker was not plotting vengeance. He and Powell had not been gung-ho supporters of the war. Yet Bush backers cannot claim the leak was merely an innocent slip. Rove confirmed the classified information to Novak and then leaked it himself as part of an effort to undermine a White House critic. Afterward, the White House falsely insisted that neither Rove nor Libby had been involved in the leak and vowed that anyone who had participated in it would be bounced from the administration. Yet when Isikoff and Newsweek in July 2005 revealed a Matt Cooper email showing that Rove had leaked to Cooper, the White House refused to acknowledge this damning evidence, declined to comment on the case, and did not dismiss Rove. To date, the president has not addressed Rove's role in the leak. It remains a story of ugly and unethical politics, stonewalling, and lies.
 
2006-08-28 6:26:21 PM  
Skleenar: and did not dismiss Rove.

Because Armatage was the leaker.
 
IP
2006-08-28 6:35:47 PM  
Like I said in another thread, this thread need more Valerie Plame.

[image from cbsnews.com too old to be available]

/Yummy.
 
2006-08-28 6:42:43 PM  
the_gospel_of_thomas: Because Armatage was the leaker.

You do know what the word "involved" means, don't you?
 
2006-08-28 6:51:03 PM  
You know, if I could get Valerie Plame away from her dad, I would be more than happy to blow her cover.
 
2006-08-28 7:03:54 PM  
First does not =/= only.

By their own testimony, and email records, both Libby and Rove revealed or confirmed this information to reporters other than Novak. Unless Armitage was the guy who called up Matt Cooper, Tim Russert, Judith Wilson, etc. and blabbed about Plame/Wilson working for the CIA then this revelation does not in any way absolve them of their role in this matter.

No more than if the was that he was the first guy to rob the corner liquor store and they only robbed it afterwards would serve as a defense to robbery charges.
 
IP
2006-08-28 7:44:05 PM  
monster87: You know, if I could get Valerie Plame away from her dad, I would be more than happy to blow her cover.

No kidding. "Uncle" Joe is like fifteen years older than her.


/Hell yes I'm jealous.
//I'm only two years older, Valerie!
///Slashy say what?
 
2006-08-28 10:38:00 PM  
"It was, in a way, linked...."

Yup, no spin there...............

And, actually, who leaked FIRST was considered important when Rove/Libby were candidates for that distinction, it's funny to see how NOW it's after all NOT important who first spilled the beans. Heh.
 
2006-08-28 11:24:57 PM  
bmasso: And, actually, who leaked FIRST was considered important when Rove/Libby were candidates for that distinction, it's funny to see how NOW it's after all NOT important who first spilled the beans. Heh.

Libby spilled the beans to Armitage. Then, allegedy Armitage--an admitted 'gossip'--spills it to the press. Whereupon Rove immediately confirms it to the press, then starts shopping the story around even more.

Knowing all this, I am not sure why you think you made a point here.
 
2006-08-28 11:46:08 PM  
All of which is moot since everyone knew who she was anyway.
 
2006-08-29 12:16:32 AM  
Brubold,

prove it.
 
2006-08-29 12:58:13 AM  
Brubold: All of which is moot since everyone knew who she was anyway.

Yes, Valerie Plame, wife of Joe Wilson. Not Valerie Plame, CIA undercover agent.

Snap out of it!


Skleenar: Libby spilled the beans to Armitage. Then, allegedy Armitage--an admitted 'gossip'--spills it to the press. Whereupon Rove immediately confirms it to the press, then starts shopping the story around even more.

Knowing all this, I am not sure why you think you made a point here.


Apparently you're arguing with the subby, because the headline is so blatantly false anyone arguing for it has to be the subby.
 
2006-08-29 1:59:57 AM  
skleenar : Libby spilled the beans to Armitage. Then, allegedy Armitage--an admitted 'gossip'--spills it to the press. Whereupon Rove immediately confirms it to the press, then starts shopping the story around even more.

Urm - Libby asked that an internal memo going out re: Joe Wilson and his claims. Among the claims addressed I assume was included his lies that was tasked with the job by the VP's office - and that his wife had nothing to do with him getting the job.

You make it sound like Libby personally had lunch with A. and told him all (wink, wink) knowing that he was a blabbermouth who would immediately call the New York Times. et alia. Yah, that makes sense - if you assume that they were passing out security clearances like candy bars. A blabbermouth would lose his, btw, pretty quickly.

Jow Wilson was an incompetant "investigator" who got the job because of who his wife was, who had an ideological axe to grind, who may well be the very first person ever hired by the CIA to do field work without having to sign do-not-talk-to-the-press forms, and who made extravegant claims to the press which were in no way compatible with what he was willing to claim in his (eventual) report or while under oath.
 
2006-08-29 3:03:12 PM  
An author I met claimed he was "cock-blocked" by David Corn while attempting to sleep with some girl. Liberal journalists are apparently quite the macks.
 
Displayed 35 of 35 comments


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.