[Grovenet] A sticky wicket

allnutt allnutt at verizon.net
Sat Jul 16 15:23:51 PDT 2005


I've heard two or three recent reports about the CIA claiming she was 
considered by the CIA to be undercover. That was why the CIA complained 
about her being outed.
Of course if Bush and Rove would like to have their own definition of what 
undercover means, different than the CIAs definition I suppose they are free 
to use the words as they please.
For me, I would not like to be a president who ticked off the CIA and said I 
wouldn't honor their defiinitions. Especially if I expected them to help 
watch my back. But Bush has Rove watching his back and maybe he thinks Rove 
is all he needs.

Katie

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ron D'Eau Claire" <ron at cobi.biz>
To: "'Forest Grove local interests list'" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Saturday, July 16, 2005 2:16 PM
Subject: RE: [Grovenet] A sticky wicket


> Crusin' the highways last week I listened to an interview with another
> undercover CIA agent who also "flew a desk" in a different bureau in
> Washington most of the time he was 'under cover'. He said the agency 
> defines
> "under cover" as traveling without diplomatic immunity. Such agents face
> very serious problems if they're picked up in a foreign country collecting
> data they shouldn't, but they'd never have access to it if they had
> diplomatic passports.
>
> So to an outsider here it's impossible to tell if a person is or is not
> "under cover". As he observed, isn't that the whole idea of being "under
> cover"?
>
> Ron D'Eau Claire
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com] On
> Behalf Of Geri
> Sent: Saturday, July 16, 2005 1:15 PM
> To: robert at vannattabros.com; Forest Grove local interests list
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] A sticky wicket
>
>
> " ... and she fails to meet the definition of a 'covert agent'."
>
>         She actually was operating covertly, and therefore
>         the CIA filed a crime report with Ashcroft (as Atty.
>         General) later in the same July in which Novak's article
>         identifying her came out.  Ashcroft angered the Bushies
>         when he recused himself (Dec. 2003) from dealing with
>         it and passed it on to a special prosecutor.  Ashcroft
>         lost favor ...  He resigned in Nov. 2004).
>
> "If the fingers pointed at Rove there wouldn't be much purpose in puttng a
> stray reporter in the slammer."
>
>         Incorrect.  She's nowhere near "stray."  She has a
>         purpose in playing the "strong, principled reporter."
>
>         1) The fingers may actually end up pointing at more
>         people in addition to Rove who mishandled the
>         Plame identification.  2) Rove has never been known
>         to do anything BUT lie and smear.  3)  J. Miller chose to
>         go to the slammer in order to redeem herself in the eyes of
>         her political party.  After all, she is the reporter who wrote
>         several untrue columns about Iraq's supposedly having WMD
>         --  she assisted in pushing that lie out there.
>
>
>
> Geri
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: Robert VanNatta
> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> Sent: Friday, July 15, 2005 8:17 AM
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] A sticky wicket
>
>
> part of the great wonders of trial by newspaper is that things float out 
> one
> at a time.
>
> A few things seem to be obvious at this point although the whole story 
> still
> isn't out.
>
> a)  Wilson is a bit of a twit.  He gets hired by his wife to go on a
> taxpayer expense junket and then passes his report to the newspapers 
> instead
> of the people who hired him-the CIA.
>
> b)  He complains about his wife's 'cover' being blown, yet according to 
> his
> book both of them have been in Washington for many years and she fails to
> meet the definition of a 'covert agent'.
>
> c)  A lot of political grandstanding seems to be going on.   Wilson with 
> his
> taxpayer junket money safely in the bank is now trying to make a big deal 
> to
> sell some more books.
>
> d) the D's who don't care what the truth is any more than the 
> administration
> have been pushing for political advantage based on a half truth.
>
> e)  If Rove's reported testimony is true he is hardly a culprit here 
> despite
> all those that have demanded his head.
>
> f)  The remaining issue as far as Rove is concerned seems only to be 
> whether
> his story is true or not.   it seems corroborated by a couple of things.
> Novak said his source was non-political person.   Either his statement is 
> a
> lie or Rove isn't his source.
>
> Secondly, they have a reporter in the slammer.   If the fingers pointed at
> Rove there wouldn't be much purpose in puttng a stray reporter in the
> slammer.
>
> We don't know the 'rest of the story' but wouldn't it be an interesting
> twist if at the end of the day the 'source' was Wilson himself who was
> looking for a way to embarass the administration and sell some books.?
>
> the last chapters of this book haven't been written and jumping to a lot 
> of
> conclusions
> as a lot of people who know better have done may not be the thing to do. 
> IT
> might be wiser to wait for the other shoes to drop.   this boat is likely 
> to
> rock a few more times.
>
> David Morelli <jo.david at verizon.net> wrote:
>
> On Thursday, July 14, 2005, at 10:08 PM, Robert VanNatta wrote:
>
>> Now we have yet another leak. This time Rove's grand jury testimony.
>> IT reports that Rowe testified that he got his information from Novak.
>>
>> This is consistent with Novak's article which says that his source was
>> a 'non-political type' --- a description that hardly fits Rove.
>>
>
> So, who told Novak? And why doesn't anyone care?
>
> Actually, I know why the Administration doesn't care, I was referring to
> those asking questions about the case.
>
> David
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> 




More information about the GroveNet mailing list