Re: Valerie Plame Speaks Under Oath....
- From: "Tom Enright" <freddy_hayek@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 19 Mar 2007 10:01:42 -0700
On Mar 19, 12:39 pm, "Randolph M. Jones" <rjo...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Tom Enright wrote:
On Mar 19, 11:39 am, <aborg...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
James Schrumpf <jaspammenotschru...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Quiet, rich hammett <bubbaric...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> -- I'm transmitting rage.
Armitage did. Why wasn't he the one on
trial?
No, Libby did not. Armitage did, to Novak.
Do you think that Armitage revelaing her identity to Novak
somehow means Libby couldn't ALSO have revealed her identity?
Maybe Gore revealed her identity. Maybe you did. Maybe my dog did.
RUFF!
Libby didn't reveal Plame's identity, the first official leaker was
Armitage. However, after Wilson wrote his bogus story he started
meeting with journalists and Democratic strategists. WITH his wife.
So if I've got this right, according to you the order of events was
"Armitage talks about Plame, then Libby talks about Plame, then Wilson
and Plame talk about Plame," and your conclusion is that Armitage,
Wilson, and Plame are culpable, but Libby is not. Makes Enright-sense
to me.
Two posts about my comments and you are going back to your old bad
habits. Take something I wrote, change my statements to construct an
argument that I did not make than bravely slap-it down.
Armitage is culpable because he leaked her name.
Libby is not culpable because he did not leak her name.
Wilson is not legally culpable because it has not been shown that he
leaked her name. However, in Wilson's multiple meetings with
journalists and DNC operatives he had Plame along with him. In
discussing his stragety to best leverage the situation to harm the
Bush admin., I find it difficult to believe that her job wasn't
revealed. However, this is just my opinion.
-Tom Enright
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Valerie Plame Speaks Under Oath....
- From: Randolph M. Jones
- Re: Valerie Plame Speaks Under Oath....
- References:
- Valerie Plame Speaks Under Oath....
- From: charlie board
- Re: Valerie Plame Speaks Under Oath....
- From: Randolph M. Jones
- Re: Valerie Plame Speaks Under Oath....
- From: James Schrumpf
- Re: Valerie Plame Speaks Under Oath....
- From: Jeffrey Davis
- Re: Valerie Plame Speaks Under Oath....
- From: Charles Beauchamp
- Re: Valerie Plame Speaks Under Oath....
- From: James Schrumpf
- Re: Valerie Plame Speaks Under Oath....
- From: Jeffrey Davis
- Re: Valerie Plame Speaks Under Oath....
- From: James Schrumpf
- Re: Valerie Plame Speaks Under Oath....
- From: Jeffrey Davis
- Re: Valerie Plame Speaks Under Oath....
- From: James Schrumpf
- Re: Valerie Plame Speaks Under Oath....
- From: rich hammett
- Re: Valerie Plame Speaks Under Oath....
- From: James Schrumpf
- Re: Valerie Plame Speaks Under Oath....
- From: aborgman
- Re: Valerie Plame Speaks Under Oath....
- From: Tom Enright
- Re: Valerie Plame Speaks Under Oath....
- From: Randolph M. Jones
- Valerie Plame Speaks Under Oath....
- Prev by Date: Re: Leonard Pitts Jr. op-ed column
- Next by Date: anderson's ncaa tournament take to this point....
- Previous by thread: Re: Valerie Plame Speaks Under Oath....
- Next by thread: Re: Valerie Plame Speaks Under Oath....
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|