Patterico's Pontifications

7/14/2005

Levine on Wilson’s Lies

Filed under: Media Bias,War — Patterico @ 7:23 am



Justin Levine reminds us of Joe Wilson’s lies — something Howard Kurtz appears to have largely forgotten.

45 Responses to “Levine on Wilson’s Lies”

  1. It’s looking more and more like Joe Wilson is the jailed Judith Miller’s source. I think Judith called Joe up and asked him what the deal with his wife was, and he told her. This is particularly interesting with Joe out helping the Dems call for Rove’s departure.

    Today’s staff meeting:
    Bush: Okay, Mr. Rove. How are we doing getting the press off the border security, deficit, army recruiting shortfall, WMD, SCOTUS nominations, Enron, Haliburton & Iraq?
    Rove: Uh, I think I found a way to do that Mr. President.
    (room erupts in laughter)

    Shredstar (91b3b2)

  2. Joe Wilson is a Democrat Party hack out to undermine the Bush administration and disrupt the WOT. His lies, his dissembling, his appearance on TV shout-shows, his book, and his press conference are examples of extreme partisanship displacing National Security.

    Anti-American Democrats in congress, and their coconspirators in the MSM, are using Wilson’s pack of lies to attack Karl Rove. The howling mob is out for blood and they want Rove’s scalp.

    The disgraceful Wilson, a career diplomat, effectively “outed” Valerie Plame when he married her. His high profile raised the level of scrutiny for both of them. But, she’s no secret agent, no James Bond dashing off to exotic places to spy on the bad guys, she’s a clerk who sits at a CIA desk. She’s the one who got him the job of looking into the Niger “yellowcake” issue. A job he botched. The Brits stand by their analysis.

    Wilson is little more than a puffed up publicity hound, a liar, an opportunist, and a shameless jerk. In the life of our nation, Joe Wilson is a sad footnote.

    Black Jack (ee9fe2)

  3. How are his “lies” relevant? Do they make rove more of an angel?

    actus (a5f574)

  4. As I watch this play out, the more I think that the Wilsons do not care a whit about Dem or Repub. Not really.

    Like I said on one of my posts about them, no matter what, they are both happy as clams right now. As narcissists, they care about nothing–war, nat’l security, nothing–except that all eyes be focused on them. The Democrats are merely more easily integrated into the Wilsons’ little show; the show in which they are the stars for as long as they can drag it out.

    And that’s the tragedy of this; how petty it is.

    Juliette (a7d1ca)

  5. Yes- if the Wilsons were lying, then Rove was acting as a whistleblower, which, when it’s not a Republican, is considered a good, rather than a bad, thing.

    Angry Clam (280c3c)

  6. I’ve written this before and I’ll write it again, as many times as necessary, and that is that Judith Miller hasn’t gone to jail to protect Karl Rove, but almost certainly, herself.

    Just an intuition. A very, very strong intuition.

    About Wilson, he seems to be plauged by bad acting. Stan Freeberg did it better.

    -S- (1164ee)

  7. Typo….plagued.

    -S- (1164ee)

  8. “Yes- if the Wilsons were lying, then Rove was acting as a whistleblower”

    He couldn’t have done that without revealing the cover of Plame and everyone that worked at her covered company?

    actus (a5f574)

  9. Is there hard evidence that there was a “cover”?

    Patterico (756436)

  10. That’s a genuine question. I’ve been too busy to follow the ins and outs of this lately.

    I just saw something at Juan Cole’s blog that said she was indeed undercover, which leads me to believe she wasn’t.

    But do we know, for sure?

    Patterico (756436)

  11. “He couldn’t have done that without revealing the cover of Plame and everyone that worked at her covered company?”

    No. The entire point of “hey, Wilson’s lying” was that it wasn’t Vice President Cheney who sent him to Niger, but his own wife.

    Saying that, without adding who is a CIA operative, is pointless. Besides, he didn’t “reveal” the cover of Plame anyhow- Joe Wilson himself said that she was not a clandestine agent at the time her identity was revealed.

    He said that tonight, incidentally.

    Angry Clam (f05866)

  12. Between that, the fact that Plame’s identity was well-known among journalists before, and the probable fact that Rove himself first learned Plame’s identity from Novak, I’m beginning to wonder if this whole thing was just another classic Karl Rove trick after all.

    Xrlq (3646a1)

  13. “Is there hard evidence that there was a “cover”? ”

    She worked at a cover company under her cover. So even if she wasn’t at work in teh cover company in those days, there is still the possibility of jeopardizing other people who were associated with the company.

    What kind of evidence of cover do you need, beyond the CIA say so? Like, lists of people who didn’t know she her real job?

    “No. The entire point of “hey, Wilson’s lying” was that it wasn’t Vice President Cheney who sent him to Niger, but his own wife.”

    ‘The CIA sent him to Niger, not the vice president.’
    ‘how do you know?’
    ‘we can’t tell you, that’s classified, also, we talked to the VP, and he’s no liar’.

    And what is the relationship between clandestine and cover?

    “Between that, the fact that Plame’s identity was well-known among journalists before”

    This is a new one.

    actus (a5f574)

  14. None of that matters, actus. It’s clear now that Rove found out about her identity from Novak. The whole issue was created by the press. They extrapolated the fact that Rove and Novak had a conversation about this into “Rove was the leak,” when in fact Novak was the one who told him.

    otcconan (493d34)

  15. “None of that matters, actus. ”

    I know. That was my original post. None of this stuff matters to whether Rove passed on this info. It doesn’t even matter where he got it from. Just that he passed it on.

    To the president getting it or passing it on doesn’t matter. I think he said he would fire whoever was “involved.”

    actus (cd484e)

  16. To the president getting it or passing it on doesn’t matter. I think he said he would fire whoever was “involved.”

    Got a source for that? The closest I can find is a statement from Bush that if someone in his Administration was leaking information, he’d want to know about it, and that the person would be dealt with appropriately if it turned out he was leaking classified information or violating a law – neither of which appears to be the case.

    Xrlq (3646a1)

  17. “Got a source for that”

    There was another one where he answered yes to a question on whether he would fire people who were responsible. So its not “involved.” But there is some ambiguity about the requirement that he be a lawbreaker.

    But I’m having a real hard time believing that its not at least classified information that she was the CIA, despite the law on blowing covers. In the sense that other provisions apply.

    actus (cd484e)

  18. I’m interested in whether this is true, since Margaret Carlson claimed it yesterday. I think she had a quote from McClellan, but nothing from Bush.

    Patterico (756436)

  19. ” I think she had a quote from McClellan, but nothing from Bush.”

    I thought he wasn’t commenting.

    actus (cd484e)

  20. Remember CIA traitor, Aldrich Ames? He “outed” Valerie Plame over 10 years ago. That’s what put an end to her undercover career. Even before she married Joe Wilson and had twins, her activities for the CIA had become ordinary and clerical, she sat at a desk at HQ. Friends, neighbors, and journalists all knew where she was employed. It was no secret.

    Joe Wilson is simply another dishonest Democrat Party shill, in a long line of dishonest shills, who twist events, pretend outrage, and play to sympathetic MSM collaborators in an effort to undermine Republicans. It’s the politics of personal destruction. This whole sorry issue is bogus. Karl Rove didn’t “out” a CIA covert operative.

    Black Jack (ee9fe2)

  21. “Joe Wilson is simply another dishonest Democrat Party shill”

    The guy held a political position under Bush Sr.

    actus (cd484e)

  22. Anita Hill worked for Clarence Thomas.

    Black Jack (ee9fe2)

  23. “Anita Hill worked for Clarence Thomas.”

    All the more reason to find her credible.

    actus (cd484e)

  24. “My wife was not a clandestine officer the day Novak blew her identity.” – Joe Wilson Yesterday
    Just when you think you’ve figured this thing out, you get another curveball like that.

    Shredstar (91b3b2)

  25. All the more reason to find her credible.

    Why is that?

    Gerald A (add20f)

  26. The guy held a political position under Bush Sr.

    How does that mean he couldn’t be a dishonest Democratic party shill?

    Gerald A (add20f)

  27. “How does that mean he couldn’t be a dishonest Democratic party shill? ”

    I would think that those guys don’t get ambassadorial assignments to rather important countries in the middle east from the opposing party. Nor do I think that they write forceful columns against saddam.

    actus (cd484e)

  28. I would think that those guys don’t get ambassadorial assignments to rather important countries in the middle east from the opposing party.

    Nobody knew then that he was the sleazy liar that he is. You’re taking information known now and treating it as though it was known then.

    Nor do I think that they write forceful columns against saddam.

    Why couldn’t a dishonest Democrat party shill write forceful columns against saddam?

    Gerald A (add20f)

  29. Anita Hill is a prime example of a dishonest Democrat Party shill. She was put up by Ted Kennedy to smear Clarence Thomas at his Senate Confirmation Hearings where she swore to tell the truth and then lied like a dog.

    Joe Wilson is nothing more than another Anita Hill in drag.

    Black Jack (ee9fe2)

  30. “Nobody knew then that he was the sleazy liar that he is.”

    Ya. Ambassador to Iraq. Sleazy liar.

    Another connection to Bush Sr. is that Rove was fired from Bush Sr.’s campaign for a leak. A leak to Novak. Looks like Wilson is more trusted by that Republican president than Rove!

    “Why couldn’t a dishonest Democrat party shill write forceful columns against saddam? ”

    I thought they were objectively pro-saddam.

    actus (cd484e)

  31. I thought he wasn’t commenting.

    Dunno. Here’s what Maggie said yesterday:

    At one time, the president called the outing of CIA agent Plame “a very serious matter” and said that the person who did it should be fired.

    So I stand corrected — she does offer a quote. Anybody know when that “one time” was that she cites?

    Patterico (fafa50)

  32. Ya. Ambassador to Iraq. Sleazy liar.

    Why couldn’t a former ambassador to Iraq be a sleazy liar?

    Looks like Wilson is more trusted by that Republican president than Rove!

    Like I said nobody knew then what a sleazy liar he is.

    “Why couldn’t a dishonest Democrat party shill write forceful columns against saddam? ”

    I thought they were objectively pro-saddam.

    No they’re objectively anti-Republican. When Clinton had his little run-ins with Saddam all the Democrats right down the line were fulminating about how evil he was. When did Wilson write this column anyways? Do you have a link?

    Gerald A (976a3e)

  33. actus,

    You have some good posts (despite that we are on “opposite sides”).

    WRT general knowledge of Val’s CIA profession: Andrea Mitchell of MSNBC answered (reluctantly) that it was generally known to reporters prior to the story breaking that Plame was CIA. I guess you could do a poll of reporters if you want, more.

    TCO (3c2924)

  34. All I have been able to find on the Andrea Mitchell statement has been a reference to the comment in Powerline. I like Powerline, but I don’t plan on assuming everything that one of their readers says is true. Anybody have an original citation to an MSNBC transcript?

    Black Jack, can you cite a reference on your statement that she was outed by Ames?

    Patterico, I want to file a class action suit on the american press for breach of contract, malpractice of journalism, and treason. [OK, I know that is over the top, but if I buy a newspaper because the publisher claims it is an accurate presentation of events and facts, but it is not, they have not fulfilled their implied agreement. If journalists are supposed to communicate the facts of a matter accurately and they clearly do not, they have not practiced their profession adequately. And if their actions undermine the effective defense of our country by warping public opinion, then it is equivalent to treason. All of these things appear to be true “in spirit”, but that doesn’t give you a winning case in court.]

    I am all for freedom of the press, but freedom of the press should mean freedom to exercise the reponsibility for honest and truthful dissemination of information and reasoned opinion, not freedom to say whatever one wants. [Yes, I know, who should determine that-it should be the people who practice the craft themselves, committed to integrity and intellectual honesty.]

    Thank you all, MD in Philly

    MD in Philly (b3202e)

  35. MD,

    Sorry, I read it somewhere recently, likely a post, and it stuck in my memory. If I see it again, I’ll make note, and let you know. If anyone else has the info, please post it. Thanks.

    Black Jack (ee9fe2)

  36. I bookmarked from MM, I am also a power line reader.dp

    David L. Parrish (e8c699)

  37. I can only find the Powerline citation as well.

    TCO (3c2924)

  38. MD,

    Check the Bill Gertz WaPo article from July 23, 2004. It isn’t definitive, but it makes the point. http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20040722-115439-4033r.htm

    Black Jack (ee9fe2)

  39. Thank you all for your attention to my request.

    If you (ie, ya’ll) haven’t looked yet, check National Review Online for today the 18th. I heard this discussed by Limbaugh earlier today, THE AMICUS BRIEF FROM MEMBERS OF THE PRESS STATED “SINCE THERE WAS NO CRIME COMMITTED, BECAUSE PLAME HAD ALREADY HAD HER COVER COMPROMISED, NO CRIME COULD HAVE BEEN COMMITTED”. (Paraphrase, but I believe accurate).

    It looks to me that someone thought the best defense was a good offense (you can’t point out that Wilson’s own wife sent him to Niger if you’re too busy hanging Karl Rove for “outing” his wife.

    Sheesh!! I haven’t had anyone contact me about the class action law suit yet. But I have another idea. How about the Pres and company starting a press conference with a PowerPoint presentation of this fact plus a few other things in the same vein and then say, “When you as individual reporter’s and the news companies you represent decided to practice your trade with some commitment to truth and fair play instead of this crap, I’ll hold my NEXT news conference. GOOD NIGHT!!!

    MD in Philly (b3202e)

  40. “Why couldn’t a former ambassador to Iraq be a sleazy liar?”

    Cuz I think its kind of a sensitive job and I don’t think bush sr would put in that kind of guy.

    “No they’re objectively anti-Republican. When Clinton had his little run-ins with Saddam all the Democrats right down the line were fulminating about how evil he was.”

    Not me. We was organizing protests at school. But we do know how evil saddam is. Its pretty common knowledge.

    “THE AMICUS BRIEF FROM MEMBERS OF THE PRESS STATED “SINCE THERE WAS NO CRIME COMMITTED, BECAUSE PLAME HAD ALREADY HAD HER COVER COMPROMISED, NO CRIME COULD HAVE BEEN COMMITTED”

    They need to fire their lawyer.

    actus (a5f574)

  41. Hmmmm,

    Do I understand correctly actus that you believe that Joseph Wilson and his wife are fine public servants who have been victimized by the Bush administration?

    “They” must have bigger problems than finding a different lawyer, as “they” include: ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, AP, Newsweek, Reuters America, the Washington Post, the Tribune Company (which publishes the Los Angeles Times and the Baltimore Sun, among other papers), and the White House Correspondents (the organization which represents the White House press corps in its dealings with the executive branch). I would have thought that conglomeration might have known a good lawyer or two (hundred). Maybe I should go to law school if it’s that hard to find a good one…

    MD in Philly (b3202e)

  42. Furthermore, as I understand it, at least one of President Clinton’s top advisors (Morris?) has written very unflattering books about him and Hillary, even though he was “The Right Hand Man” for them.

    Is it not true there are a lot of people in the CIA and State Department that are “career” people who stay throughout whatever administration, perhaps being more supportive of one than another? If Caesar had Brutus as a friend, what is hard to imagine that an appointee as ambassador, someone quite removed from the president personally, was not a very loyal supporter??

    MD in Philly (b3202e)

  43. “Furthermore, as I understand it, at least one of President Clinton’s top advisors (Morris?) has written very unflattering books about him and Hillary, even though he was “The Right Hand Man” for them.”

    I think its partisan advisors are in a different class than diplomats. Sleazy and lying go with with and not the other.

    actus (a5f574)

  44. Calling Patterico!! Calling Patterico!!

    Other than actus’ comments which did not seem helpful to me, there was no response to my post about McCarthy’s claim in NRO about the Amicus brief filled by the media’s “Who’s Who”.

    Today I see in my Philly Inquirer an article with an AP byline about a meeting where Democrats listened to people in the intelligence community all hot and bothered about Karl Rove, etc.

    It seems to me that McCarthy’s article is fraudulant or the press folks have already stated they have no reason to squawk about this issue (and it looks like a smoke screen to hide a CIA employee sending their not-so-objective spouse on an official mission).

    Assuming McCarthy’s story is correct, is there any reason for the AP and The Inquirer to keep publishing on this except they still need to grasp at ways to hurt the President, don’t bother with the facts???

    Can you imagine a doctor telling the patient wrong information, even after the doctor knows it is wrong!?!?!?

    Looking forward to responses, thank you.

    MD in Philly (b3202e)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.1019 secs.