Skip to main content

Oh, Oh....Wilsonian moment must have hit a nerve!

Reading two liberal blogs; America's Blog and "factsmachine" (clearing throat..), You see the both spining the Wilson "opps" moment on CNN so fast the wheels of sanity are coming off.

Both are picking up up on the Wilson's explaination on Friday that, "I didn't mean that, I meant this...I must have misspoken..." crap.

Both are panning Drudge for "twisting" poor little Joseph's words out of context. Well let's review for a moment, this transcript from the CNN interview.

"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.

She was not a clandestine officer at the time that that article in Vanity Fair appeared. And I have every right to have the American public know who I am and not to have myself defined by those who would write the sorts of things that are coming out, being spewed out of the mouths of the RNC..."


Well he did talk about her "status" in his book and on numerous other interviews. Notice he didn't say, "On the day", he said, THE day - meaning she wasn't then a covert op, and as USA Today revealed, she hadn't been for a while.

I do believe this guy has a pathological disorder and it looks like it's spreading...

On another site, "Crooks and Liars" (I thought at first by the name it was the Bill Clinton Library site), there is post about where Lawrence (liar, lair, pants on fire!) O'Donnell is supposedly refutes the Wilson opps moment.

"On KCRW, Left, Right and Center, Tony Blankley tried to use the new trick of Valeri not being an active operative in the CIA by using Joe WIlson's Wolf Blitzer segment. Lawrence O'Donnell corrects Blankley by making the obvious point that Valeri Plame had to be an operative or else there would be no case:

LAWRENCE O'DONNELL:

Here’s what I think is definitive on this question. Patrick Fitzgerald has represented to the courts that he is pursuing a serious, national security, criminal violation. It seems to me in this grand jury, witness number one -- and Tony you’ve been a prosecutor, you know how they assemble cases -- witness number one would have been a CIA administrator who comes in and testifies about how Valerie Plame does indeed fit the law’s requirements. Because if witness number one doesn’t do that successfully for the prosecutor, there is absolutely no reason to call witness number two, because there is no crime to investigate."


First, Lawrence doesn't have a clue what's going on in that investigation. If you want to cite experts, pick the ones who have been all over the airwaves, two of which actually help draft the law, who state Valerie did not meet the criteria.

The fact that there is so much "damage control" going on about the Wilsonian Slip, is proof it really upset the "Valerie was a covert dammit!" Argument. Because it pretty much slams the door on the original point of the investigation, Wilson was all over the place on Friday trying to say, "What I said is not what you heard, which is not what I meant" drool. Sounds like Clinton's "depends on what sex means"; these guys never cease to amaze me!

Which leads to the belief by myself and many others that Fitzgerald has gone beyond the original scope. A Grand Jury isn't a trial, it is an "investigation in progress" and as such is fluid with new things being discovered. Again, if I were Wilson I might want to shut up for now. As for Valerie - did she go 'under' again? I mean, this lady hasn't been anywhere to be seen. Her husband is out there, her 'friends' are out there...

"Absense is the sign of guilt" a prosecutor told me once....

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Calling Mr. Fitzgerald?

**UPDATED AND BUMPED****

As I told you about in this post yesterday as a source confirmed to me that the Justice Department has launched a probe into the NSA leak. Mr. Risen, you are in trouble - prepare your defense. I told you so.

The White House will be announcing the probe at about 12:30pm. My source tells me that this probe will most likely result in another prosecutor being assigned as of course Fitzgerald is still busy/dizzy on the Plame/Game No-Leak. Additionally, other probes into other recent leaks such as the CIA 'prisons'leak is in the works as well. As I said, this is the NEW Bush - on the attack - it's no more Mr. Nice Guy!

About time! Also covering Michelle Malkin

*****End Update*********

UPDATE II: Looks like I owe my source big time as yet another tip comes true as the Washington Post is on the target list as well for the CIA Prison leak.

****End Update II*************************************

Update III: Via Fox: "The government has no legal right to…

Is the lid about to be blown off Able Danger?

Those who have been wishing for a full blown Able Danger investigation are about to get their wish. The "gate" has been unlocked.

9/11 Iraqi Connection

With Democrats calling for yet more investigations into pre-war intelligence, and Republicans like myself pushing back to help their 'sudden amnesia”, the growing stories of Able Danger and even China Gate, are beginning to make news.

The three main theories about why Able Danger hasn't gotten out of the "blog stage", are 1) To hide Clinton era responsibility for stopping the 9/11 attacks, and/or 2) To hide the truth behind China-Gate, or 3) The facts show that there in fact was a direct link between Iraq and 9/11.

Taking either one you can see why the Clinton worshipping MSM for the most part hasn't touched the story. Of the later point, Democrats, the MSM and even some of our investigations state that there was no 'direct' link between Iraq and 9/11. Say otherwise and the MSM will slice and di…

Able Danger - Pulling Back the Covers of the real Clinton Legacy

First, let's dispense with the bull crap. The meeting between Mohammed Atta and Iraqi Intelligence officer Al-Ani, on April 8th, 2001 happened.

Yet, just don't mention it to the MSM, becaue since May of 2002, the MSM declared an all out assault on the story. A meeting incidently, that the Czech government has to this date stood by.

Let's review a little history:

October 13, 2001: Story of the meeting is leaked from somewhere in the Czech foreign service.

yet.....

October 20, 2001: Ny Times, John Tagliabue writes a story citing other Czech officials said the meeting never took place.

so.....

October 26, 2001: Czech Minister of the Interior, Stanislav Gross has a press conference not only confirming the orginal report but giving further details of Atta's other trip to Prague in June 2000.

then.....

October 27, 2001: The NY Times "recants" the October 20th denial.

The story continues it's oddessy of 'back and forth' until May 1st, 2002, when Walter P…