News High Crimes & Treason: Compiling a List

[edward]

cWe know there is no record of those existing weapons ever having been destroyed; and (d) We know no such WMDs were found after the invasion.
Perhaps someone who is salivating to convict and lynch would care to fill in the logical gap for us?

Actually the weapons of WMD that existed before during and after the first gulf war were destroyed. That was well documented at the time. WMD , but especially, A possible resergence of WMD production capability was what Blix was instructed to search for.

Blix found nothing. Blix was forced to leave by the upcoming US invasion.
Blix was right and so was Wilson, why is that so hard to accept?

The entire invasion was based on some inocuous aluminum tubes and a fake document from niger, either of which could have easily been proven to be benign had we chosen to do so. At the very least this was criminal negligence.

 

[edward]

SOS,
IOW - Joe Wilson is qualified because Joe Wilson says he is qualified! I guess I can't argue with that. :)
BTW - as far as I know and, according to Wilson himself, he never filed a report on his "trip." Since we're all so suspicious and raring to convict without a trial, doesn't it seem just a little odd that a career diplomat on assignment with the CIA with all that implies chooses to publish his "report" in the New York Times and the Washington Post? Not even a little odd?

Why would you have the idea that there was no report by Wilson?
He published the information in the press only after it was disregarded by irresponsible people. Of course they had to disregard his information because at this point it would have negated the backbone "16 words" of Bushes propagandist speech.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/intell/library/news/2003/intell-030711-cia01.htm

There was fragmentary intelligence gathered in late 2001 and early 2002 on the allegations of Saddam's efforts to obtain additional raw uranium from Africa, beyond the 550 metric tons already in Iraq. In an effort to inquire about certain reports involving Niger, CIA's counter-proliferation experts, on their own initiative, asked an individual with ties to the region to make a visit to see what he could learn. He reported back to us that one of the former Nigerien officials he met stated that he was unaware of any contract being signed between Niger and rogue states for the sale of uranium during his tenure in office. The same former official also said that in June 1999 a businessman approached him and insisted that the former official meet with an Iraqi delegation to discuss "expanding commercial relations" between Iraq and Niger. The former official interpreted the overture as an attempt to discuss uranium sales. The former officials also offered details regarding Niger's processes for monitoring and transporting uranium that suggested it would be very unlikely that material could be illicitly diverted. There was no mention in the report of forged documents -- or any suggestion of the existence of documents at all.

 

[SOS2008]

A strong suspicion of illegal activity is required for an investigation. One of the problems with the type of crime people are looking for is there is not a clear-cut indication of a crime being committed.

Everyone is well aware of the difficulty, if not impossibility of proving the outing of Plame and/or treason. That is because of the law--not because of innocence. Libby was indicted for cover-up activity, which in itself provides reasonable cause for prudent people to believe a crime was committed.

edit: One thing liberals like to forget, here, is that there are investigations going on all the time. There are people looking into voting irregularities. There were investigations into torture. There are, at the very least, reporters digging into everything they can find about public officials. If anyone had found even a strong hint that they could pin something on Bush, more formal investigations would have been warranted. So far all we have is unsubstantiated, unconnected allegations. That isn't enough.

No it’s not enough because of the Republican majority in too many branches of government at this time.

 

[Skyhunter]

The contrary evidence is that Wilson was unqualified to make such an assessment. He was not the spook. His wife was. Moreover, he claimed to have been sent by Cheney. Cheney clumsily pointed out that he did not send Wilson and one should look at his contacts in the CIA for Wilson's invitation. And you think it is something new for politicians to discredit "the other side?"

Could you provide source for a quote from Wilson where he said Cheney sent him?

You cannot because Wilson never made such a claim.

Incidentally, doesn't it seem somewhat odd to anyone that Wilson filed his "report" in op-ed pieces in the NYT and Washington post? HINT: It's called POLITICS!

Read the indictment of Libby, Cheney told Libby about Wilson's wife weeks before he published his op-ed piece. It is called going public to defend yourself.

Everyone? LoL! Hey, who needs facts anyhow? They are such a petty nuisance! :)

Yes facts are a nuisance for you are they not?

Over the past months, however, the CIA has maintained that Wilson was chosen for the trip by senior officials in the Directorate of Operations counterproliferation division (CPD) -- not by his wife -- largely because he had handled a similar agency inquiry in Niger in 1999. On that trip, Plame, who worked in that division, had suggested him because he was planning to go there, according to Wilson and the Senate committee report.
The 2002 mission grew out of a request by Vice President Cheney on Feb. 12 for more information about a Defense Intelligence Agency report he had received that day, according to a 2004 report of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. An aide to Cheney would later say he did not realize at the time that this request would generate such a trip.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/10/AR2005081001918.html

More Koolade anyone?