2006-07-16 12:11:40 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Let's see Republicans answering for once instead of using slogans or whatever
2006-07-16 12:21:04 · update #1
They would be talking treason charges. And they would have been right to do so. They would have outed a CIA operative (yes, I said operative -- read below) during a time of war. If that isn't giving aid and comfort to the enemy, I don't know what would be.
History will put Cheney, Rove, and Libby in the same chapters of history books as Benedict Arnold (and probably Jane Fonda).
As to the question about her being an operative:
Do you Fox News viewers ever question ANYTHING you hear on that network? Valerie Plame was not only an operative, she was a NOC. If her cover had been blown, she would have been executed since she had no diplomatic cover.
She was undercover when she met James Wilson (in Belgium, not Quantico).
2006-07-16 12:32:28 · answer #1 · answered by franson 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
So, was she a "secret" agent? I thought she was already quite well-recognized to be an agent. That's why she wasn't in the field anymore, right? Because her identity was already known.
If it were a real crisis of an agent in the field being "outed", I'm sure Republicans would have been outraged, no matter which party did it. The issue isn't about politics. It's about right and wrong. I just don't see how this Valerie Plame case could be seen as an "outing", since her name was even published as a member of the CIA, wasn't it?
Oops. Are you gonna arrest me now for using her name? Have i outed her all over again?
2006-07-16 22:17:21 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
1. valery wasnot covert, not even an agent. she was listed as a CIA employee in Who's Who..It was public knowledge...
2. She and Joe comitted nepotism, so he could go out and fake a report that there is no written record of, that he obtained by improper means, that was a lie he wanted to use against GWB for the "greater good" of his party..They should both have been fired , then jailed, for what they did..
3. Do you know what the meaning of "is" is?
2006-07-16 19:24:10 · answer #3 · answered by mr.phattphatt 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Oh my Lord the ignorance that abounds. I saw one answer that said she was a clerk at Guantanamo. Lord. The Republicans would have had a committee to boil him/her in oil. And then they would have insisted he be tried and go to jail!
By the way to the one who thought she was a clerk. She was in the diplomatic core and did travel some and she was an undercover agent. Sorry
2006-07-16 19:19:53 · answer #4 · answered by olderandwiser 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
They would love it. CIA agents are the tools of imperial forces within the US to take over and oppress the citizens of the Earth.
Good question.
2006-07-16 19:18:03 · answer #5 · answered by Chapparo 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
They would have tried to Impeach the Democratic President, but with bush in office, it's swept under the rug.
2006-07-16 19:24:45 · answer #6 · answered by linus_van_pelt68 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
They would be so upset that they would work to bring whomever was responsible to the forefront and held accountable. However, Republicans obviously feel they are above any reproach and therefore it should just be overlooked.
2006-07-16 19:17:59 · answer #7 · answered by Kat 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Who knows? We're still talking about Clinton's illegal use of the FBI files concerning his politcal rivals and Hillary's refusal to turn over documents to the feds.
2006-07-16 19:15:07 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
REP: "How *dare* you !! ANother shameful act of liberal betrayal of American interests ! Republicans would know the value of national security and would NEVER do such a thing !"
(and pant and gasp in 'righteous indignation' )
2006-07-16 19:16:55 · answer #9 · answered by atheistforthebirthofjesus 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
She wasn't a field agent. She was clerical help at Quantico.
2006-07-16 19:14:48 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋