Did Valerie Plame Lie?

Question

Did Valerie Plame Lie?


"If the Democratic controlled Congress is so hot to process a crime that has not been committed by trying to solicit perjury, why don't they go ahead and prosecute the one that has been committed by Valerie Plame, who has now been caught lying to the US Senate as revealed by her recent house testimony?" This is an interesting question. The first answer I'd offer is that it's Democrats that run the committees. Christopher Bond, senator from Missouri, is a member of the Senate intelligence committee. He said (paraphrased), "You know, we never heard anything about this junior underling that, phone call from Cheney's office, and somebody else walking by suggesting Valerie Plame's husband." There's a letter. Christopher Hitchens mentioned it. There's a letter you can get that shows that Valerie Plame suggested her husband to go on that trip to Niger. It's up to Democrats to do this. They run the House and the Senate, and I don't think there's going to be any interest on the part of Democrats to process Valerie Plame or put her through any kind of a perjury claim. You never know. The justice department is not going to do anything. It's partisan politics. It's the way it is. You have somebody who has told two different stories before two different committees (Gasp!) and nothing's done, and then you got eight people haven't done anything wrong. Rove has not lied, and he's going to be subpoenaed for the purposes of trying to trick 'em into perjury. There's no question.

http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=11171

Answer 1

According to the CIA, no she didn't.

Answer 2

well... first off... she MAY have lied... that's not been decided yet...

the letter could be a lie... or a shade of the truth... perhaps she recommended him "to help the agency"... which turned out to be the trip, but she didn't recommend him for that trip...

I don't really know...

but I doubt anything will come of it...

I mean... Democrats learned about tricking someone into perjury over issues that don't matter from the master... the Republicans with Clinton...

the simple fact is... Clinton wouldn't have even been investigated under Democrats, if they were over congress.... neither would have Libby under Republicans...

Answer 3

Of course not! Don't be silly.

Valerie spoke under oath. The Republicans are too terrified to speak under oath because they know they are lying.

Answer 4

There has been no proof Valerie lied. But the strangest thing--Despite the real crime by Richard Armitrage that Scooter Libby (his boss) went to jail for--the illegal outing of an active CIA agent, everywhere I search, I come up with wingnut websites with big headings of "Valerie Plame lied, many died." And even that her husband lied and many died. BOTH A LIE, And none has any facts in the story to back up the crazy but catchy (from campaign sayings "Bush lied, Iraqis died" and "Clinton lied, but nobody died.") headline. It seems to be an empty PR campaign of the type they are so good at...get enough sources going with the fake newsstory that search engines no longer vpick up the real story, anything about who Wilson and Plame are, what they did for the country, but instead pick up at least the first entire page of search results leading to blogs, wingnut websites created to disinform and fuel the massive internet wars they promote...A Karl Rove tactic from using church parking lots, flyers, law students papering cars with lies to destroy their opponents. Now on the internet, same thing--block out any results that identify real media stories, book written, appearances, by sheer quantity of fake stories with the same blazing headline, but no story to explain it, or no story at all, or just a blog by someone you never heard of, stating an opinion that can't be called libel.... The truth is that lying is an accusation made by Republicans AFTER they were caught revealing her identity---in retribution for her husband telling the world of his trip to Niger, the only source for some of the uranium equipment absolutely required for Saddam to have been working on a nuclear weapons program. The administration knew of his trip (asked him to go because he had connections there and could unobtrusively get in to see the people who would know and who would tell the truth)--he reported the results to them (that it would have been impossible for such items to have gone out of the area, through the small villages on the huge trucks required for the job, without everyone who lived in the rural area knowing about it. it could not have been done. And btw, we know his info was accurate! The war, 2 trillion dollars of national debt never even put on the books by that administration, proved what Joe Wilson reported), but they were not the facts Bush and Cheney were looking for. They ignored them, and never told the U.N. or Colin Powell about the trip. So Wilson went public, trying to avert an unnecessary war. And now, a decade late, the amateur right is trying to revise history and paint Plame and Wilson as liars over a minute detail in the story--how did Wilson's name first come up as someone who could get accurate info about Iraq and nukes. Did Valerie mention her husband's experience, or was she asked about it first. Irrelevant since we know he was correct, they ignored his info and went on lying to justify invading a country who had not attacked us and was not trying to get weapons to attack us. And he went public, trying to prevent the war, she was outed--everyone thought Karl Rove did it, Scooter Libby said he did, and now it's clear Richard Armitage--a long-famous neo-con who wanted to build an American Empire--is the one who did it. An employee of Libby I believe? Very responsible for the beliefs that led to such little planning for the war--that silly "they will welcome us as their liberators" inane bs that drove projections of winning the war in 1 to 3 weeks, not needing to provide troops bullet proof vests or fortified vehicles...no plans as to what to do with Saddam's military or the Iraq national guard, the police force...so they fired everyone, and created anarchy! They fired all those who ran the refineries, power plants, water...so there was no law, no order, no services, and the U.S. had bombed the place for weeks and weeks destroying the infrastructure. That was largely Armitage from the start because he told them it was not necessary to worry about that, we'd be in and out. The opposite of what Bush 41 had warned... And now it's Valerie's fault....she put forth Joe's name and I don't understand the reasoning--likely there is none--but it's their fault. The wingnuts will tell you so in headlines that come up on any search, at least a page of worthless references to her lying, they don't identify the lie, they don't cite a source, include a video, you won't see any reference to the NY Times, Washington Post...all superseded by useless dishonest pages created just to take a place on search results that should belong to a story of merit. This was done when Forbes announced that all the stats showed Obama's presidency was better at economic gains in every area than Reagan's had been at the same point in their terms. A few weeks later that article had disappeared and a search yielded only wingnut claims of how the story was refuted (by them, not Forbes or anyone else of merit). It's the new propaganda...Actual media reports buried almost immediately by individuals with no credentials, just a web page set up themselves...a blog...a wingnut site without facts, just emotional conclusions... Now Plame and Wilson are the victims of the new tar and feathering, for daring to do what's right, thereby showing the emperor and his VP had no clothes.

Answer 5

Yes. She lied, her husband lied, they will stop at nothing to harm our country.