Isn't revealing an undercover CIA officer and risking National Security an act of treason?
And everyone is alright with this?
He admitted he knows the source came from within his own administration! How many of his administration personel had access to that knowledge?
So he knows who it is
Didn't he say on National television that he would fire anyone in his office if he found out they had exposed Valerie Plame?
Just more lies from the liar!
So when did treason become such a non issue in our Country?
This is sick! And the people that support - well - you can figure it out.
2007-07-12 11:32:11 · 9 answers · asked by scottanthonydavis 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
What the heck are talking about Armitage
That old man- no life - has been - was nothing but a scapegoat for Cheney and Rove
AND YOU KNOW IT!
2007-07-12 11:42:08 · update #1
Yes, Bush admitted that Richard Armitridge was part of the administration.
Richard Armitridge was out of the State Department the day after it was found, he was the source of the leak to Novak.
Special prosecutor Fitzgerald determined that Armitridige did not violate the law when he told Novak.
The law on this is very funky, it contains very specific things that have to be proven, before the law can be used.
Forget about treason, the USSC has made charging someone with treason, almost impossible.
They couldn't even charge John Walker with treason for selling the naval communication codes to the Soviets.
2007-07-12 13:09:22 · answer #1 · answered by jeeper_peeper321 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
that is astounding that the guy who wrote the regulation overlaying the "time out of covert operatives" suggested that Ms. Plame's duties on the CIA did not fall decrease than the status of "covert". 2d, if she became a covert operative, why wasn't Armatige prosecuted. And 0.33, why did Fitzgerald proceed the examine whilst he KNEW withing the 1st month of the examine that it became Armatige that had leaked the tips to Novak and Woodward. Novak stated that he had informed Fitzgerald on the commencing up of the examine that it became Armatige that had leaked him the tips. BTW, in case you're so in touch approximately government leaks, the place is your outrage approximately each and every of the secret government operations in the process the conflict against terrorists? the place is your outrage with regards to the leaks on how we've been amassing intelligence on terrorists via taping THEIR telephone conversations? Your indignation approximately this seems slightly hollow.
2016-10-21 01:16:47 · answer #2 · answered by quintero 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Son, you aren't paying attention. They proved she wasn't covered by the law protecting agents from being "outed" because she wasn't undercover, hadn't been for some time.
Her husband himself bragged multiple times since she left that service that she had been an undercover agent.
You want someone fired because they mentioned it after she was no longer undercover? Should we prosecute her husband as well?
Of course President Bush knows it came from his administration. Do you really want everyone to realize that you have no idea how many people are in his administration? Goodness sake, son, you're embarrassing yourself! Get a grip.
I'm glad you're against treason. We need to find this guy and get him.
At the same time, you seem to be blaming the victim. That's contemptible. You want sick?
How about: ignoring the court (that said they were not guilty of "outing her" and treating our President as "Guilty until proved innocent".
That's what you are doing.
You've chosen sides in WW III whether you realize it or not.
So have we.
2007-07-12 11:42:38 · answer #3 · answered by mckenziecalhoun 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Look, Bush is a liar and has become psychotic. He is by far the most dangerous president we have ever had (and I voted for him twice - sorry!) He has taken Executive power and privilege places that were never intended. I read the people that think he is God and see them bow to him and believe his every word. Don't you people get it? Can't you read? Stop listening to Rush and Sean and start listening to your common sense.
2007-07-12 11:42:13 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, he and Vice President Cheney were the leakers, but President Bush declassified everything first!
2007-07-12 11:36:19 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
What the heck are you babbling about, everyone knows and Armitage admitted to leaking it. Where in the heck have you been for the last year or so. Pull your head out and pay attention.
2007-07-12 11:35:47 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
God told him to commit treason, just like God told him to kill innocent Muslims, so it's OK.
2007-07-12 11:36:25 · answer #7 · answered by Studbolt Slickrock Deux 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
You are way off base in your Bush-bashing complaints. It smacks of unbridled liberalism.
2007-07-12 11:37:56 · answer #8 · answered by regerugged 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/bush;_ylt=AleuDxW9.9wtJ5FFhPh2npys0NUE
why didn't he fire armitage anyway... if he was so upset about iit before?
2007-07-12 11:40:37 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋