From the Rush Limbaugh Show: RUSH: Here is
the information that Wilson himself put out on his wife. The 2003 Iraq Forum, June 14th, 2003, Washington, DC, and
it lists -- there's three pages of speakers here, and they're from all over the world, and on the last page, you
get to Joe Wilson, under the section, "Evening public lecture, a state-of-the-movement address," and it lists the keynote
speaker, Ray McGovern, a CIA analyst, and ambassador Joseph Wilson. Now, listen to the bio that accompanies
Wilson's picture on the website promoting the 2003 Iraqi forum. Again, this is one full month before Novak's column came out
identifying her. "Joseph C. Wilson IV blah," blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah,
blah, blah, blah. "Ambassador Wilson graduated from the University of California at Santa Barbara in '72. He's been
decorated as a commander in the Order of the Equatorial Star by the government of Gabon and as an admiral in the El Paso Navy
by the El Paso County commissioners. He is married to former Valerie Plame and has four children." So he outs his
Now, I'm telling you that the concern
over all this is, "Well, if she's running around using the name Valerie Plame, and is known as an agent at the CIA, anybody
who knows her from her CIA work will then know that she's Joe Wilson's wife." So he puts her name out there. He also allows
Vanity Fair to photograph them on the cover of the magazine. So the point here is that Patrick Fitzgerald will not have an
easy time if he goes for revelation of her identity. She will have to take the stand as will Wilson, and all their public
appearances and various social contacts will become relevant. So if they're sill pursuing this notion that the real crime
here -- and the reason he asked this, and speculated, because they're sending FBI agents into the neighborhood and asking
neighbors if they knew that she worked at the CIA. So I find this amazing. I can't believe they're still working on that aspect
of this, and it could be for any reason whatsoever.
Bush Administration Found Guilty By The Media
Lee P. Butler
In one over-hyped news conference, the media proved once-and-for-all that the whole Valerie Plame-Wilson covert-status
name release never has been about finding out whether our national security was ever breached or proving that crimes had been
committed by exposing the identity of a covert CIA operative.
This whole maudlin episode has been about nothing more than attacking the Bush administration because liberals and their
media elitist counterparts who monopolize the control of information to the American public have always been and always will
be against the War on Terror, specifically Iraq.
At some point… but of course, with media elitists no point will ever be reached… somebody has to decide whether
this whole Machiavellian play has been about breaching national security or perjury and obstruction of justice. During the
course of this investigation, liberals have railed against Conservative commentators and media spin doctors have lambasted
the administration about the issue of breaching national security, yet Lewis Libby has been proven innocent of that charge.
Instead of the media headlines that boast, ‘Cheney Aide Indicted’, they should be reading, ‘Libby Exonerated
in CIA Leak Investigation’.
Notice how suddenly Lewis ‘Scooter’ Libby has become a ‘Cheney Aide’ or the ‘Vice President’s
Chief of Staff’? That’s media elitist mind-meld subterfuge used so that Americans will attach the negative connotations
of an indictment, not with the actual defendant, but with the person they want people to associate it with.
Remember that this is about destroying the Bush administration, not over national security concerns.
Even during his news conference, Prosecutor Fitzgerald repeatedly pointed out that Valerie Plame-Wilson’s status
at the CIA was ‘classified’ not ‘covert’. If ‘leaking’ classified information was a crime
in Washington D.C., that place would be a ghost town and certain previous Secretary of State officials would be the biggest
criminals this country has ever seen!
Besides, in spite of Prosecutor Fitzgerald’s grandiose rhetoric about standing for America’s integrity, his
whole investigation was little more than a fishing expedition. Even the Washington Post admitted that Fitzgerald, ‘was
named as a special prosecutor to investigate whether the identification of Plame, who was an undercover CIA officer, was a
violation of federal law’. They also added that, ‘the core of the case was whether any government official violated
the 1982 Intelligence Identities Protection Act, which prohibits a government official from knowingly disclosing the identity
of a covert officer’.
As Fitzgerald repeatedly admitted, Plame-Wilson’s status was ‘classified’ not ‘covert’, therefore
it shouldn’t have taken but a few weeks to glean that information and once verified, ended the investigation without
all the hullabaloo that was generated in the interim, including garnering indictments for actions that would never have taken
But that wasn’t what the investigation was all about to begin with. This was a seek-and-destroy mission on the Bush
President Bush said, "In our system, each individual is presumed innocent and entitled to due process and a fair trial."
That is accurate concerning the legal system, but in no way identifies with the modus operandi of media elitists, where a
person is proven guilty because they say that person is guilty and an indictment is equivalent to locking the cell door and
throwing away the key.
Fitzgerald didn’t seem too worried about that when he stated emphatically, "Mr. Libby’s story that he was at
the tail end of a chain of phone calls, passing on from one reporter what he heard from another, was not true. It was false."
Fitzgerald continued, "And he lied about it afterward, under oath, repeatedly."
Sounds an awful lot like a conviction without a court trial. If not, shouldn’t he have been saying, ‘we believe…this
is what happed or that took place’?
Still not sure that this case had nothing to do with a ‘criminal leak’ and everything to do with attacking
the administration over the War on Terror? Check out this comment from a prominent Democrat. "Today’s indictments represent
the beginning, but not the end," John Conyers (D-Mich) railed as he attacked the administration, "of the process of finally
holding the Bush administration accountable for its conduct in foisting a pre-emptive war on this country."
The Democrats weren't through. "This case is bigger than the leak of highly-classified information. It is about how the
Bush White House manufactured and manipulated intelligence in order to bolster its case for the war in Iraq and to discredit
anyone who dared to challenge the president," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.
If you think that is bad, it gets even worse. Sen. Chris Dodd, (D-Conn) openly attacked the Vice President, then admitted
what many of us have known for a while. "Now, there's no suggestion the vice president is guilty of any crime here whatsoever.
But if our standard is just criminality, then we're never going to get to the bottom of this," Dodd said.
'If our standard is just criminality'!? In other words, it doesn't matter how innocent you are, if you are a Republican,
they are going to try and destroy you, because you are just guilty, period. In the liberal utopia, why should you actually
have to commit a crime to prove guilt?
Later in the press conference, Fitzgerald commented, "When a Vice President’s chief of staff is charged with perjury
and obstruction of justice, it does show the world that this is a country that takes its law seriously; that all citizens
are bound by the law." Shouldn't he have said, ‘When a Republican Vice President’s…’, because when
a Democrat President blatantly committed perjury and /or obstruction of justice, that prosecutor didn’t seem to think
it was all that important to take this country’s laws seriously or that ‘all citizens are bound by the law’.
Fitzgerald also made a statement that sounded eerily reminiscent of Dodd's and most Democrat's sentiments as he defended
his investigation by saying, "Investigators do not set out to investigate the statute, they set out to gather the facts."
So by his own admission when he stated, "We have not made any allegation that Mr. Libby knowingly or intentionally outed
a covert agent. We have not charged that. And so I am not making that assertion," he is confirming the fact that Libby was
innocent of outing a CIA agent, which should have negated the investigation itself.
The media and their liberal buddies don't care about that fact... why Prosecutor Fitzgerald proved Joe Wilson was right
about the War on Terror because an indictment was handed down to Libby for perjury and obstruction of justice... according
to the media, the White House is GUILTY, GUILTY, GUILTY!