On imbalanced Hardball panel, Toensing repeated Plame investigation falsehoods and distortions
The October 12 edition of MSNBC's Hardball with Chris Matthews featured a skewed panel to discuss special prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald's investigation into the alleged outing of covert CIA agent Valerie Plame: Sol Wisenberg (former deputy to independent counsel Kenneth Starr) and Republican attorney Victoria Toensing (who has strongly defended columnist Robert D. Novak, in whose July 14, 2003, column Plame was first publicly identified). In the course of the discussion, Toensing misleadingly claimed that Fitzgerald's investigation was limited to possible violations of one statute in particular and recycled a number of falsehoods about Plame's husband, former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV.
In 2002, Wilson was sent to Niger by the CIA to answer questions from Vice President Dick Cheney's office regarding the purported sale of Nigerois yellowcake uranium to Iraq. Wilson's investigation turned up no evidence of any sale taking place. After President Bush alluded to the apocryphal uranium transaction in his 2003 State of the Union address as justification for invading Iraq (the now-infamous "sixteen words"), Wilson detailed the findings of his trip in a July 6, 2003, New York Times op-ed. Eight days later, Novak identified Plame as "an Agency operative on weapons of mass destruction," and wrote: "Two senior administration officials told me Wilson's wife suggested sending him to Niger." The White House allegedly attempted to discredit Wilson by suggesting that Plame recommended him for the mission. The CIA has denied that Plame suggested the trip. Fitzgerald is investigating whether the leak of Plame's identity was a criminal act.
On Hardball, Toensing distorted the scope of Fitzgerald's investigation by narrowing it to a single law. Responding to host Chris Matthews's claim that Fitzgerald's case deals with the Bush administration's rationale for the Iraq war, Toesning said: "No it doesn't. Don't say that. It doesn't. It has to do with whether somebody violated the criminal law and gave a name of an undercover agent as defined by the law and whether that person knew that she was undercover." Toensing was apparently referring to a law she helped draft as chief counsel on the Senate intelligence committee, the 1982 Intelligence Identities Protection Act (IIPA), which states that it is unlawful for someone to knowingly divulge the identity of an agent whose "intelligence relationship to the United States" is being actively concealed.
But Fitzgerald was given broad authority to investigate leaks of Plame's identity. He was not restricted to investigating possible violations of the IIPA, and he is reportedly considering a number of possible charges. According to an October 12 Washington Post article: "Numerous lawyers involved in the 22-month investigation said they are bracing for Fitzgerald to bring criminal charges against administration officials. They speculated, based on his questions, that he may be focused on charges of false statements, obstruction of justice or violations of the Espionage Act involving the release of classified government information to unauthorized persons."
Toensing then repeated dubious claims about Wilson's credentials in an attempt to undermine his credibility and to frame the leak of Plame's identity as an attempt by the White House and Novak to expose a case of nepotism, rather than as an act of political retribution against Wilson for publicly refuting the administration's case for war. Toensing alleged that Wilson "doesn't have any experience in WMD [weapons of mass destruction], and he doesn't have any kind of senior experience in the country." Toensing made a similar claim in a January 12 Washington Post op-ed, in which she wrote that Wilson was "credentially challenged" for the Niger mission and was "an expert neither on nuclear weapons nor on Niger." As Media Matters for America documented at the time, Wilson had diplomatic credentials as well as past experience investigating sales of Nigerois uranium in 1999, and he specialized in Africa for the majority of his diplomatic career, having served in Niger, Togo, Burundi, and South Africa, and as ambassador to the Gabonese Republic and to the Democratic Republic of Sao Tome and Principe. In coming to the defense of Novak, both on the October 12 edition of Hardball and in her Post op-ed, Toensing failed to disclose that she and Novak are close friends.
Additionally, it is unclear how, according to Toensing's criticism, Wilson's alleged lack of experience with weapons of mass destruction would prevent him from properly investigating the sale of yellowcake uranium. Yellowcake is a commodity, not a weapon, and contains a very low concentration of uranium-235 -- the isotope that fuels nuclear reactors and weapons. It must undergo several more refining and enriching procedures before it is considered weapons-grade.
From the October 12 edition of Hardball with Chris Matthews:
MATTHEWS: Let me ask you both about the motivation of prosecutors, all right? If you're up against, whatever case it is, as complicated as this is, this leak case, and it has to do with the war and the argument for the war, somebody challenged the argument --
TOENSING: No, it doesn't. Don't say that. It doesn't. It has to do with whether somebody violated the criminal law and gave a name of an undercover agent as defined by the law and whether that person knew that she was undercover.
MATTHEWS: And what would be the motive for doing that?
TOENSING: Look, go back in time and just think about this a little bit. When Bob Novak wrote his column, it could just have easily been framed as he, Bob Novak, was exposing nepotism. But it didn't happen that way because the press didn't like President Bush and framed it all for poor Joe Wilson. If a wife gets a husband an assignment, and he doesn't have any experience in WMD, and he doesn't have any kind of senior experience in the country, Novak thought he was exposing nepotism.
I hate to comment about a persons persona or physical appearance but this character Victoria Toensing is really a BAD piece of work. I mean the way she smirks when she talks, her looking down her nose at the viewers with this aura of superiority to anyone outside of her very small elitist circle of conservative snobs. She does not help her cause one iota with her arrogance.
I did see this segment yesterday on Hardball and I noted how she (and others) are now going after Fitzgerald and trying to demonize him as the bad guy... does this remind anyone else of the way Delay and his flunkies are going after the TX prosecutor Earle.
The tough part about going after Fitzgerald is that he is a Republican. Since claims of partisanship appear to be the only neocon weapon against prosecutors/tormentors, expect the conservatives to challenge whether Fitzgerald is even a Republican. That should be fun to watch.
what brings a sarcastic smile to my face is all these "knowledgable people" that get to comment on the various subjects. The irony being that they really aren't that well informed as they are opinionated. I'd be alot happier if these shows actually had positive discussion rather than the. "No, it doesn't. Don't say that. It doesn't."-Toensing, proceded by here's my shallow opinion and no matter what else is said I will not budge, those are the facts because they are. What does that solve? What's interesting about that? All that happens is you have a bunch of shows featuring talking heads, hosted by yet more talking heads.
2nd thing. Could now be the time were some republicans are going to start distancing themselves from the adminstration for the sake of their political career? Hopefully. I think it would be tiring trying to kiss that much (...) and not actually agreeing with any of it. I've always thought that there were too many people in the republican party to agree with eachother all the time. Guess we'll all see just how buddy buddy the republicans really are, and just when the backstabbing with eachother begins.
Toensing obviously avoided the question of how this is connected to the lies for going to Iraq. Wilson chapped a few folks at the White House when he challenged their lame story of Nigerian yellowcake. Toensing didn't want to answer any question from Matthews with anything but slander directed at Wilson.
what the republican spin machine is still trying to claim is that wilson's trip to africa was some plum assignment arranged by his wife. as i understand it his expenses were paid but he did not get any salary for what was basically a one week or so trip to some dusty central african capital. this was no junket to tahiti. what we have in this situation is two loyal patriotic brave americans attempting to do their best for the american people. all the times plame was overseas, she held no diplomatic passport and i'm sure there were times when she could have been arrested for spying or even killed. wilson exposed the bush administration's claim about a reconstituted iraqi nuclear program as a fraud. for this truth, the bush thug patrol went after him and exposed his wife, ruined the spy network she took years to build, probably got some of her contacts killed, and made future informants hesitant to deal with our agents. it's wilson and plame who operated in the finest tradition of america. it's the gangsters in the white house who deserve our scorn.
what the republican spin machine is still trying to claim is that wilson's trip to africa was some plum assignment arranged by his wife.
That was the exact story that was cooked up by those within the administration in the wake of Wilson's revelations then dished out to reporters in the White House smear operation which has resulted in the present investigation. Wilson had revealed that his mission was arranged as a consequence of inquiries by Dick Cheney, and this was being proposed, by Bush's thugs, as an alternative scenario--an alternative to the truth.
in his 2003 state of the union address, bush said the following: "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa." The "16" words.
joseph wilson went to niger, on behalf of the cia, to determine if iraq had purchased yellow cake. this was the result of a request by vp cheney to the cia. cheney's office had nothing to do with selecting wilson for the mission. wilson's wife, a cia employee, suggested him to cia mgmt.because of his credentials in the area, not his expertise in nuclear weapons. the final selection was that of cia mgmt., ms. plame appears to have had no more to do with it, aside from introducing him at a cia meeting.
joseph wilson determined that iraq had not purchased yellow cake from niger. he made no determination as to whether or not they had attempted to, that wasn't his mission. though some niger officials he spoke to alluded to efforts, by what they presumed to be iraqi agents, to acquire said material, wilson made no significant attempt to ascertain the truth of the matter. again, it wasn't part of his mission, which he freely admitted.
robert novak, while definitely a slime, slandered no one, least of all wilson and his wife. unless, of course, stating facts is now considered slander. valerie plame is joseph wilson's wife, and she was a covert cia agent. these are facts, not slander.
what novak may well have done is violate a section of the espionage act, by making public, classified information, that of ms. plame's status with the cia. if a government employee leaked that data to him, they could possibly be charged under two statutes, the one referred to, as well the much earlier espionage act.
ms. toensing's looks notwithstanding, she's a good lawyer. good lawyer's throw up strawmen, in an attempt to deflect attention from their client behind the curtain.
all speculation at this point, since mr. fitzgerald has kept admirably silent while pursuing his investigation.
A few quibbles and clarifications:
- As I understand it, Wilson's task did indeed include seeking to discover if Iraq had attempted to obtain yellowcake from Niger; after all, the allegation was that Saddam Hussein had "sought" ore from Africa, not had "obtained" it. For the White House's purposes, which was to claim an on-going Iraqi nuclear weapons program, actively seeking it was enough.
- It's true that Wilson concluded that while he couldn't say for sure whether or not Iraq had wanted to obtain uranium ore from Niger, he could say that no such deal ever occurred. It's important to add that the Niger officials he spoke with said that when Iraq contacted them about doing some business, they assumed uranium ore was what was meant - but the Iraqis never said that and nothing came of it.
- It's also true that Cheney's office had nothing to do with picking Wilson. It should also be noted that contrary to right-wing mythology, Wilson never said he did.
- Since it's unclear at what point in the selection process Valerie Plame became involved, it's incorrect to assert as fact that she "proposed his name" for the trip; it's equally possible that his name was brought up to her for her opinion. But again, a point should be added: If she did propose his name, so what? He was certainly qualified.
- Whether or not Novak was guilty of slander is largely irrelevant. But while stating that Valerie Plame is Joseph Wilson's wife and she was a covert CIA agent may be facts, implying that his trip was nepotism is not and that may well have been libel (because it was written; slander is spoken).
- Finally, "good lawyers throw up strawmen." Yes, indeed they do. My complaint is less with Ms. Toensing than with how easily the media lets those of her ilk get away with it.
That persistent churning of the wheels on the Republican propaganda machine is finally being drowned out.
As Gandhi once said:
"When I despair, I remember that all through history the way of truth and love has always won. There have been tyrants, and murderers, and for a time they can seem invincible, but in the end they always fall, always."
Evidence: The claims and statements made by their agents become more and more extreme and obtuse as the results of failed policies come to light.
Essentially, I believe the following to be the case:
1) People, by nature, prefer to get along with one another
[Qualifier] Unfortunately, this can not always be the case (i.e. when another - whether it may be an individual or a country - threatens the immediate safety & security of yourself).
2) None-the-less, an effort to achieve peacefull & synergistic relations with others deserves a sustained & persistent focus.
3) When asked, [assuption] most people would support the notion that the Bush administration is more frequently at odss with, rather than in partnership with, foreign governments, groups & individuals.
4) Policies that have alienated the U.S. from the international community have a similar effect on the psyche of the nation as they would have at an individual level. (Can you imagine what your life would be like if you consistently ostracized & physically harmed your friends, family & neighbors?)
Results:
- Lowest Presidential approval ratings in an extremely long time...(the light of TRUTH begins to glow brighter)
- And eventually (hopefully), changes that will reflect this shift in sentiment. By "this shift," I mean the recognition of a deeper truth that is reflected in all human beings..."Love thy Neighbor" (for all you bible folk).
The consciousness that we have all been blessed with is something that we must treasure & cultivate. There are many distraction in the daily grind of life, but the defense mechanisms that we have built to keep us 'blinded' up are only so strong. My hope is that through a concerted effort and a growing tide of this recognition, that humanity will give birth to a revolution; not one of arms, but one of spirit. Our time on this earth is much too short and our wallets much too thin to be wasted on the trivial pursuits of fabricated wars (i.e. On drugs, terror, poverty, et. al.). These ills that affect our society will not be fixed through a show of material force. They must be addressed at a deeper level. At an undeniable level; the level of spirit. Only through educating, I mean literally educating, our consciousness.
As we come ever closer to reaching this higher level, the ills of our society will diminish correspondingly and we will then be empowered to focus that short time we have on the joy & happiness that we are all destined for.
Interesting thing about being allowed to publish "facts".
I guess outing CIA agents is okay cuz it's FACTS.
I guess lying about it is fine too. Cuz it's FACTS.
SOOO I guess publishing military plans is okay cuz it's FACTS, and worry about the legalities later.
Toensing got all her face-time on television during the Simpson trial 24/7. She's about as likable as Mann Coulter. I watched the show (Hardball) and she called Wilson an idiot twice. I'll believe her bull when I believe that Novak was just trying to "expose nepotism" between Wilson and Plame in his column. I needed Dramamine to watch the show yesterday.
Victoria showed the only idiot involved was on the Hardball stage wearing a dress....and lying to every one....
I just happened to catch her performance and noted that Hardball has become softball....as the host let the "idiot" comments slide without mentioning them.
As to her being a good lawyer....I'd take anyone but her if I needed a lawyer...I couldn't trust her as far as I could throw a deuce and a half...
Rove and Libby should have already lost their secret clearances....pending any further charges....
And Vickie's argument about no crime is stupid. It would be like a speeder claiming that there was no failure to stop.....There are multiple possibilities as far as charges that Rove and Libby face.
In order to get secret clearances, they had to sign reams of paperwork that stressed they faced federal criminal charges if they violated the "contract".
At the very least, Rove has already admitted to giving the identity of Plame away (but claims not the name). Since her identity was in classified documents, his releasing of that information would put him in direct violation of the conditions of his security clearance...and it was compounded when he apparently (according to the lawyer) did not report the disclosure to security personnel at the CIA and in the West Wing.
So far, the only "idiots" are Rove, Libby and the GOP chorus of slime artists who call the former ambassador and his wife names.
I still remember former GOP senator from Oklahoma (Nickles) claiming that "if she isn't dead, there isn't a problem".... after people were claiming that identifying her CIA affiliation had put her life in jeopardy....
As for Novak, he never has been a journalist....just a hack with an ego the size of the Milky Way.
Another note regarding the security clearance: you can't confirm or disconfirm information either, regardless of where the question comes from.
Those on Air Force One were WELL AWARE that the information regarding Valerie Plame in their memo was marked SNF (secret-no foreign -- which means that her name was not to be given out/verified/confirmed to ANYONE including friendly foreign officials).
Bob Novak admitting that Rove said 'oh you heard that too' goes to show, that at the very least, Rove broke the laws governing the security clearance.
Novak was also told, not once, but TWICE, by a CIA official to NOT discuss/disclose Valerie's name. The CIA official even verified her undercover status and called Novak back to make sure that Novak was clear about NOT releasing her name. He chose to anyways and for that (among other things) he surely is scum of the earth and deserves punishment.
I have read and re-read "What I didn't find in Africa" by Joe Wilson. He is careful to state that he was sent to Niger by the CIA which was acting in response to an inquiry by the Veep. As far as I know this is true. Question one: is there any merit to the claims by the Republican spinners that Joe Wilson said he had been sent by the Vice President?
Second question: why does nobody who appears on Hardball ever ask Chris Matthews what he thought it meant when Karl Rove called him up and said, "Joe Wilson's wife is fair game." Mathews has quit mentioning this, but he was clear as a bell about it when the brouhaha first erupted.
You decide which was the easy question.
Tell 'em Big Mitch sent ya!
The bottom line here, as I see it, is that Karl Rove finally stepped on his....er...tie. His favorite tactic has been to attack and smear anyone who threatens to tell the truth about his client, G.W.Bush. It usually works, so he's become a little too brazen about it. Well, this time, he may have actually broken the law. I don't know if he'll be indicted or convicted, but at least he's been exposed for the slimebucket that he is. We can take some small pleasure in that.
larrye-
wilson's job, per the cia and himself, was to ascertain whether or not iraq had purchased yellow cake from niger, not if they had attempted to purchase it. had they actually purchased it, this would clearly support the claim that iraq had re-established its nuclear weapons program, and represented a "clear and present danger" to the u.s, a claim made not in the state of the union address, but elsewhere. my purpose in quoting the "16" words was to distinguish the two.
again, wilson never claims to have determined whether there was any basis in fact for the assertion that iraq had attempted to purchase yellow cake. the "16" words were later repudiated, by both the british intelligence services, and the cia.
agreed, wilson never claimed that he was sent by cheney, but try telling that to the wingnuts, facts notwithstanding.
per wilson, plame and the cia, plame proposed wilson for the trip after cheney's office requested the information, and during internal cia discussions of who would be qualified to go. wilson appears to have been eminently qualified, he received only expenses for going, and seems to have done the job. plame, again according to her superiors, had no say in the actual decision of who would go, she wasn't at that level, and there is no documented evidence to suggest otherwise.
i'm not sure where you get the impression that novak implied wilson's selection for the trip was "nepotism". he merely states, factually, that wilson's wife, cia employee plame, suggested him. no where does he state, imply or infer that wilson wasn't qualified or that he somehow personally benefited from the selection and trip. this is left-wing mythology. the administration has committed enough demonstrably wrong actions, we don't need to make stuff up.
the "media", and i use the term loosely, is made up of well paid, perfumed, pseudo-liberal hacks. they are too intellectually lazy to learn the facts, and they wouldn't want to upset either their employers, or their fellow hacks, because they might want to get a job with them some day. no, they prefer to tinker with their toy cars in the hamptons, and go to lovely parties, with the same people they're supposed to be reporting on. they write and speak nonsense, with a straight face, and expect the rubes to bow down to their superior wisdom and knowledge.
We're arguing trivialities here, so this will be my last on this, but a few points:
Wilson said in his July 2003 op-ed that he was asked to check out an intelligence report that "referred to a memorandum of agreement that documented the sale of uranium yellowcake ... by Niger to Iraq in the late 1990's." You can argue from that that "wilson's job ... was to ascertain whether or not iraq had purchased yellow cake from niger, not if they had attempted to purchase it." But that very limited interpretation makes little sense. For one thing, it'd be hard to do the former without obtaining information about the latter. Second, in his column that started all this, Robert Novak said "Wilson's mission was created after an early 2002 report by the Italian intelligence service about attempted uranium purchases from Niger." (Emphasis added.) Third, Wilson was asked to check out the report; are we to think that if he had come back saying "No, they didn't buy yellowcake - they wanted to but Niger refused/the deal fell through" that he'd have been told he exceeded his mandate?
Or that confirmation of the attempt would not serve the White House propaganda machine equally well?
Also, I have to insist that it's incorrect to assert as fact that Plame "proposed" Wilson for the trip. As far as I'm aware (links to sources if I'm wrong, please), neither of them has ever said that. The issue, essentially, is who brought up his name. Did she say "How about my husband?" Or did someone say "Hey, Valerie, wasn't your husband an ambassador over there or something?" In the former case she "proposed" him; in the latter case she did not. Since it remains unclear who first mentioned his name, it can't be said with assurance that she "proposed" him (as opposed to endorsing his selection).
Finally, the charge of nepotism is not "left-wing mythology." The whole purpose of the "he got the assignment through his wife, who works at the CIA" meme is precisely to impugn his qualifications and imply nepotism. No, Novak did not specifically make that accusation but he did go out of his way to mention that "[t]wo senior administration officials told me Wilson's wife suggested sending him to Niger to investigate the Italian report." (Yes, out of his way: The entire paragraph mentioning Plame could have been excised without affecting the argument of the rest of the column one whit.) That certainly raises at least the implication of nepotism, an implication I'm hardly the only one (see Toensing, Victoria) to recognize.
Why is it that no one ever points out that whether or not Wilson was qualified, did a good job, was a hack or a saviour, is totally IRRELEVANT to Fitzgerald's investigation into whether or not someone illegally exposed a covert agent (or subsequently lied about it)?
Lets see, we’ve got Karl Rove and Scooter Libby (cutest name of war monger ever!) under investigation for outing a CIA agent because that agents’ husband communicated the Bush administrations pretext for taking the US to war in Iraq was false and flawed. The undeniable fact is there was no attempt to buy yellowcake for WMD’s as Bush said in his SOTU address. So Turdblossom and Scooter are now on the hot seat. Possible indictment for perjury and conspiracy and maybe, just maybe endangering an undercover agent in the field. The right-wing is spinning this lately that “Joe Wilson is an idiot” (Victoria Toensing said that a least four times) and she also floated that this is a case of nepotism. Nothing to look at here.
Nepotism. Idiots. Cronies. That brings use to Mike Brown and the FEMA/Katrina mess. Here we had a post of national security level importance filled with a person that clearly was unqualified. The argument could be made that millions of dollars and hundreds of lives were lost because of this appointment. But hey, Brownie did a heck of a job. Didn’t he? Do you think if Bill Clinton had made such an appointment there would have been a special ala Ken Starr investigation? Naw. Nothing to look at here.
Nepotism. Idiots. Cronies. That brings us to Harriet Miers. She is clearly without a doubt one of the great legal minds of this generation or any other. The fact that she is a Bush loyalist and his personal lawyer only make her that much more qualified. And the part about religion. I always thought that religion should not be a factor in deciding who is appointed to a lifetime post that will affect every person in the country. But I guess if it’s YOUR religion, there’s nothing to see here either.
Meanwhile Bill Frist is under investigation by the SEC for insider trading. He wouldn’t do such a thing would he? Insider trading is a victimless crime anyway, right? Nothing to look at here.
Lastly, we come to that charming warmhearted cuddly Tom Delay. Seems The Hammer has some not-very-ethical close friends. Longtime Delay loyalist and business partner Jack Abramoff has been indicted for defrauding his clients of millions of dollars. Also he and another business partner, Adam Kidan, have another indictment concerning fraud relating to the SunCruz Gambling fleet. There is also evidence that the Gambino’s gunned down the prior owner and now the three gunmen are almost ready to flip. But that’s all just a partisan witch-hunt. Right? Even the golf trip Delay took with Jack is easily explainable. And this new indictment concerning multiple cases of money laundering and conspiracy is so clearly political payback. Delay is clean as a whistle. Right? Nothing to look at here.
If we go back in history to Bush’s good friend Kenny Boy and the Enron collapse, nothing has come of that, so must be nothing there to look at either.
My head hurts. And my heart. These crooks are ruining my country. How the right-wing kooks can justify their bloody deeds in the name of their ideological destiny and in the name of God, makes me sick!
It's GE. What do you expect?
No kidding!
On a slightly different topic, these execs must be losing it with the reports Olbermann has been doing lately! He is so clearly the most accurate news on TV but how long will the neocons allow him to speak so much truth to power?
So let me get this straight: a man, Wilson, with diplomatic experience with the Niger government and Iraq isn't qualified to investigate the sale of yellowcake uranium to Iraq from Niger but Michael Brown, ex-director of Arabian horse judges, is totally qualified to head FEMA. Um. Am I missing something?
cpinva says, [i'm not sure where you get the impression that novak implied wilson's selection for the trip was "nepotism".]
(quote) TOENSING: Look, go back in time and just think about this a little bit. When Bob Novak wrote his column, it could just have easily been framed as he, Bob Novak, was exposing nepotism. But it didn't happen that way because the press didn't like President Bush and framed it all for poor Joe Wilson. If a wife gets a husband an assignment, and he doesn't have any experience in WMD, and he doesn't have any kind of senior experience in the country, Novak thought he was exposing nepotism. (end quote)
That's where I get it. A quote from Novakula's good friend, Victoria. -------------------------------------------------
Damn Roy Demeo! I stand and applaud your post!!
toensing: "When Bob Novak wrote his column, it could just have easily been framed as he, Bob Novak, was exposing nepotism."
caged: "That's where I get it. A quote from Novakula's good friend, Victoria."
i would suggest that you go back to the source, not some third-hand "interpretation".
her opinion is just that, an opinion. mr. novak's column made no such reference. she can opine to her heart's content, but that doesn't change what the column actually said.
again, the administration has committed so many egregious mistakes, we needn't follow their lead and make stuff up. doing so causes a loss of credibility.