And don't forget Valerie Plame was not an undercover agent

[BOSSHOG]

and this Libby trial is nothing more then political meddling by an activist prosecutor. We are at war people, how can the President do his job with all these manufactured distractions? The next thing you know some liberal will claim there were no WMD and bush lied about them to get us into a war so he could masquerade as a real man. Have they no shame? And have you heard the latest, liberals want to bring back the fairness doctrine which will literally shut down sean hannity's broadcast forever.

[wakeme2008]

1. Well Bosshog

:spank:

:)

[AtomicKitten]

2. she was a desk jockey - so sayeth

[BOSSHOG]

5. And I just have to wonder out loud

If she was just a desk jockey as the flag waving, god loving patriots so vociferously insisted for years, WHY WAS IT SO IMPORTANT TO EXPOSE HER IDENTITY? I've yet to get a bush backer to answer that question but that question does a fine job of ending a conversation.

[AtomicKitten]

7. I fully expect Fitz will answer your question.

Why indeed.

[AndyA]

3. Yep, Plame was just a dumb secretary doing nothing important fighting the

war on terra and trying to prevent thermonukular war...

That is all.

:sarcasm:

[underpants]

4. I love this talking point-is there nothing that a desk jockey can do?

They play no role in national security or in CIA matters or anything else? Where does that leave Dick Cheney then? Have you noticed that this is repeated by people who themselves are nothing but desk jockeys?

If only any part of their story was true..if only

[emulatorloo]

6. I for one feel this "Cheney-Annotated NYT editorial" is fabricated!!!!

Obviously the Godlless Lieberal Prosecuter Saddam "Obamba" Fitzgerald made this up with his Communistic Macintosh, Photoshop and a copy of Vice President Cheney's beloved Christmas Card to the Republican Faithful.

Our Patriotic Vice President would never allow his strong virile hands to come in contact with the pustulant pages of the New York Times.

[Rebellious Republican]

8. What would a retired Navy CPO know about such intricate matters?

I suppose you think that because you were in the worlds largest canoe club and probably carried a secret clearance or above, that you think you know something about classified information. I suppose you would tell us that after spending a mere 24 years or more participating in Naval Operations around the globe, that you may know a little something about covert operations. I can just here you now, saying you would love to tell us about some of the missions that you were involved in, but can not because upon your retirement debriefing you were told you could go to jail if you did. I suppose you would say just how bored to tears you were setting through those all to regular NIS training sessions and lectures about the ramifications of spying for foreign intelligence operatives. Yep and you could tell us about John A. Walker and the ripples that it set in motion and just how the need to know was rammed home to all sailors. Yep, what would a retired Navy CPO know about just how people in certain positions could easily forget about protocol and be so caviler with classified information.

My guess is a HELL OF LOT!

Even the lowest seaman knew what they were not allowed to talk about, let alone an adviser to the Vice President.

Its always good to see your posts BOSSHOG, you have always had a flair for the obvious, fair winds and following seas shipmate.

:toast:

[BOSSHOG]

12. Thanks Shipmate

Actually many of those briefings had slide presentations and it was so easy to scare the crap out of the young Seamen and Airmen in the audience. With the right elan and flair, we could have them wanting to poke their eyes out rather then look at a secret document. Yes, many a Seaman worked for me over the years and everyone of them (almost) had more integrity then anyone in the bush administration.

I've discovered over the years that the obvious sometimes is so obvious that we never see it; and often the obvious is forgotten just by the passage of time. I don't like for that to happen; therefore I post.

[librechik]

9. were you watching Washington Journal this morning? All the callers said that!

they said "only war supporters for the first 40 minutes" and all the calls were just like your post! Then, of course, they forgot to have the second forty minutes for callers against the war. CSpan is completely fair, tho. so there must have been some reason... oh yeah, a preview of Our Dear president's new speech tonight! Sorry Democrats, better luck next time!

[AtomicKitten]

10. I read somewhere a while back

that Washington Journal does indeed cater to the "right" statistically; two Rs for ever D as guests.

That was surprising for CSPAN.

[caledesi]

11. The point is the Libby was not accused of the Plame outing...

whether she was covert at the time is not the issue. The fact that Libbey LIED under oath is the issue. Cheney is screwed.