Who Outed Valerie Plame?
That’s the question that superprosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald didn’t answer for us. Thankfully, Maj. Gen. Paul Vallely has an answer. In an interview with WorldNetDaily, Vallely says that it was (drumroll please) Joe Wilson that outed Valerie Plame. Here’s part of the WND interview:
Vallely says, according to his recollection, Wilson mentioned his wife’s job in the spring of 2002, more than a year before Robert Novak’s July 14, 2003, column identified her, citing senior administration officials, as “an Agency operative on weapons of mass destruction.” “He was rather open about his wife working at the CIA,” said Vallely, who retired in 1991 as the Army’s deputy commanding general in the Pacific. Vallely made his claim in an interview Thursday night on the ABC radio network’s John Batchelor show.
—–
Vallely said, citing CIA colleagues, that in addition to his conversations with Wilson, the ambassador was proud to introduce Plame at cocktail parties and other social events around Washington as his CIA wife. “That was pretty common knowledge,” he said. “She’s been out there on the Washington scene many years.” If Plame were a covert agent at the time, Vallely said, “he would not have paraded her around as he did. This whole thing has become the biggest non-story I know,” he concluded, “and all created by Joe Wilson.”
In addition to calling Amb. Wilson’s credibility into question, again, it calls into question Patrick Fitzgerald’s credibility as an investigator. Remember his press conference quote:
“Valerie Wilson was a CIA officer. In July 2003, the fact that Valerie Wilson was a CIA officer was classified. Not only was it classified, but it was not widely known outside the intelligence community. Valerie Wilson’s friends, neighbors, college classmates had no idea she had another life.
Before the Fitzmas Day Letdown, Chuck Schumer went out of his way to tell us that Fitzgerald was beyond reproach, that he was an investigator’s investigator. I immediately questioned Fitzgerald’s investigatorial bona fides. Now Gen. Vallely gives us something substantial to base our beliefs on.
How can we trust Fitzgerald’s credentials when he doesn’t call Wilson or Plame to testify in front of the Grand Jury. Or why he didn’t call Andrea Mitchell? After all, Mitchell was asked on CNBC’s “Capitol Report,” Oct. 3, 2003, how widely it was known in Washington that Wilson’s wife worked for the CIA.
“It was widely known among those of us who cover the intelligence community and who were actively engaged in trying to track down who among the foreign service community was the envoy to Niger,” she said.
An investigator that can get up in front of the nation and tell us that “it was not widely known outside the intelligence community” only to have Andrea Mitchell contradict him isn’t a “prosecutor’s prosecutor” or beyond reproach. He’s ordinary.
Though the Agenda Media have tied their fate to Amb. Wilson, he’s still the same political hack with a backwards view of the world. You’d think they would’ve learned after Mary Mapes and Bill Burkett, and after ‘Mother’ Sheehan and others. They haven’t and they’re embarassing themselves right out of business.
Cross-posted at Let Freedom Ring
November 9th, 2005 at 10:04 am
Sorry, but Vallely has been busted as a lying Rve stooge.
You guys are dumber than tent spikes.
http://www.theleftcoaster.com/archives/005975.php
http://talkleft.com/new_archives/013048.html
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2005/11/08.html#a5767
http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2005_11_06_digbysblog_archive.html#113147542831962924
http://noquarter.typepad.com/my_weblog/2005/11/trying_to_smear.html
November 9th, 2005 at 10:19 am
In the Looney Left’s mind, everyone who isn’t left of Ted Kennedy is a mindless Rove pawn. Another sad case of an otherwise healthy person struck down in the prime of life by B.D.S.
November 9th, 2005 at 10:48 am
I notice you’re not even discussing yesterday’s sweep of the conservative agenda.
November 9th, 2005 at 11:23 am
Firegirl, I generally stay on topic with my comments. I’m sure you’ll find that we won’t hold back on analysis of the Proposition defeats.
November 9th, 2005 at 5:01 pm
This may be true, or may not be as Hesiod says above, but isn’t this besides the point? e.g. doesn’t let Libby off the legal hook, does it, nor excuse his leak.
zombieH of ( zombieH’s Enchanted World
November 9th, 2005 at 6:41 pm
Zombie, This isn’t intended to say that Libby’s innocent but it does say that the Wilsons haven’t been honest about the basic facts about Valerie Wilson. It says that Patrick Fitzgerald’s ‘investigation’ wasn’t the tight, comprehensive investigation that could’ve and should’ve been done. Finally, it says that the Agenda Media’s storyline on this continues to not be based on facts but on what they wish it were about.