What are the concise talking points to debunk lies re: Joe Wilson?

[buycitgo]

They're everywhere, as you know, and follow the pattern of usual RW propaganda: call somebody a name--liar, for instance

provide debatable talking points with a smidgeon of substance, MAYBE

make it impossible to refute said talking points without going into the amount of detail not allowed in forums like TV or radio

spread these lies over and over and over, til people think there must be some substance to them

the obvious first rejoinder to this must ALWAYS be the fact that the WH pulled back on the sixteen words the VERY NEXT DAY.

you know they'd have defended with all their "souls" had they not KNOWN that they'd been caught redhanded

have you EVER seen them backtrack so quickly on anything?

I want to call a radio show (Bruce duMont--beyond the beltway--big audience) that I know will be putting these things out, so it would be great to have something succinct with which to challenge them

thx

concentrate on concise; this is for persuading the uninformed who swallow the corporate media line about Wilson

[MikeG]

1. Read Josh Marshall if you haven't yet.

The past two weeks has plenty of material.

www.talkingpointsmemo.com

[buycitgo]

2. I have

concise it isn't

[MikeG]

4. Here's a couple.

1. Valerie Plame was not in the meeting where Wilson was designated to go to Africa.

2. Susan Schmidt got it wrong - Iran was trying to buy uranium - not Iraq.

3. If Wilson was lying, why did they try to out his wife?

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

3. Here's one:

How does ANY of it justify outing a NOC, in contravention of the law?

They will come back and say that Wilson outed her himself. That is their new talking point. Stick to the timeline. The outing was by Robert Novak, who was fed the information from within the administration.

They are flailing on this one and straining credulity. We should not let up on out logical arguments.

[buycitgo]

5. I've read his letter to the Senate

I've read parts of the Plame thread: I think this has to do more with stopping Plame's investigation into Cheney perfidy; makes more sense

what I'd like are, basically, some, uh, talking points

that's where the fascist almost always win: short, sweet, repeatable Bull that sticks in peoples' minds

all one has to do is think back to the Gore smears

they're doing it right now

Conason talked about the swift boat thing this week, saying it's JUST what happened to WJC during THOP, but it took years to suss it out. he says it's very interesting to see it unfolding in REALtime now

they're using the same tactics on Wilson

[fearnobush]

6. Nothing they say can justify waht they did to National Security by

Outing his wifes name, a CIA NOC operative. This is a crime they are trying to weasle out of. They would not be added bogus remarks to the so called Sen Intel report if they knew they were not guilty.

Joe's response

First conclusion: "The plan to send the former ambassador to Niger was suggested by the former ambassador's wife, a CIA employee."

That is not true. The conclusion is apparently based on one anodyne quote from a memo Valerie Plame, my wife, sent to her superiors that says, "My husband has good relations with the PM and the former Minister of Mines (not to mention lots of French contacts), both of whom could possibly shed light on this sort of activity." There is no suggestion or recommendation in that statement that I be sent on the trip. Indeed it is little more than a recitation of my contacts and bona fides. The conclusion is reinforced by comments in the body of the report that a CPD reports officer stated that "the former ambassador's wife 'offered up his name'" (page 39) and a State Department intelligence and research officer stated that the "meeting was 'apparently convened by wife who had the idea to dispatch him to use his contacts to sort out the Iraq-Niger uranium issue."

In fact, Valerie was not in the meeting at which the subject of my trip was raised. Neither was the CPD reports officer. After having escorted me into the room, she departed the meeting to avoid even the appearance of conflict of interest. It was at that meeting where the question of my traveling to Niger was broached with me for the first time and came only after a thorough discussion of what the participants did and did not know about the subject. My bona fides justifying the invitation to the meeting were the trip I had previously taken to Niger to look at other uranium-related questions as well as 20 years living and working in Africa, and personal contacts throughout the Niger government. Neither the CPD reports officer nor the State analyst were in the chain of command to know who, or how, the decision was made. The interpretations attributed to them are not the full story. In fact, it is my understanding that the reports officer has a different conclusion about Valerie's role than the one offered in the "additional comments." I urge the committee to reinterview the officer and publicly publish his statement.

It is unfortunate that the report failed to include the CIA's position on this matter. If the staff had done so it would undoubtedly have been given the same evidence as provided to Newsday reporters Tim Phelps and Knut Royce in July 2003. They reported on July 22 that:

"A senior intelligence officer confirmed that Plame was a Directorate of Operations undercover officer who worked 'alongside' the operations officers who asked her husband to travel to Niger. But he said she did not recommend her husband to undertake the Niger assignment. 'They were aware of who she was married to, which is not surprising,' he said. 'There are people elsewhere in government who are trying to make her look like she was the one who was cooking this up, for some reason,' he said. 'I can't figure out what it could be.' 'We paid his airfare. But to go to Niger is not exactly a benefit. Most people you'd have to pay big bucks to go there,' the senior intelligence official said. Wilson said he was reimbursed only for expenses." (Newsday article "Columnist Blows CIA Agent's Cover," dated July 22, 2003).


MORE... Salon day pass asks to watch a 15 to 20 second ad before entering

<http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2004/07/16/wilson_letter/>

[buycitgo]

7. thanks. I've read that, saved it to HD

you should probably edit that to four paragraphs,vis a vis DU fair use policy

this is good enough for now:

First conclusion: "The plan to send the former ambassador to Niger was suggested by the former ambassador's wife, a CIA employee."

That is not true. The conclusion is apparently based on one anodyne quote from a memo Valerie Plame, my wife, sent to her superiors that says, "My husband has good relations with the PM and the former Minister of Mines (not to mention lots of French contacts), both of whom could possibly shed light on this sort of activity." There is no suggestion or recommendation in that statement that I be sent on the trip. Indeed it is little more than a recitation of my contacts and bona fides. The conclusion is reinforced by comments in the body of the report that a CPD reports officer stated that "the former ambassador's wife 'offered up his name'" (page 39) and a State Department intelligence and research officer stated that the "meeting was 'apparently convened by wife who had the idea to dispatch him to use his contacts to sort out the Iraq-Niger uranium issue."

In fact, Valerie was not in the meeting at which the subject of my trip was raised. Neither was the CPD reports officer. After having escorted me into the room, she departed the meeting to avoid even the appearance of conflict of interest. It was at that meeting where the question of my traveling to Niger was broached with me for the first time and came only after a thorough discussion of what the participants did and did not know about the subject. My bona fides justifying the invitation to the meeting were the trip I had previously taken to Niger to look at other uranium-related questions as well as 20 years living and working in Africa, and personal contacts throughout the Niger government. Neither the CPD reports officer nor the State analyst were in the chain of command to know who, or how, the decision was made. The interpretations attributed to them are not the full story. In fact, it is my understanding that the reports officer has a different conclusion about Valerie's role than the one offered in the "additional comments." I urge the committee to reinterview the officer and publicly publish his statement.

It is unfortunate that the report failed to include the CIA's position on this matter. If the staff had done so it would undoubtedly have been given the same evidence as provided to Newsday reporters Tim Phelps and Knut Royce in July 2003. They reported on July 22 that:

and SEE what I mean about the necessity of responding at LENGTH to the simply stated lie in the first sentence?

more than three paragraphs to refute the BS they spread, with the only intent being muddying the waters

obviously, all this other garbage is peripheral to the outing of Plame, and all they're seeking to do is defame Wilson and his wife

I CANT WAIT for the civil suit

who will they get to subpoena?

will the EXCOTUS break their backs overturning thier unanimous ruling re: Paula Jones/Clinton suit?

[sandnsea]

8. Exactly

Blowing the cover of a CIA operative is the issue and not anything else.

[buycitgo]

11. what they're doing, so far, successfully, is obscuring the issue

and the media are playing along, just like the handmaidens they are

ALL the stories lead with something like: Wilson's credibility questioned, or Iraq WAS looking for yellowcake.

that's what we're up against, as always

[Immad2]

9. How about Joe Wilson's response?

Joe Wilson-His Response

an excerpt:

The Honorable Jay Rockefeller
Vice Chairman, Senate Select Committee on Intelligence


Dear Senator Roberts and Senator Rockefeller,

I read with great surprise and consternation the Niger portion of Senators Roberts, Bond and Hatch “additional comments to the Senate Select Intelligence Committee’s Report on the U.S. Intelligence Community’s Prewar Assessment on Iraq. I am taking this opportunity to clarify some of the issues raised in these comments.

First conclusion: “The plan to send the former ambassador to Niger was suggested by the former ambassador’s wife, a CIA employee.”

That is not true.

[merh]

10. Simply talking point.

Why is everyone attacking Joe Wilson? He did not violate the law by leaking the fact that his wife was a clandestine intelligence officer. Whoever leaked the info to the press is the criminal and now they are trying to shift the blame from themselves to Wilson.

Smoke and mirrors.

[buycitgo]

12. what they're doing there is trying to take the WH off the hook

if she'd already been outed by ANYbody, which they've already said has been done (it was already "common knowledge" that she was a CIA op), then there is ZERO WH culpability, since she's already been outed

they seem to have abandoned that tack, as it's not true, I guess, otherwise they'd still be clinging to that thin thin reed

[merh]

14. yeah, do you think they could get anyone to come forward and say that

they knew she was an operative before the story was leaked to Novak? Nope, won't happen.

Disinformation (discredit and spread misinformation) that's their trick, only problem is, it's like the rabbit in the hat trick, its been performed too many times and now everyone knows how it works.

[HysteryDiagnosis]

13. Smoke and mirrors.

And I wonder where the smoke is coming from.... herbs perhaps.. they certainly could pass for being under the influence the way they try to turn everything inside out.

[Green Mountain Dem]

15. Concise.....

1) 9-11 Comission..dominated by pubs...LIED!!

2) Butler Report...caved to "10...LIED!!

Concise enough??

[buycitgo]

16. you mean the senate intel commission?

911 isn't out yet, though that, too, will clearly be a whitewash on the order of the Warren Commission, which is what I've been calling it for awhile

one silly pug said this the other day, very stupidly, I think: the credibility of the 911 will be expressed by the reaction of the families who were victimized

well, we all know what they think about that now.

can't WAIT for Kristen Breitweiser to start making the scene

problem is, will this story overshadow the dem convention, I wonder?

will the dems be accused of playing politics for even bringing it up at the convention?

are they screwed once again by the timing of its release?

should this be a separate thread, btw?

[medeak]

17. civil suit

can't wait.....he's going to smoke their ass.

[buycitgo]

18. ayuppp. I mentioned that above

one of the other threads linked the John Dean article that says a civil suit SHOULD be one of the main things the Wilsons should pursue.

it's a separate link, and also part of his book, Worse than Watergate, that many people here is the best among all the spate of ABB books out there

not having read it, I can say that Blind Ambition, his account of his role in Watergate is as good a retelling of that story as I've read, and I've read a whole lot of books on that, including the Dean-was-part-of-the-coup stuff

[BeFree]

19. She suggested Joe do the study?

Looks like she outsmarted them. She laid out the trap and boosh walked right into it.

But really.. who cares who suggested who? The fact is, your-anium from Niger never happened and boosh knew. If he didn't, he shouldn't have said it.

Sounds like the administration is going to plan 'B'. Plan 'A' got them in deep shit.

Hope the trial lawyers boosh has hired aren't the one's who came up with this lame excuse, 'cause if they did, he's wasting his money.

Looks like boosh is gonna end up in front of the Supreme Court again. The first time they selected him, this time the Court may de-select him.

[buycitgo]

20. she didn't come right out and suggest him

they dance around the issue, it's true, but, according to Wilson, his wife NEVER said that he'd be the man for the job.

what she DID do is say that he had good relations with certain key players, and that he was knowledgeable, having served many years in that part of Africa

that's MORE than enough for the right wing reactionary propaganda mill, as you're all aware, I'm sure

that AHole on Washington Journal was proof positive of that. He lied and lied and lied, and, AFAIK, never got called on it once

he even said Bush got his WINGS back, and started flying again, after stopping to go to Alabama!

[buycitgo]

21. here's the Dean/civil suit link

http://www.yuricareport.com/Impeachment/WhytheWilsonsShouldSue.html

I thought I had seen political dirty tricks as foul as they could get, but I was wrong. In blowing the cover of CIA agent Valerie Plame to take political revenge on her husband, Ambassador Joseph Wilson, for telling the truth, Bush's people have out-Nixoned Nixon's people. And my former colleagues were not amateurs by any means.

For example, special counsel Chuck Colson, once considered the best hatchet man of modern presidential politics, went to prison for leaking false information to discredit Daniel Ellsberg's lawyer. Ellsberg was being prosecuted by Nixon's Justice Department for disclosing the so-called Pentagon Papers (the classified study of the origins of the Vietnam War). But Colson at his worst could barely qualify to play on Bush's team. The same with assistant to the president John Ehrlichman, a jaw-jutting fellow who left them "twisting in the wind," and went to jail denying he'd done anything wrong in ordering a break-in at Ellsberg's psychiatrist's office, where the burglars went and looked for, but did not find, real information to discredit Ellsberg.

But neither Colson nor Ehrlichman nor anyone else I knew while working at the Nixon White House had the necessary viciousness, or depravity, to attack the wife of a perceived enemy by employing potentially life-threatening tactics.

So let me share a bit of history with Ambassador Wilson and his wife. And, well aware that gratuitous advice is rightfully suspect, let me also offer them a suggestion -- drawn from some pages of Watergate history that till now I've only had occasion to discuss privately. Long before Congress became involved and a special prosecutor was appointed, Joe Califano, then general counsel to the Democratic National Committee and later a Cabinet officer, persuaded his Democratic colleagues to file a civil suit against the Nixon reelection committee. And that maneuver almost broke the Watergate coverup wide open. In seeking justice from the closed ranks of the Bush White House, Wilson and Plame should follow a similar strategy.

[UTUSN]

22. 1) Steno Sue Cheeneed Herself, & 2) Wolf BLITZOWITZ Cheeneed Himself n/t

[buycitgo]

23. I know about steno sue, and I taped the Leslie/Wilson interview,

but only watched snips of it

can you clue me in on what to look for in the Wilson interview

and Sue couldn't/WOULDN't get the country right, even

I wonder if that's the same thing that happened to the Sen Intel Com: did they make the same mistake re: Iran/Iraq?

[oasis]

24. kick