The Conservative Cat

Thanks for the trackback and the Link! MEOW!!

Excuse me, that doesn't even make sense, you're linking two things that can't be linked that way, it would be illegal and very wrong for the JD to even offer such a deal.

Also, I myself am in favor of the minority party using all the tactics it can to bring the focus on to the important matter.

The Executive Branch Deceived the Legislative Branch, and if they did so deliberately (as it certainly appears to most observers who haven't chosen a side) then all those responsible need to be removed from office post-haste, or else our great nation is done.

AB, we're all for it. Please, encourage the "deceived legislative branch" to continue the noble fight. If my state had a democratic senator, I'd be on the phone to him/her today.

These tactics will definitely bring focus on the important matter.

Having read a few books on CIA history, it seems to me CIA analysts who don't agree with whatever the current administration is, always complain that they are being pressured. But even when Casey was the CIA Director, there was never any coercion or faking of evidence going on. People like to copmlain though, that's for sure.

America Betrayed, too bad the Senate Intelligence Committee, who is half Democrat, does not agree with you.

The only ones who agree are Dean, Kennedy, Boxer, Pelosi and Durbin. Not very good company to have.

Aw c'mon! Baby rattlers would be so much easier. That way, when the Democrats are really mad, they could vigorously shake them at those meanie Republicans.

The Senate is inoperative until these Democrats are voted out of office. They are liars, hypocrites, and theives. Their ambition is power over governance and governance over truth. There is nothing good that can come from them and time is too short to act like children in kindergarden. They have lied to their people, gone against about anything that makes any logical sense, and backed all things that are disgusting and false. It is all political and none of it has anything to do with caring about anything but party and their image.

Honestly, coming from the highest levels, Democrats suck.

====================

BREAKING NEWS ALERT

====================

We now go live to Washington DC,

Bruce Sanford,
An author of the 1982 Intelligence Identities Protection Act, has filed several federal lawsuits against Joe Wilson, Valerie Plame and Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, the lawsuits also include several democratic party minority leaders.
The court papers charge each defendant as coconspirators, the charges include, abusing Mr.Sanford, his family and the case in chief is centered on Mr.Sanfords written statutory law known as the 1982 Intelligence Identities Protection Act, this lawsuit is a first in American legal history. The aggrieved party Bruce Sanford said at a news conference today, quote

"Hey its my law, I am the author of The 1982 Intelligence Identities Protection Act, and it is being abused and misapplied, by Joe Wilson, the democrats the liberals on the left and Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald . They are going after me and my family to discredit my law, everyone knows it would be impossible to convict anyone in this case under this law. The law itself requires and defines covert agent, which it speaks of, as somebody who has been stationed abroad within the past five years. Now, its clear from Joe Wilson the Wilson's were married in 1998 and Wilson's Wife, "Valerie Plame" she had not been stationed abroad within the last five years. That means she's not a covert agent within the meaning of the statute. The statute cannot be applied to the disclosure about her. Wilson and Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald are trying to discredit my family and my law and abusing my law for the pleasure of the liberal media, its a vast left wing conspiracy"

Sanford also filed two other actions today, one against Michael Moore and one against Moveon.org for no apparent reason.

The plaintiff, Bruce Sanford is not seeking money damages however the court papers demand the defendants learn how to read. The damages sought in the plaintiff's case specifically single out Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald to return to grade school for Special remedial reading class.

THE REAL DEAL:

The 1982 Intelligence Identities Protection Act, ( I I PA )
Congress passed the law under a bit of Intelligence agency pressure, our intelligence community was apoplectic over one individual named Mr.Philip Agee during the 1970s, Mr.Agee acts defined the term “outing” of CIA covert agents stationed abroad, Mr.Agee knowingly, willfully and purposefully " outed " agents abroad intentionally to disrupt the agency's operations.

The 1982 ( I I PA ) was written in unusually specific language and requires a prosecutor to show that a person has disclosed information that identifies a “covert agent” (not an “operative”) while actually knowing that the agent has been undercover within the last five years in a foreign country and that the disclosed information would expose the agent. For a person who had no classified access to the outed agents identity, the law provides the additional hurdle of proving a pattern of exposing agents with the belief that such actions would harm the governments spying capabilities. As a practical matter, this high degree of proof of willfulness or intentionality would be almost impossible to find in any circumstances other than in a Philip Agee clone (and maybe not even him).To interpret the statute more broadly would flout the long-standing American jurisprudential tradition of narrowly construing criminal laws, especially those that encroach upon free-speech First Amendment values.

NOTE:

Legislators emphasized in crafting the 1982 ( I I PA ) to “exclude " the possibility that casual discussion, political debate, [or] the journalistic pursuit of a story on intelligence . . will be chilled.” The statute was thus not intended to target executive branch officials who make disclosures — whether carelessly, out of personal or bureaucratic animus, or in pursuit of an important foreign-policy objective — while talking about national security matters with reporters. Indeed, even if Congress wanted to criminalize a journalistic pursuit or a casual discussion, political debate ect, ect which it in fact congress and the authors emphatically “excluded " the executive branch release for policy reasons of a particular type of intelligence information,
a regulatory scheme that "included" the executive branch would have serious politcial and separation of powers problems.

ps
Bruce Sanford, Esq.
Practices law in Washington DC, as a First Amendment attorney

============================

THE LIBBY INDICTMENT IS "NOT" ABOUT THE IRAQI WAR

Press Conference Transcript
Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald

After 22 months of investigation into the compromising of CIA operative Valerie Plame, Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, came up with nothing, only handing down a five-count perjury indictment of Vice President Dick Cheney’s chief of staff, Lewis Libby
During a press conference Friday, Special Prosecutor Fitzgerald was asked directly if there was a connection between the indictment and the Iraq pre war intel during his .

Press Question:

A lot of Americans, people who are opposed to the war, critics of the administration, have looked to your investigation with hope in some ways and might see this indictment as a vindication of their argument that the administration took the country to war on false premises.
Does this indictment do that?

Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald:

This indictment is not about the war. This indictment’s not about the propriety of the war. And people who believe fervently in the war effort, people who oppose it, people who have mixed feelings about it should not look to this indictment for any resolution of how they feel or any vindication of how they feel. This is simply an indictment that says, in a national security investigation about the compromise of a CIA officer’s identity that may have taken place in the context of a very heated debate over the war, whether some person--a person, Mr. Libby--lied or not. The indictment will not seek to prove that the war was justified or unjustified. This is stripped of that debate, and this is focused on a narrow transaction. And I think anyone who’s concerned about the war and has feelings for or against shouldn’t look to this criminal process for any answers or resolution of that.

"disclaimer- liberals this post is in part satire dont get all up in your cat box about it =^..^="