Difference between revisions of "Talk:Valerie Plame"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(I don't get it) |
|||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
What did President Bush hope to gain by having (letting?) Fitzgerald keep the "investigation" going for 3 years, when their was no crime to investigate and the leak source had already come forward? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 09:36, 2 June 2008 (EDT) | What did President Bush hope to gain by having (letting?) Fitzgerald keep the "investigation" going for 3 years, when their was no crime to investigate and the leak source had already come forward? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 09:36, 2 June 2008 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | :In your second point, are you suggesting that Plame was not a covert agent and therefore not covered by the Identities Act? --[[User:Jareddr|Jareddr]] 09:45, 2 June 2008 (EDT) | ||
Revision as of 13:45, June 2, 2008
The whole thing is confusing, and the McClellan book doesn't help.
I don't understand why Fitzgerald would "investigate" the source of a leak if:
- He knew it was Armitage before he launched his investigation
- Plame was not covered by the Identities Act
What did President Bush hope to gain by having (letting?) Fitzgerald keep the "investigation" going for 3 years, when their was no crime to investigate and the leak source had already come forward? --Ed Poor Talk 09:36, 2 June 2008 (EDT)
- In your second point, are you suggesting that Plame was not a covert agent and therefore not covered by the Identities Act? --Jareddr 09:45, 2 June 2008 (EDT)