A question for the political Right

[Lanya]

I am content with the verdict.

I repeat:

'Further, Fitzgerald stated that Plame's identity had been protected by the CIA "not just for the officer, but for the nation's security." And in their recently published book, Hubris, Corn and Newsweek investigative correspondent Michael Isikoff reported that, at the time of the leak, Plame was the chief of operations for the CIA's Joint Task Force on Iraq, which "mount[ed] espionage operations to gather information on the WMD programs Iraq might have."'
http://mediamatters.org/items/200703060008

CIA Director Hayden: ‘Wilson Was Covert’

During House hearings today, Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD) announced that CIA Director Gen. Michael Hayden recently told Reps. Henry Waxman (D-CA) and Silvestre Reyes (D-TX) that there was no doubt Victoria Plame Wilson was covert. Cummings — relaying what Waxman had told him — said that Gen. Hayden expressed clearly and directly, “Ms. Wilson was covert.”

Cummings also asked Wilson to respond to the specific claim, made by Victoria Toensing and others, that Plame had lost her covert status because she “had not been stationed abroad within five years.” Cummings asked, “During the past five years, Ms. Plame, from today, did you conduct secret missions overseas?” She answered, “Yes I did, congressman.”
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/16/hayden-cia-plame-covert/

I'm getting my highlighters  out next.....

[sirs]

And still not 1 reference by Fitzgerald that she was covert, and still not 1 indictment for "outing a covert agent", especially now that we know her "outing" came from Armitage....Case now officially closed

But Lanya's just fine with the results           

[_JS]

It is very rare for these cases to end up with anything other than actions taken against crimes such as perjury, witness tampering, obstruction of justice, lying to Congress, etc. That is the way most of these like Iran/Contra, the Lewinsky Affair, and many other special investigations into complex government affairs end.

To claim that somehow vindicates all wrongdoing is intellectually dishonest Sirs.

[sirs]

Intellectually dishonest?  That'd be trying to lay claim to widespread outing of an undercover covert agent by the Bush administration, when the concluded investigation implies otherwise, a small reference to the fact that someone has a desk job at the CIA, by a State Dept official. 

I'm not sure where you were trying to go with the slap at me Js, but suffice to say, you're all over the ballpark on that one.  I'd advocate a more practice what you preach approach, on your part