Page 1 of 1
Where is the Outrage?
Posted: Wed May 28, 2014 4:56 am
by Baldy
White House outs top Afghanistan CIA officer
The White House inadvertently included the name of the top CIA official in Afghanistan on a list of participants in a military briefing with President Barack Obama that was distributed to reporters on Sunday, the Washington Post reported.
The newspaper said the official, identified as “Chief of Station” in Kabul, was named as being among those at a briefing with Obama during the president’s trip to Bagram Air Base near the Afghan capital.
The list of names was sent by email to reporters traveling with Obama on his surprise Afghanistan visit and included in a “pool report” shared with correspondents and others not on the trip.
The Post said the White House issued a revised list deleting the CIA official’s name after it recognized the mistake.
The newspaper said its White House bureau chief, Scott Wilson, who was on the trip, copied the original list from the email provided by White House press officials and included it in a report sent to a distribution list with over 6,000 recipients.
After he spotted the reference to the station chief, Wilson asked White House press officials in Afghanistan if they had intended to include that name, the Post said.
The Donks have a running shit fit when Richard Armitage inadvertently mentions to Bob Novak in an informal conversation some "covert" cunt riding a desk in Washington. Now a know nothing pimple faced hipster in the Obama Regime releases the name of the CIA Station Chief in Kabul (an actual covert agent in the field) to the press in a mass email, and nary a peep from the mouth breathers.
Shocking...
Re: Where is the Outrage?
Posted: Wed May 28, 2014 5:33 am
by andy7171
I read an article talking about how the AP didn't publish the name, but the author did get the original email and found out the guys wife and home addresses doing a simple search. Sad really how he talked about that.
Re: Where is the Outrage?
Posted: Wed May 28, 2014 6:23 am
by YoUDeeMan
Cue up dback to say Armitage is anti-gay so he deserved to be attacked in any way possible.
Re: Where is the Outrage?
Posted: Wed May 28, 2014 6:25 am
by GannonFan
Well, the station chief in Afghanistan apparently didn't have a politician for a spouse so that is one significant difference.
Re: Where is the Outrage?
Posted: Wed May 28, 2014 6:34 am
by kalm
GannonFan wrote:Well, the station chief in Afghanistan apparently didn't have a politician for a spouse so that is one significant difference.
Did Plame? I thought Wilson was a former ambassador who wrote an unfriendly op-ed piece.
Re: Where is the Outrage?
Posted: Wed May 28, 2014 6:57 am
by GannonFan
kalm wrote:GannonFan wrote:Well, the station chief in Afghanistan apparently didn't have a politician for a spouse so that is one significant difference.
Did Plame? I thought Wilson was a former ambassador who wrote an unfriendly op-ed piece.
Well then, how about "strongly politically active" then? He was and is hardly a simple diplomat and former ambassador. Heck, he's like the bankers and financial folks you constantly pillory who go back and forth between government and then private practice lobbying the government - he was a diplomat in Africa and then "retired" to advise a private capital firm on areas of Africa. Like I said, if he was a financial guy you would be all over him. But politics overwhelms that view apparently.
Re: Where is the Outrage?
Posted: Wed May 28, 2014 7:02 am
by CID1990
THIS is a phony scandal if anyone wants to know what one really looks like
so was Plame
Re: Where is the Outrage?
Posted: Wed May 28, 2014 7:06 am
by kalm
GannonFan wrote:kalm wrote:
Did Plame? I thought Wilson was a former ambassador who wrote an unfriendly op-ed piece.
Well then, how about "strongly politically active" then? He was and is hardly a simple diplomat and former ambassador. Heck, he's like the bankers and financial folks you constantly pillory who go back and forth between government and then private practice lobbying the government - he was a diplomat in Africa and then "retired" to advise a private capital firm on areas of Africa. Like I said, if he was a financial guy you would be all over him. But politics overwhelms that view apparently.
I honestly didn't follow his career much and yes, I suppose being a former ambassador opens doors in the private sector. But at least he hasn't gone back to regulate the very companies he's worked for.
Re: Where is the Outrage?
Posted: Wed May 28, 2014 7:10 am
by Ibanez
Re: Where is the Outrage?
Posted: Wed May 28, 2014 7:52 am
by Baldy
CID1990 wrote:THIS is a phony scandal if anyone wants to know what one really looks like
so was Plame
It isn't a scandal. Just the White House reiterating how totally incompetent and overwhelmed it is.
Re: Where is the Outrage?
Posted: Wed May 28, 2014 12:58 pm
by Chizzang
Baldy wrote:
It isn't a scandal. Just the White House reiterating how totally incompetent and overwhelmed it is.
This ^ is probably pretty accurate... sad and annoying but accurate
