home

Fulton Armstrong and Mr. Smith

By Jeralyn, Section Other Politics
Posted on Mon Apr 11, 2005 at 08:36:56 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

At least one right wing blog is suggesting Sens. John Kerry and Richard Lugar blew the cover of a CIA operative referred to as "Mr. Smith" at today's Senate Hearing. The person they referred to was Fulton Armstrong.

Only Fulton Armstrong has been a publicly identified intellgence officer for years. He was the CIA's national intelligence officer for Latin America. Kerry didn't out anything. Even the story about him being forced out of the CIA has been in the media. From Salon:

Put it this way, with this White House, I see an outright pattern of bullying: Gen. Eric Shinseki, the former Army chief of staff, warned that the U.S. was going to need several hundred thousand troops in Iraq, and he's attacked for that, and basically told that he doesn't know what he's talking about -- and he's fired essentially a year before he's out of that job. When it's time for him to retire, not a single senior representative of the Department of Defense or White House leadership is there for his retirement. ... There was a senior CIA analyst by the name of Fulton Armstrong who was attacked, using leaks to the press, which alleged that he was disloyal and somehow under the influence of the Cuban government. There was a prosecutor [ousted from] the Department of Justice who had warned that John Walker Lindh's father had hired a lawyer and that [the DOJ] needed to consider the Miranda rights. [emphasis supplied]

Here's his official bio from 2003.

Fulton Armstrong
National Intelligence Officer for Latin America

Fulton T. Armstrong was appointed National Intelligence Officer for Latin America on 1 June 2000. Previously Mr. Armstrong served as Chief of Staff of the DCI Crime and Narcotics Center (CNC). Prior to that, he served two terms as a Director for Inter-American Affairs at the National Security Council (1995-97 and 1998-99) and as Deputy NIO for Latin America (1997-98).

Mr. Armstrong began his government career in 1980 as Legislative Assistant and Press Secretary to US Representative Jim Leach. In 1984-95, he served as analyst, political-economic officer, and manager specializing in Latin America in the both the intelligence and policy communities.

Prior to joining government, Mr. Armstrong worked four years as a reporter, editor, and translator in Taiwan. He earned his B.S. in Linguistics and Spanish at Georgetown University in 1976. He is fluent in Spanish and Mandarin Chinese.

Bio link via ArmsControWank.

Another bio from Who's on First's list of Bush appointees:

National Intelligence Officer for Latin America: Fulton Armstrong, previously Chief of Staff of the DCI Crime and Narcotics Center (CNC). Prior to that, he served two terms as a Director for Inter-American Affairs at the National Security Council (1995-97 and 1998-99) and as Deputy NIO for Latin America (1997-98). In 1980 he was Legislative Assistant and Press Secretary to US Rep. Jim Leach. In 1984-95, he served as analyst, political-economic officer, and manager specializing in Latin America in the both the intelligence and policy communities.

This is not an invitation to bash the right wing site in the comments here--criticize what they said, sure, but please refrain from name-calling and degrading insults.

Michelle Malkin deserves a credit point for debunking the meme before it gets very far.

Update: LGF has a new post saying I misrepresented its post in writing they suggested John Kerry blew a CIA agent's cover. Charles points out that he updated the post to say information about Mr. Armstrong is on the Internet. But the title to his original post still reads, "Kerry Blows CIA Agent's Cover" and putting the title together with the content of his post, I think it's fair to say he "suggested" Sens. John Kerry and Richard Lugar blew the cover of a CIA operative.

Charles disagrees with my interpretation and responds by e-mail:

Most people understand that when one writes “may have,” they are expressing a possibility, not a certainty. And the link, and quoted section of the article, make it very clear that I was not simply spouting an unsourced allegation as a fact. I still think you completely misrepresented me.

We'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.

Update: World O'Crap has more.

Update: Charles has changed the title to his post to read "Kerry Blows CIA Agent's Cover- AP" which is what he should have done in the first place. That makes it clear it's a news report, not a fact.

< The Remix of the America Stand as One Video | Time Magazine's 100 Most Influential People >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Fulton Armstrong and Mr. Smith | 39 comments (39 topical)
    Re: Fulton Armstrong and Mr. Smith (none / 0) (#1)
    by scarshapedstar on Mon Apr 11, 2005 at 09:20:46 PM EST
    Had to do a double take to make sure that wasn't the "Michelle Maklin" April Fools' page.

    Re: Fulton Armstrong and Mr. Smith (none / 0) (#2)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 11, 2005 at 11:00:32 PM EST
    personal attack on lgf deleted

    Re: Fulton Armstrong and Mr. Smith (none / 0) (#3)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 12:46:10 AM EST
    "There was a senior CIA analyst ... who was attacked, using leaks to the press, which alleged that he was disloyal and somehow under the influence of the Cuban government." John Bolton, come on DOWN! Gee, could that dastardly CIA analyst have pointed out that NIGER URANIUM was spurting from Bolton's rear end?

    Re: Fulton Armstrong and Mr. Smith (none / 0) (#4)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 12:46:45 AM EST
    Is TALKLEFT another one of Karl Rove's double-agent blogs? As a self-proclaimed and proud MOONBAT it's starting to take a physical toll on me to repeatedly see our side making these accusations, only to find out that they are based on half-truths, distortions or outright lies. It's like a big sting operation! AbuGhraib, Valerie Plame, "Iraq won't have elections" (and it's suddenly reclusive ugly half-sister that "Sunnis won't participate"), CBS forgeries, Ohio irregularities, Florida irregularities, my fingers are getting tired from typing the list or I could go on and on. None of this stuff lives on in the mass media because whenever it tries to crawl out from under this blog or that it shrivels in the light of sun. Isn't there anything against this bAdministration that we can hang our hats on?

    Re: Fulton Armstrong and Mr. Smith (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 01:07:10 AM EST
    uh, it's pretty comical to claim lgf is the one suggesting that kerry blew the cover of the cia agent when the entire post there is pointing to and quoting a guardian article making that particular claim.

    Re: Fulton Armstrong and Mr. Smith (none / 0) (#6)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 01:20:01 AM EST
    I was going to post this on LGF, but they're not currently accepting new registrations. So I'll post it here instead. -------------- My goodness, Charles. I'm a big fan of yours, but to quote one of my favorite movies, "you surely screwed the pooch last night, didn't you?" Or put another way, were you just in a pissy mood when you sat down to blog last night? TalkLeft's original post was accurate (perhaps even understated), based on the title of your post ("Kerry Blows CIA Agent's Cover"), which you didn't bother to update before pounding out this whiney and defensive riposte. Don't even try to claim that the body of your post excuses the title -- that's an MSM trick of the trade. I noticed that TalkLeft has updated their post, and, just as in their original, did so without the self-righteous blather that permeates your own, even though they are clearly in the right. You suggested a lack of reading ability on the left. While in many cases that's quite true, I'd suggest this ill-advised rant of yours displayed a lack of manners and perspective. Pick your battles, dude! You just shot a 120mm AP shell through a holographic target. Hooah! And all you folks blindly supporting Charles' position aren't doing yourself any favors, either.

    Re: Fulton Armstrong and Mr. Smith (none / 0) (#7)
    by john horse on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 04:09:20 AM EST
    re:"There was a senior CIA analyst by the name of Fulton Armstrong who was attacked, using leaks to the press, which alleged that he was disloyal and somehow under the influence of the Cuban government..." Yet the Presidential Commission said that there was no direct political pressure to tell the administration what it wanted to hear. However, if analysts who disagree with the administration were being attacked, doesn't that constitute political pressure to toe the line?

    Re: Fulton Armstrong and Mr. Smith (none / 0) (#8)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 04:15:26 AM EST
    I'd have to agree that LFG was misrepresented. Sloppy blogging like that reflects badly upon the entire blogoshphere, unfortunately.

    Re: Fulton Armstrong and Mr. Smith (none / 0) (#10)
    by Richard Aubrey on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 05:01:56 AM EST
    I'm reminded of memogate. Too juicy a story to check. Screwed up--again, as one poster pointed out. Shinseki announced his resignation plans before the Stryker and other contretemps hit the fan. As you know but hope others don't. It's the hoping others don't that gets you into trouble because, as I try to point out so often, the others usually do. I know free advice is worth what you pay for it, but at least you could think about it. And some LGFers were speculating that Kerry used the guy's name several times hoping Bolton would slip and use the guy's name by accident, thereby rating all the blame for outing the guy. We know you and the MSM would tell it that way.

    Re: Fulton Armstrong and Mr. Smith (none / 0) (#11)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 06:44:22 AM EST
    Most people understand that when one writes "may have"....
    One is looking over One's shoulder for the lawyer who will file a defamation or a libel suit against One for asserting One's lies wrapped in newspaper or cyberfonts. Oh wait, TL is a lawyer. See, One has covered One's Little Red Caboose.

    Re: Fulton Armstrong and Mr. Smith (none / 0) (#12)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 06:49:29 AM EST
    Charles' hyperbolizing seems to be confined to the headline with the heavy lifting being done by the Guardian. That sort of twitch on LGF is hardly worthy of an article here.

    Re: Fulton Armstrong and Mr. Smith (none / 0) (#14)
    by roy on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 06:53:11 AM EST
    I usually only post here to disagree with the Leftists, but I have to pipe up to say that TL handles disagreement in a much classier way than the Rightists I usually side with.

    Re: Fulton Armstrong and Mr. Smith (none / 0) (#15)
    by michael on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 06:54:12 AM EST
    At least one right wing blog is suggesting Sens. John Kerry and Richard Lugar blew the cover of a CIA operative referred to as "Mr. Smith" at today's Senate Hearing. Actually, Johnson conveniently did not mention that Lugar was involved. Just Kerry.

    Re: Fulton Armstrong and Mr. Smith (none / 0) (#16)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 06:58:54 AM EST
    What did Armstrong's wife do to rile up Lugar and Kerry so greatly that they blew his cover? What kind of message are Lugar and Kerry trying to send to Mrs. Armstrong and her types?

    Re: Fulton Armstrong and Mr. Smith (none / 0) (#17)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 07:06:01 AM EST
    Sorry guys, but I read the headling, then the second line and DID NOT come to the conclusion that you all did. The "may have" means something. Can you all not read? Sure, the headline was definately inappropriate, but the VERY NEXT sentence explains it all. Are you all idiots? Do you have nothing more to complain about? LOL

    Re: Fulton Armstrong and Mr. Smith (none / 0) (#19)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 07:16:28 AM EST
    If publicly identifying this particular CIA agent is not a problem, then why did the Senators and Mr. Bolton go to the trouble to obscure his identity by referring to him as "Mr. Smith" during the hearings?

    Re: Fulton Armstrong and Mr. Smith (none / 0) (#20)
    by Che's Lounge on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 08:19:34 AM EST
    Considering Armstrong's CV, I'd say he was pretty well known in the intel arena? A spy who woked for DCI? Brilliant cover.

    Re: Fulton Armstrong and Mr. Smith (none / 0) (#21)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 08:26:20 AM EST
    It's also typical of CJ's relentless left-bashing that he says 'Kerry may have' when the news article he links to says: Committee Chairman Richard Lugar, R-Ind., and Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., both mentioned a name, Fulton Armstrong,

    Re: Fulton Armstrong and Mr. Smith (none / 0) (#22)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 08:32:23 AM EST
    Bob.... seriously now... do you fact-check anecdotal posts on threads that you read on a frequent basis? I can understand trying to verify the veracity of someone who annoys you and sounds like they're bragging, but generally fact-checking is something appropriate to news and not personal asides, no matter how silly they may sound. Further, the correction that was posted on LGF predated this article and was made due to fact-checking done by LGF posters. That makes your "example" useless in establishing any pattern of behavior which makes framing this as a fact-checking issue difficult and does more to argue that your example is anomolous, even assuming you accept that fact-checking personal war stories among posters is a requirement.

    Re: Fulton Armstrong and Mr. Smith (none / 0) (#24)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 08:53:03 AM EST
    Dear Reader Al: as one of the lizardoids you allude to I have too much respect for Jeralyn to bash her, and too little respect for a nincompoop like yourself to waste the effort bashing you.

    Re: Fulton Armstrong and Mr. Smith (none / 0) (#27)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 09:50:07 AM EST
    Clarification: Johnson and teh fact checkers seem to concentrate on public figures who mislead as well as teh influence of Rqdical Islam.

    Re: Fulton Armstrong and Mr. Smith (none / 0) (#28)
    by Bob on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 09:52:34 AM EST
    Immolate: no, and I agree that personal anecdotes can be taken with the proverbial grain. But this was different, it was immpossible not to wonder how the media had missed this one, a real 'hero' story -- a veteran of Iwo Jima with the right stuff at age 79 to be a hero again. And then there's the fact that 9/11 is the founding event of what LGF is today, so a personal story about a father's heroism would get a lot of attention; and it did. Realwest got many sympathy posts. But it's not the lie itself that interests so many, it's the cover-up. Had a 'leftist' on KOS or even some 'newby' at LGF posted this and been exposed, oh my. They'd be talking about the take-down today. No, I believe this represents a group-think mentality at LGF, where the posters there feel safe within their 'registration closed' enclave to attack anyone, on any blog, and ignore even obvious lies by one of their own. In a word: hypocrisy.

    Re: Fulton Armstrong and Mr. Smith (none / 0) (#29)
    by Bob on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 09:56:37 AM EST
    The realwest dead father at 9/11 story is untrue: there is no one of that description on any of the well documented victims lists. And yes about public figures, but Charles often goes after regular posters on other blogs, quoting them and so on. Atrios and Kos are favorite targets. Turnabout, as they say, is fair play.

    Re: Fulton Armstrong and Mr. Smith (none / 0) (#30)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 11:53:12 AM EST
    OK, I'll try interrupting one more time, but if publicly identifying this particular CIA agent is not a problem, then why did the Senators and Mr. Bolton go to the trouble to obscure his identity by referring to him as "Mr. Smith" during the hearings?

    Re: Fulton Armstrong and Mr. Smith (none / 0) (#32)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 01:14:55 PM EST
    What is hilarious is that this occurs JUST as Bolton is going through the poop-chute that used to be the US Senate. So when HIS trail of nasty CIA purging and character assassination is exposed, then somehow that's Kerry's fault? Hilarious. The analyst was an agent for the Axis of Evil! He was working for the Cubans. That's why Bolton's favorite lie about Niger uranium made it into the 2002 State of the Union address! It came from a Cuban agent who complained that Bolton was lying about it to start a war. And then the man who just won the presidency but doesn't get to take the oath because the Justice Dept. is run by another honorless henchman of Bush (who is himself Cheney's Renquist) is the media coverstory. What a freakin' shock!! Rove wants everyone to look for the Niger uranium in Valerie Plame's handbag, where they will find Michael Moore's cellphone, which is ticking, and the bullet which killed Kennedy, signed by John Kerry. Do NOT look at John Bolton or Scooter Libby. They are invisible. Freakin' hilarious.

    Re: Fulton Armstrong and Mr. Smith (none / 0) (#25)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 01:55:57 PM EST
    deleted.

    Re: Fulton Armstrong and Mr. Smith (none / 0) (#23)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 01:56:15 PM EST
    deleted

    Re: Fulton Armstrong and Mr. Smith (none / 0) (#26)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 01:57:15 PM EST
    response to brother bob and al deleted since their comments were deleted.

    Re: Fulton Armstrong and Mr. Smith (none / 0) (#18)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 01:58:09 PM EST
    deleted for namecalling and not putting the url in html format

    Re: Fulton Armstrong and Mr. Smith (none / 0) (#9)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 01:59:00 PM EST
    Sadly, it seems that usual reality-based news outlets, such as the Guardian, have posted similar headlines: Senators May Have Blown Cover of CIA Agent by Anne Gearan AP Diplomatic Writer. A story which was echoed by many otherwise fine news sources. I honestly had no idea that LGF had such far reaching influence. Not only has the AP been infiltrated by LGF operatives it appears that many formerly trustworthy news sources have been as well. "It is not clear whether Armstrong is the undercover officer, but an exchange between Kerry and Bolton suggests that he may be." The above quoted text is from the AP feed. Which predates the LGF post. While Charles Johnson's LGF might have put Kerry in the lede it is pretty clear that Johnson was not the first to suggest it. So when TalkLeft says: "This is not an invitation to bash the right wing site in the comments here--criticize what they said, sure, but please refrain from name-calling and degrading insults." exactly what right wing site is she talking about? The AP?? Sheesh. The question should be whether Lugar and Kerry actually did spill the beans, or where they just observing the mess? Was Armstrong publicly known to be associated with the event in question? Or simply known as a CIA Analyst? None of which have been adequately discussed in the media. Furthermore, I find it interesting that TalkLeft is linking to an article dated Jan 23, 2004 that time has since proven much of it to be fallacious. An article which should be viewed in light of this Mark Steyn article. Taken together it should be apparent that the CIA, and indeed much of the rest of the US intelligence community, seems more interested in playing politics...distorting facts to support one outcome or another... than it is in being an apolitical presenter of fact for the elected leadership to act upon. In this case we have to wonder whether Senator Kerry brought the issue up to renew partisan bickering, or was it a question to establish Bolton's judgement? It isn't clear. What is clear is that the question takes a back seat to political bickering about a subject that has nothing to do with the matter at hand.

    Re: Fulton Armstrong and Mr. Smith (none / 0) (#13)
    by Bob on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 01:59:26 PM EST
    deleted

    Re: Fulton Armstrong and Mr. Smith (none / 0) (#31)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 02:11:33 PM EST
    I noticed that the Washington Post is running with the headline that Kerry and others did "out" the CIA operative. It is good to know that the "liberals" at the Post take the word of a rightist over going out and finding the truth.

    Re: Fulton Armstrong and Mr. Smith (none / 0) (#33)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 10:22:36 PM EST
    It's ok - it's not these people's faults they're idiots. I just feel sorry for people who can't distinguish reality from their la-la land fantasy world. The fact that this rat-hole of a weblog is linking to LGF is a testament to just how on the mark Charle's is. Go try to generate traffic by piggybacking some other conservative (read: truthful) weblog - LGF's readers aren't stupid enough to engage you in your little plot. lol

    Re: Fulton Armstrong and Mr. Smith (none / 0) (#34)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 11:27:21 PM EST
    //crickets//

    Hellloooo! Anyone out there? Will anyone answer my question? If publicly identifying this particular CIA agent is not a problem, then why did the Senators (including Mr. Kerry) go to the trouble to obscure his identity by referring to him as "Mr. Smith" during the hearings?

    //crickets//
    Re: Fulton Armstrong and Mr. Smith (none / 0) (#35)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Apr 13, 2005 at 12:02:19 PM EST
    Josh did you take your meds today?

    Re: Fulton Armstrong and Mr. Smith (none / 0) (#36)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Apr 13, 2005 at 03:07:17 PM EST
    Bani, it's called an EXCESS OF CAUTION, something you winger rot don't know anything about. Comes with a 'checks and balances' government, which works pretty good until criminals like Bush come along and rip off the system for every dollar not nailed down.

    Re: Fulton Armstrong and Mr. Smith (none / 0) (#37)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Apr 13, 2005 at 05:55:04 PM EST
    Paul in LA, Calling the President of the United States a criminal doesn't fly without proof...do you have any? Regards,

    Re: Fulton Armstrong and Mr. Smith (none / 0) (#38)
    by Richard Aubrey on Wed Apr 13, 2005 at 06:43:20 PM EST
    Oh, Bennette. You are mean. You must know what Paul will do, don't you? It's bad for his heart to get that wound up. Not fair. It's like waving a steak in front of a hungry weasel. You're teasing him, aren't you?

    Re: Fulton Armstrong and Mr. Smith (none / 0) (#39)
    by jimcee on Wed Apr 13, 2005 at 07:26:22 PM EST
    We all know Paul in LA needs an intervention so we'll leave that as that. What surprises me more than anything is that there are some rational people on this thread that don't see the irony of screaming about the Plame/Wilson affair as outing of an undercover operative but find this outing as just hunky-dory. Hypocrites all around. Oh, by the way did everyone know that Cheney's daughter was a lesbian? At least that's what Kedwards told the world. The nonsense that passes for honest dialog nowdays is what is poisoning the well of politics and idiots such as Paul in LA are the catalyst of that poison. Hypocrites all.

    Fulton Armstrong and Mr. Smith | 39 comments (39 topical)