An emailer to Sullivan writes:
People need to stop hiding behind Clintonian semantics here and understand that even if no actual technical violation of the law is found in the Rove/Plame case it will still be true, based on what we know now from the Time emails, that White House actions compromised a CIA asset during a time of war. What would Hannity, Limbaugh, Scarborough and all the cable loudmouths be saying if it had been Sidney Blumenthal?
Just to gauge where we are in this mess, do we even agree on this statement- that no matter what, someone in the administration, inadvertantly or intentionally, compromised Plame’s position?
*** Update ***
It appears not.
Defense Guy
No. At least not for me. I will not condone or support a witch hunt if there has been no violation of the law. If it is proven that there is a violation, then appropriate steps must be taken.
The reason why I feel this way is that just as the government is not above the law, neither are the less protected by it.
cburke
Yeah, we can agree on it. I don’t understand how the outing of a US government agent is suddenly okay to some people. I’m a Democrat, and I was screaming pissed about Clinton lying while he was in office. To be honest, I couldn’t give a flying donut if he diddled every intern in Washington as long as it was consensual, but bald-faced lying about it is unacceptable to me.
I would hope that Republicans would be disgusted by the shameful behavior of some members of this administration. Revealing the identity of a US agent involved in covert operations is treason – regardless of what letter appears after the blabber’s name.
Trevor
I would have no problem with Rove or anyone else getting kicked to the curb, but the simple fact is that many members of the media already knew who she was before Rove spoke to anyone.
http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/004931.php
This is a desperate game of gotcha by the dems. I don’t really care if Rove does get canned, but I would hate to see the dems win this and embolden subsequent attempts to twist a controversy in their favor.
Trevor
CBurke, Valerie Plame was about as covert as I am. She worked at a desk in Langley. What she did was wrong. She sent her sad-sack husband to report exactly what she wanted him to report, and nothing else. Do you think that Rove pointing out that Wilsons’ report was hacktacular and commisioned by his CIA wife, is worse than an agent sending a family member to gather pre-conceived intelligence that was to be used to decide American foreign policy.
Marcus Wellby
I don’t know how anyone except the most die-hard pro-Bush partisan could disagree. The best defense of Rove I have read to date are of the “Wilson lied about x,y, and z” or — the classic defense of the partisan – “Its all just too complex…” varieties.
I’d say a lack of coordinated spin on this coming from the RNC and Whitehouse points to a pretty serious outcome. The MO of this admin (and the last to some extent) with regards to any bad news was to just brazen it out. If they can’t even do that, well, then something truly damaging is at hand.
From what I have read of Fitzgerald, he isn’t the sort to jail a journalist for a simple case of “Rove made a boo-boo”. I am no legal scholar — or scholar of any sort – but when a Grand Jury begins looking into one crime, what is the process if other crimes become apparent? Meaning, can indictments be handed down for crimes not at all related to the original intent of the Grand Jury?
cburke
The matter as I see it: I don’t care who her husband was or any other circumstances of the situation. I don’t care to what party of political ideology any of the participants claim membership to. A White House official discussing the identity of an active CIA agent to a member of the press is not acceptable. Period.
I don’t care where she worked. Her involvement in investigations pertaining to WMD programs was somewhat relevant to issues of national security at that time. Speaking about that rendered her useless an an agent. I regard that as a crime. Regardless of who did it. If it turns out Rove is innocent and Harry Reid was actually the source, I will be equally pissed.
Mike
Trevor,
I don’t believe you can back up your statements with facts here. There has been no evidence that shows Valerie Plame “sent” Joe Wilson anywhere. If she was just a desk jockey, how in the world would she be able to accomplish that without leaving any traces? Just admit it before you make your side look worse. Rove pulled a very nasty trick here which may not have been TECHNICALLY illegal (gotta love the Clintonian statements from all you Clinton-haters trying desperately to defend him), but you folks continue to persist in your mistaken belief that loyalty to the Rethugs in charge of your formerly decent party is more important than loyalty to America.
GROW UP.
JG
‘Ladies and gentleman, this is Chewbacca…
Paging Linda Tripp
Tim F
Trevor claims that “everybody in DC” knew about Plame’s status and links to…a blog post that also makes the claim. Now that I’m curious I’ll google it myself, but Trevor’s link provides as much proof as Trevor saying so himself.
eileen from OH
I’ll even go further than that – can we agree that, legalities aside, that it was a despicable, slimy thing to do?
If the purpose was to discredit Joe Wilson, couldn’t they make their points on the content of what he said without dragging his wife into it? Were they so unsure of their case that they needed to use her?
eileen from OH
Demdude
I am trying to sort this out. Here are a few points:
1.) He leaked the details of the internal workings of the CIA. a.) He identified the person responsible for the investigation b.) Identified a CIA Report (Was it confidential? I think it was.) c.) The report had to include other people than Wilson and his wife. Did he expose other people than those two? What about people on the ground in Niger?
2.) The denials that Rove was involved for two years. Who knew?
3.) The political part of smearing someone they disagreed with for their gain. Certainly not new, but using the CIA information to do so is not exactly kosher. .
They keep bringing up Wilson
Marcus Wellby
‘Ladies and gentleman, this is Chewbacca…
I don’t get the Chewbacca reference.
albedo
“They keep bringing up Wilson
Mike T
Trevor
How can you be so certain she worked at a desk job? Do you have a desk job at Langley? Maybe your desk is conveniently situated by the one Plame supposedly had?
I’ve seen this excuse making the rounds for some time now, but it never passed the laugh test, in my opinion. If Plame wasn’t a NOC, as you assert, why would the CIA forward the case to the Justice Dept in the first place? There has to be at least a reasonable likelihood that a crime was committed for them to take that step. The CIA’s actions in this story would seem to be sufficient evidence that Plame was indeed a NOC. Where’s your source that she wasn’t undercover? Like I said, I’ve seen that excuse a number of times, but never attributed to a real source. It appears to be typical GOP mudslinging, and completely fabricated.
Tim F
No luck in my search so far.
From Trevor’s link I’ve searched for a quote by Andrea Mitchell alleging that Plame’s status was common knowledge. So far I’ve come up with two references: on July 20, 2003 Andrea Mitchell warned Wilson that the White House was shopping his wife around as a story. The next day Mitchell ran an interview with Wilson.
I did find this:
BinkyBoy
Marcus, its a South Park reference where a completely separate argument is pulled into a legal preoeding in order to confuse a jury. Or at least thats what I think it is.
I don’t think this “leakage” will stop with Karl Rove, and if it does it will be a sacrifice to make the problem go away.
But the fact is is that the CIA requested the Grand Jury because the CIA believed a crime had occured. The CIA knows Valerie Plame’s status, they should also be the ones that understand the law, you would hope. If they believe a crime occured, thats pretty solid for a lot of Americans. Whether it turns out to be Rove or Scooter or someone else, outing an agent to 1) Discredit an opposing view 2) Chill the political waters so others would be hesitant about opening any other opposing views. Its underhanded and the damage across the board is fairly heavy.
JG
Marcus,
That wasn’t at you. I was making fun of the wingnuts ‘focus on everything but the relevant issue’ defense. The formatting makes it seem like it was at you but it wasn’t. Sorry. My response to your quote has nothing to do with the Chewbacca comment.
John Cole
Chewbacca Defense
Darrell
Yes, both Powerline and Captain’s Quarters claim that Andrea Mitchell conceded that it was well known around Washington media circles that Plame worked for the CIA. Robert Novak said the same thing. I would like to see the MSNBC transcript, but from what I’ve read so far, it does seem to be common knowledge that Plame worked for the CIA. So if it turns out that it really was common knowledge that Plame worked for the CIA, then there was nothing to ‘leak’..
Marcus Wellby
Thanks BB. My question in regards to the Grand Jury was just some thinking out loud. I think if the crime were only the leaking, than the current spin of “Plame was a desk jockey”, “Joe Wilson lies”, or “Rove didn’t knowingly leak..” would be an adequate WH PR defense – contradictory in some instances, but what is a contradiction in politics?
Since the parties involved have been questioned, they must know the direction this prosecutor is taking. And the lack of a strong damage control campaign coming from this VERY disciplined admin could indicate something larger or deeper than the leaking.
KC
Yes. It’s obvious now. That doesn’t necessarily mean anything illegal was done per se, but it does mean something, sloppy, stupid, partisan, and idiotic was done. It’s up to the President now to hold to his word. He knows now that someone in his administration was leaking information on a CIA operative. He pledged to fire that person. If he wants to get rid of the firestorm, he ought to do what he said he would do.
Darrell
It has not at all been established that Plame was a CIA ‘operative’. In fact, that point is very much in dispute. And if she was an operative as her husband claims, then he himself ‘outed’ her by listing her ‘cover name’ on his bio, which was conveniently removed
SamAm
It was common knowledge. Which is exactly why it was “double super secret” knowledge. And Rove copped to being the leaker at the time, because there’s nothing wrong with what he did. Which is why McClellan is freely talking about the matter in his briefings.
Rarrah!
Demdude
Question:
Does it matter if it was common knowledge in Washington that Plame was a CIA Agent?
I would think there are many things common knowledge in Washington. Doesn’t printing it or discussing on TV still break the law? Or at least improper?
over it
I was carrying on an email discussion with a friend pretaining to my, aforementioned, confusion over the whole Rove/Novack/Cooper/Miller/Plame thing.
In one of his responses…he sent this to me. If nothing else, it is an interesting thing to note.
Defense Guy
Here is the law in question:
http://foi.missouri.edu/bushinfopolicies/protection.html
So, those claiming that it was broken, please be so kind as to point out exactly how. Thanks.
Marcus Wellby
Did his bio list her as “my wife, the super-secret covert agent at the CIA” or just her name? There is a rather slight difference. Saying her name in public is not outing her – saying she is a covert operative is outing her.
Tim F
Thanks Darrell. So what you have is a rumor that a quote exists somewhere backing up this claim, despite clear statements to the contrary by the network in question. And gosh, I couldn’t imagine that Novak had any ulterior motives in making the claim. That’s so weak that it makes weak look strong in comparison.
Face it Darrell, you guys believe that Plame’s status was common knowledge because you have to believe it. The only alternative is to imagine that the Bush administrtion did something very bad, and contradictory to America’s security interests, for the most patheticall petty reasons. There’s no way that your filter will ever let that kind of thinking through.
BinkyBoy
The CIA is the only institution that knows her true status, and the main crime may be more in outting her as an operative working on WMD than as just an operative.
The CIA believed a crime occured. Now its up to the Grand Jury to decide.
But that doesn’t excuse it from being a pretty rotton sort of political move that should be made an example of. Its not like Rove is really going anywhere.
Darrell
If it was common knowledge, it would seriously undermine the claims that Plame was a ‘secret’ agent. I posted on another BJ thread that Plame reminds me of the Simpson’s episode in which Homer wore a WITNESS PROTECTION PROGRAM shirt. I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that Valerie Plame has a closet stocked with CIA SECRET AGENT shirts
Sojourner
Only Darrell thinks it’s in dispute. Note that he still hasn’t produced a shred of evidence to support his contention.
Trevor
The reference to Plame working a desk job at Langley is from the NYT article that is the crux of the Captain’s Quarters post I linked above. For everyone’s reference here it is directly: of course, it’s the last paragraph on the last page. Imagine that from the NYT, burying the lede:
At White House, a Day of Silence on Rove’s Role in C.I.A. Leak
TimF, please don’t speak for me. I never stated that “everyone in D.C.” knew about Plame’s identity. I stated very specifically that the elite D.C. media knew who she was. That was why most of them have been asked to testify. They have had to ask all of them where they got the information from, and the fact is that they all knew who she was before Rove talked to Cooper.
Mike, albedo properly set me straight on this point: Plame only suggested her husband, she did not have the authority to send him. Thanks for correcting me.
Darrell
Show us the ‘contrary’ statements made by Andrea Mitchell. Powerline was very specific with their claim of Mitchell saying her comments were made on MSNBC. I would like to see a transcript, but Andrea Mitchell’s concession that it was widely known that Plame worked for the CIA would confirm what Robert Novak already said.
Tim F
Thanks for sharing Darrell. If that’s the strength of your ‘proof’ then you can sit next to Raimondo on the crackpot bench,.
Demdude
Of course, another question Darrell, is how it got to be “common knowledge”. Washington, being a town of snakes and snake charmers, putting information out there to either destroy, diminish or create sainthood, is “common”.
gratefulcub
So, the CIA referred the case even though she wasn’t an operative, meaning there was no crime. A Federal Prosecutor, named by Bush and Ashcroft has spent two years on a case that could have been over by him asking the CIA if she was an operative. Several judges have reviewed the information and proceeded with the case, without checking to see if she was an operative. Rove didn’t come forward 2 years ago and let everyone know that he told reporters, but that isn’t a problem because she isn’t an operative.
It was common knowledge the she was in the CIA, because Powerline and Captain’sQ say Andrea Mitchell said so. (John Bolton is a double agent working for both Iran and Syria, and I know that because the DUnderground says so, and it was backed up by Michael Moore) If it were common knowledge, wouldn’t everyone that has Washington Common Knowledge be saying, “Oh yeah, I knew that.”
Rove, and others, called reporters and used ‘double super secret’ cover, to pass along common knowledge.
All of which is possible, but I need more than powerline to take me out of the ‘Rove is at least ethically guilty camp’
Hypothetically, if she was undercover, then her ‘cover’ would have been, V Plame, wife of ex US ambassador Wilson, working for company X (which would have been her cover company that she didn’t actually work for). She would have been undercover in plain sight, that is the point.
Darrell
The burden of proof is on those who are screaming that Plame is definitively an “operative”. I’m waiting to see any such proof or solid evidence.
Tim F
Sure thing, Darrell. It’s a quote to which I linked above:
Marcus Wellby
Oh my god! That is RICH RICH RICH. So essentially you need her business card or resume stating “V. Plame, Covert Operative”? Although, to cut you some slack, I do believe that is how they finally busted Al Capone, his tax returns, though loaded with errors, had him listed as A.Capone, Prohibition Kingpin and Arch Villain.
Darrell
Let’s not forget who started this sh*tstorm to begin with: Joseph Wilson going public with now discredited lies (thanks to the Senate intelligence committee report for exposing him). If Plame was in fact a secret agent, does it make sense that she would let her husband go a PR jihad against the administration, complete with 30+ television talk show appearances and a flamethrowing op-ed filled with lies in the NYT? Are you people seriously arguing that a ‘secret’ agent would allow her husband to do such a thing?
Tim F
Oops, specious argument. Try again.
gratefulcub
So SH was trying to buy uranium from Niger? Iraq really did have a nuclear program so advanced that he needed plutonium, and aluminum tubes (that couldn’t be used for a centrifuge)? I missed the part where we found the reconstituted nuclear program.
bb
One thing not being discussed here is the judge who jailed J. Miller, and his report with the 8 pages of ‘redacted’ material. He believed Fitzgerald’s case was strong enough to jail her. We don’t know yet if her testimony has to do with Rove, or not.
Darrell
TimF, yes, that 2003 statement would seem to contradict what Powerline and Captain’s quarters say Andrea Mitchell said on MSNBC. Once we see the MSNBC transcript, then we’ll know what Mitchell actually said and try and square it with your 2003 Slate article.
Slartibartfast
Unless your point is something to the effect that we don’t know squat, Tim, that article doesn’t support it.
Mike T
Glad to see you weigh in on the idle gossip of the chattering classes, Darrell. It’s so rare to see your side citing these MSM types….is it possible for you to clarify when it’s OK to believe them and when it’s not? I already have you down for equating ‘vague rumor mongering’ with ‘hard fact’ as long as it suits your partisan interests, so I was hoping you could expand on which other times it’s ok to believe the hated MSM.
Demdude
Is there a link to something that dissects his argument not related to partisan web sites? From what little I’ve read, he put some conjecture in his report that was disputed and maybe a few points, but was the major stuff in dispute?
Anyhow, a link would be appreciated. Thanks.
Mr Furious
When you assclowns have something beter than ‘Captain’s Quarters’ and ‘Powerline’ as sources, get back to us.
SamAm
Also, what was the impetus behind Novak’s use of the word “operative”? I remember him at the time spinning it’s use as random and un-apt.
Tim F
Of course Trevor. You’re reiterating what you said in the third post in the thread. Darrell must have worried that you aren’t coming back so he re-reiterated it for you. None of that constitutes evidence.
Give me something other than the (cough) word of Bob Novak. Since Captain whoever claims Andrea Mitchell as a reference, give me an Andrea Mitchell quote. Right now it looks like you believe this rumor simply because you want to believe it, despite evidence to the contrary. Help me out here Trevor, that’s the behavior of a conspiracy theorist and I know you’re not one of those.
ed
I am curious as to the purpose of substituting an asterisk for one letter in a dirty word. Does this allow one to swear but retain an argument that one did not actually swear? Or is there another purpose that is not disingenuous?
Defense Guy
Again, which part of the law was broken? Or do we now not care about the law?
over it
I have gotten in the habit of substituting an asterisk(or other symbol) in foul words….mainly because many of the peope I am corresponding with are at work.
Tim F
Well yes, as I’ve said the whole story right now is a kabuki play. What the article does say, among very few things, is that Andrea Mitchell, Trevor’s ‘media elite,’ didn’t know about Plame’s status before Novak released it.
Darrell
From the nonpartisan Washington Post:
Wilson’s assertions — both about what he found in Niger and what the Bush administration did with the information –were undermined yesterday in a bipartisan Senate intelligence committee report.
Read the whole thing. Joseph Wilson has most definitely been proven to be a lying sack of sh*t
Clever
This is precisely the counter-point to the ‘common knowledge’ argument. Did people know she was Joe Wilson’s wife? Yes. Did [some] people know she was a CIA agent? Yes [those with proper security]. Did the mass populus know that she was a CIA agent working for a front company [Brewster-Jennings & Associates] gathering intellegence on WMD? Not until after the leak.
This was a colossal partisan pooch-job, and now its become a colossal partisan billy club for Bush bashers [and I can’t fault them].
As for the outcome, we’ll just have to wait for the prosecution. But my guess is someone will have to take the fall.
Mike T
A number of commenters have already pointed out that the CIA wouldn’t have referred this matter to the Justice Dept if they didn’t believe a crime had been committed. Since the CIA — who absolutely knew Plame’s status — did refer the matter, most reasonable people can accept that Plame was indeed a NOC. Given all that, I’d say the burden of proof switches over to the ‘desk job at Langley’ types. Why is Andrea Mitchell’s idle gossip so much more believable than the CIA’s actions? Darrell? Trevor?
Darrell
Have you now MikeT? where did that happen? tell us where.. or are you just sniping from underneath the trash can as usual
Darrell
That claim has already been debunked in the Washington Post and elsewhere:
It’s time for a timeout on a misguided and mechanical investigation in which there is serious doubt that a crime was even committed….
..there is a serious legal question as to whether she qualifies as “covert.”
Anderson
Has anyone explained how/why Joe Wilson’s being a liar, a pederast, or Jimmy Hoffa, has ANY RELEVANCE WHATSOEVER to whether Plame’s covert ID was illegally burned?
Please do so or quit with the Chewbacca Defense.
Slartibartfast
As much as I disagree with Darrell’s approach to this, the following paragraph in his link to the WaPo article hits at the crux of the issue:
Of particular interest is the “classified” part. Much of the D.C. media knowing something is mutually exclusive with its being classified.
Vladi G
Darrell would so much like to forget that he was outed as a serial liar on another thread. It’s tragic. Especially his red herring about Wison “outing” her by telling people that she was his wife and that she *gasp* had a different last name than him before they were married!! The traitorous wretch!!
Darrell, regale us with your tales of how Plame listed her employer as CIA when she donated to Gore. That’s my favorite.
Folks, Darrell is a lying sack of crap. He’s been caught numerous times red handed. He has less credibility than Scott McClelland. Sad, really.
Darrell
As has been stated in the Washinton Post article cited in the previous post, whether Plame was a “covert” agent is very much in doubt.. she certainly didn’t act like one allowing her husband to go a very high profile PR attack against the administration. Not at all what one would expect from a ‘secret’ agent trying to keep a low profile
If it does turn out she was a covert CIA agent, then it looks like it was her husband who was first to “burn” her by revealing, what he says, was her cover name on his now removed CV. Wilson claimed loudly that Valerie used her maiden name as her CIA cover name. He made quite a point of it. Can’t have it both ways.. unless of course, you’re a lying dishonest leftist
Luddite
Vladi G: By any chance is Darrell a refugee from a BB known as F**ked Company? There are a lot of bored Trolls on FC and perhaps some of them have wandered onto Balloon Juice?
Tim F
There it goes again. I’ve begged, pleaded and even searched myself for this alleged quote supporting the claim of Trevor, Darrel and now Slarti-whatever. I’ve found that Captain’s Quarters cites Andrea Mitchell, who he doesn’t quote directly. Darrell claims that an apocryphal MSNBC transcript supports the claim. I have an on-the-record statement that states just the reverse.
I understand that you guys hold on to this claim like a mother bear clings to her cub, sure, President George W. Christ and all that, but wouldn’t you want to stake your credibility on something that has actual evidence to back it up? I’m a bit mystified here.
Anderson
Darrell, Toensing is a professional Republican tool, as Josh Marshall pointed out at the time of the op-ed.
Btw & in general, “op-eds” by definition are “opinions” and less persuasive as evidence. Maybe that will help you on future threads.
Toensing isn’t even persuasive. She invents her own list of what the CIA “should” have done? Says who? Ah, says her.
And she ignores the Espionage Act, which Mark Kleiman has been railing about for 2 years now.
Vladi G
Don’t know. Never visited that board.
I *do* know that Darrell is a serial liar, though.
John Cole
VVladi- Enbough of the name calling. Darrell has been here a while, and he is free to espouse his opinions whenever, just like everyone else. IN fact, we need some more right-leaning folks to dive into the comments here, as we have dwindled down to Sotrmy, Darrell, and Rick, and I don’t want the shouted down or driven away.
For that matter, the reports do exist- this is far from being a settled issue.
Now everyone play nice in this little flame war.
Tim F
Her cover name was her maiden name, retard.
neil
Ohmigosh, defense guy! You’ve figured out what the judge and prosecutor couldn’t: nobody broke any laws! Better get on the horn and let them know quick, before they waste any more time or money!
Oh wait, the very first subsection in your link informs us that
“Whoever, having or having had authorized access to classified
information that identifies a covert agent, intentionally discloses any information identifying such covert agent to any individual not authorized to receive classified information, knowing that the information disclosed so identifies such covert agent and that the United States is taking affirmative measures to conceal such covert agent’s intelligence relationship to the United States…” is guilty of a felony.
So, did Rove know that Wilson’s wife was undercover? We don’t know — that’s for the judge to find out. But we definitely don’t know the answer is “no” based on what we have now.
Indeed, the fact that Rove’s own lawyer is even demurring on that question is not too promising for those like Darrell who think that liberals are the only national security threat that our nation faces. The silver lining in this filthy cloud is that this scrutiny may serve to re-focus Bush and friends’ attention on our nation’s problems abroad rather than their political problems at home.
Clarence
An op-ed column by a former “deputy assistant attorney general in the Reagan administration” and a DC lawyer is all you’re presenting as evidence of refutation? You’re kidding right?
You guys really don’t have anything to fight this except opinion stacked on top of opinion, do you?
Tim F
Okay, strike the ‘retard’ from my above post. That was gratuitous.
JG
Every post by Darrell calls liberals scumbags but you ask other people to stop calling him names?
prob
I was reading this thread and got curious…I went to Darrell’s “Washington Post proof” It was an OPINION piece! For Christ’s sake, man…don’t you know the difference between actual NEWS articles and Opinion pieces?
Darrell
Well let’s review my “approach”.. I point out that Powerline and Captain’s quarter’s are claiming that Andrea Mitchell conceded on MSNBC that it was well known among media circles that Plame worked for the CIA..I then followed up saying that I would like to see the MSNBC transcript before jumping to conclusions
Seems to me that honest people, those sincerely looking for truth, would have said something like “yes, let’s wait for the MSNBC transcript”..But honest and sincerere are the furtherest things away from the leftists posting on these threads. Instead, all we got was:
When you assclowns have something beter than ‘Captain’s Quarters’ and ‘Powerline’ as sources, get back to us.
“rumor-mongering”
They left is not honest, they are not sincere, and they certainly aren’t honorable
Anderson
Yglesias, alas, is probably right:
Karl Rove, whether criminally liable or not (and my guess is that the answer will turn out to be not), on the other hand, was clearly taking ill-advised risks with national-security secrets for crass political purposes. And the president’s made it clear — not just over the past 48 hours, but by his behavior throughout this case — that he’s okay with that. He’s the sort of president who’s willing to comply with the letter of the law if forced to by an independent prosecutor, but not the sort of guy who’s actually bothered by having key aides play political games with classified information.
prob
I was reading this thread and got curious…I went to Darrell’s Washington Post link which he purported as “proof”. It was an OPINION piece! Don’t you know the difference between actual NEWS articles and Opinion pieces?
Vladi G
Sorry, John. I’ll try to behave. People like Darrell make it difficult, however.
JG
this is why there is no talking to Darrell. He hates the left, sees no value in them so why try to convince hiom they have a point. He won’t hear it, he can’t he hates them too much.
Defense Guy
Very nice snark. The question still remains if she was covert, whether she was taking affirmitive action to keep her status covert, and if Rove knew it. So, given that there have been no charges yet filed, you are entirely correct that it’s possible that nobody broke any laws.
Do you care? Or is the law a mere invonvienance when partisanship is on the line?
Darrell
I never referred to the opinion piece as “proof”. That is a lie..you lefties seem to have a problem with the truth, don’t you?
Another WP article I linked to was a news article on the results of a Senate Intelligence committee investigation discrediting Joseph wilson.
neil
Defense Guy, “there’s a possibility that no laws were broken” is perhaps the worst reason to halt an investigation that I have ever heard. And after all we’ve been through with Michael Jackson and Scott Peterson and hell, even OJ Simpson, you think the fact that the jury isn’t in yet is supposed to shame people into not _speculating?_ Tell it to Nancy Grace.
Besides, the topic of this thread is supposed to be “even if no actual technical violation of the law is found in the Rove/Plame case it will still be true…that White House actions compromised a CIA asset during a time of war.”
Agreed or no?
Doug
The relevant quote from the New York Times article cited by Darrell above:
The Toensing involved is Victoria Toensing who has made this assertion in other places. She makes the legal argument against a crime having been committed in a January 11, 2005 article wherein she had previously made the assertion that Valerie Plame “worked a desk job in Langley”.
Media Matters has a debunking of Toensing’s critique. It leads with an accusation that Toensing was a personal friend of Novak’s and failed to disclose that fact in her opinion piece. It also points out that Novak used the term “CIA operative” in his column. That term is a term of art meaning a clandestine agent. And, in fact, a review of Novak’s past work shows he is aware of that. He uses the term “operative” only in conjunction with undercover agents. The Media Matters piece goes on to argue with the “well-known on the cocktail circuit” argument. They don’t put it quite this way, but they suggest that only the source of the leaker’s information really matters. If a government employee knows that he has classified information about an undercover agent, but then hears the same information gossiped about at a cocktail party, that does not mean he is free to go spill the beans.
From those two sources, however, I have not seen any more information about Plame’s “desk job.”
But who is Toensing? Apparently a professional Republican lawyer and media whore. Speaking of Toensing and her husband Joe DiNova were the subject of a 1998 Howie Kurtz article which mentioned that they were quoted or appeared on television at least 300 times in the month after the Lewinski scandal broke. He continues:
A pretty extensive Vanity Fair article contains interviews with Wilson and Plame. I didn’t read it thoroughly, but I couldn’t find any discussion of what Plame was doing between 1997 and 2002. It said that in the spring of 2002, Plame was in the process of moving from NOC cover to State Dept. cover, though I don’t know what that means exactly.
After all that, my best guess is that Rove leaked the information, he shouldn’t have, he probably didn’t commit a technical violation of the law I’ve been hearing about — though it seems possible he could get in trouble for divulging classified information. But, at the end of the day, the Bush administration will suffer the most damages because it was too cute in denying Rove’s involvement in the matter and in letting Bush talk big about wanting to run a clean shop. In the past, the White House press has let the Bush admin slide with reliance on finely parsed responses. Now, the press corp doesn’t seem so willing to let that kind of thing slide.
gratefulcub
Darrell,
What is a lefty?
Am I completely without honor, integrity, or principle?
If there is a group that can be titled ‘lefty’, then I am probably in it. Again, am I some unprincipled crazy kook with no integrity?
John Cole
Darrell will play nice and lay off the scumbag quotes, too.
jim rhoads (vnjagvet)
I cannot agree with the statement that TM made to start this thread.
Rove, a known political operative, was doing what known political operatives do. And his actions in this regard were in the best traditions of those paragons of candor, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Lyndon B. Johnson, William J. Clinton and the skillful political operatives who served them like, e.g. Harry Hopkins, Bill Moyers and Syd Blumenthal, to name a few on the other side of the aisle.
There has been zero credible evidence brought forth anywhere of which I am aware that Plame in 2003 was in a “covert” CIA position, or that she had been undercover at any time since July, 1998. There has also been zero credible evidence made public that anything Rove told Cooper or anyone else was “classified”, or that Rove knew it to be classified.
Everything else is political BS. There will be no frogmarching of Mr. Rove. He will not resign over this, nor will he be fired.
All Democrats to the left of Zell Miller will weep, wail and gnash their teeth, much as Republicans did under the administrations of the master manipulators of public opinion listed above.
And each side will be shocked! shocked!! at the machinations their (un)worthy opponents. What the Hell’s new about that?
Darrell
Ok Doug, having drafted and negotiated the scope of the 1982 Intelligence Identities Protection Act, I would certainly say there is little doubt that Toensing is well qualified to comment on this matter.. but your point is taken that there are ties to Republicans, which shouldn’t, in and of itself, disqualify anyone honestly searching for truth
Now, to the heart of the matter.. where is the solid evidence that Valerie Plame was a covert agent? And if there is such evidence, then what to make of her husband publishing her undercover name on his bio well before any alleged ‘leaks’?.. and yes, I realize her maiden name, according to Wilson says, is the same as her cover name
Darrell
Do I have to John? if the shoe fits and all…Ok, I’ve been planning to clean up my language anyway
Clarence
Clarence, your strawmen don’t work. Not everyone who’s concerned about this Rove/Plame thing is a PETA-lovin’ idiot liberal.
I voted for Bush from the beginning. But the backsliding, almost Nixonian duplicity from this administration over this has given me cause to take another look at this presidency. If he won’t even fire someone who puts our national security at risk, by sacrificing Brewster Jennings on an altar of political payback, then what kind of aggregious deceit will he continue tolerate? What kind of risks to our nation is he willing to roll dice with? This is the kind of thing that gets people killed. Our people.
The simple truth is, we’re at war. And as far as I’m concerned this sort of lack of discipline plays too fast and too loose with our country’s safety right now.
Darrell
gratefulcub, no you seem to be that rare breed of an honest lefty. I’ve quoted a sampling of the statements made by others (the majority of leftists posting here) which qualify
jim rhoads (vnjagvet)
John:
Sorry for the reference to TM. Getting old, and thought I was somewhere else.
jim rhoads (vnjagvet)
John:
Sorry for the reference to TM. Getting old, and thought I was somewhere else.
Tim F
You probably know this, but that explodes the myth that Plame’s ‘covert’ status had expired by 2003.
All Jum Rhoads should need to know is that the CIA referred this case for criminal prosecution. There’s no conveivable reason they should do that unless exposing Plame’s status was indeed a crime.
Tim F
You probably know this, but that explodes the myth that Plame’s ‘covert’ status had expired by 2003.
All Jum Rhoads should need to know is that the CIA referred this case for criminal prosecution. There’s no conveivable reason they should do that unless exposing Plame’s status was indeed a crime.
Doug
Darrell,
I will concede that Toensing is qualified to discuss the 1982 Intelligence Identities Protection Act. I don’t, however, think that she is a trustworthy source for facts about this particular case — any more than I think Tom DeLay or Howard Dean would be reliable sources of facts on the matter. They are all political operatives and should be regarded as such.
Having said that, I don’t have any evidence that Plame was NOC in the spring of 2003. Of course, I’d think part of the point of being a clandestine agent with no official cover is to make sure that such evidence is fairly scarce. I think we can fairly conclude that the CIA believed her to be NOC at the time of the Novak article. Whether that classification described an actual fact or merely a checked box on a CIA form somewhere, I don’t know.
I don’t know about the bio — if it stated that she was a CIA agent, then I suppose it would be conclusive of something. But, if it just thanked her and mentioned a name, I don’t think it really points to anything — any more than listing her in a phone book would have. As I understand it, the way a no official cover agent works is by looking like an ordinary citizen, complete with a husband — even a husband who may have written a book. But, perhaps I miss the point.
Defense Guy
neil
I did not say that I want the investigation stopped. Investigation of this should continue. Having said that, if it turns out that no law was broken will that be enough? I can tell you that if it turns out that Rove did break the law, then he should burn for it.
As to the topic of the thread
This assumes that someone (Rove) in this administration compromised Plame
Darrell
“explodes” it, only if you’re willing to believe anything from second hand unnamed sources. From the Vanity Fair article:
Newsday’s Knut Royce and Timothy M. Phelps reported that, according to their intelligence sources, Plame was an “undercover officer.”
and Robert Novak says his unnamed intelligence sources say the opposite.. some “myth being exploded”, huh? that certainly solves everything, doesn’t it?
Doug
I said Spring of 2002. I should have said Spring of 2003. Just for the record.
Slartibartfast
Actually, the name-calling and unsupported conclusion-jumping is what I disagree with. As to whether Plame was actually compromised, I have to say that I can’t conclude that at present.
I can conjecture, though, that Plame came back to the ‘States prior to 2000, because she’s got twin kids that were borne about then. Vanity Fair places her return in 1997. Hard to imagine what she was doing in the ‘States for five years as a NOC agent. Considering, you know, CIA’s jurisdictional constraints. Also, the story that she revealed her identity to Wilson because he’s got high clearance level doesn’t wash; need-to-know supercedes level of clearance. If I had, say, a TS clearance, that only affords me access to that TS material that I’m approved access to based on need-to-know; otherwise I could access EVERYTHING TS that’s not overtly restricted. And that’s not how it works.
What I’m having trouble nailing down is the fact that she was supposedly widely known as a CIA agent. That’s something that seemingly everyone says, but it’s not so easy to show that it’s true. So I’m going to have to admit that one’s just entirely hearsay.
Darrell
Fair enough Doug. Although I doubt such an agent would permit her husband to go on a such a high profile PR attack on the administration, after having recommended him for the Niger trip. One would reasonably think she would insist on a lower profile. Joseph Wilson has made a big deal over the fact that her maiden name, was her cover name. And he seemed to play pretty fast and loose with that name.
For your theory to be more plausible, he would have commonly referred to her as Valerie Wilson, careful to avoid the ‘Valerie Plame’ name which she was allegedly (according to Wilson) using in all her covert activities. But he made a point on his bio/CV and his ‘Who’s who’ listing to bring up her maiden name. Doesn’t add up
Tim F
Works for me. I’ll be happy to admit that nobody really knows when her NOC status expired, with circumstantial evidence supporting both sides.
Vladi G
It doesn’t. It simply says that he’s married to the former Valerie Plame. It simply says she’s his wife. It in no way mentions her employer. Why Darrell thinks this was all a big secret is a mystery. every other person on this thread realizes this except Darrell, but he continues to either be dishonest, or ignorant of the relevance (or lack thereof) of that information.
Tim F
Bad Vlad. Ten yards and loss of down.
Vladi G
I didn’t insult him. I described his behavior. :)
Darrell
“every other person on this thread realizes this”? Every other person = groupthink leftists. I’ve explained my position pretty clearly by any honest reading. Let me know if you want me to use smaller words for you
Vladi G
No. Every other person = people who recognize facts.
I can see it now. As a young boy, when Darrell was the last person in his class to grasp that 2+2=4, he accused all the other kids of being groupthink leftists.
Anderson
All Jum Rhoads should need to know is that the CIA referred this case for criminal prosecution. There’s no conveivable reason they should do that unless exposing Plame’s status was indeed a crime.
Actually, this isn’t quite true. One can conceive, plausibly tho without evidence, that CIA has been p.o.’d at the White House for Cheney’s toe-stepping, and that this was a chance to get back at Cheney (assuming the Libby thing holds up).
Not saying this is what happened, but since we’re the “reality-based” crowd, we have to consider these things. Beware of taking ANY agency’s position as the gospel truth. Principalities & powers, folks.
Stormy70
Good thread, all you partisans, you! I am now officially waiting for Fitzgerald to get on with it. I may, in fact, take the cheese on this until further info comes out. I shall call it the Le Frommage de Plame, and raise my single malt Scotch tumbler high!
If the French phrasing is incorrect, please correct, since I am too lazy to look it up.
Tim F
If the CIA wanted Fitz to take their case seriously then they would have had to lie to him. In the course of the investigation Fitz would have found out that they lied to him, and then they would find out how pissed a Special Prosecutor gets when you lie to him.
Darrell
How dare you think outside the leftie groupthink box? Time to revoke your vastleftwingconspiracy(tm) membership on the basis of independent thought
Andrew J. Lazarus
IIRC, Plame was no longer working deep undercover at the time she was outed. She had, however, worked deep undercover shortly before (before she married?), and the release of her name would have damaged national security not only in eliminating her future usefulness, but by jeopardizing all of her associates from her earlier work.
There isn’t any doubt about her training as a covert agent.
In the face of this, Darrell is left with three remarkably dishonest talking points. First he presents an op-ed (mendaciously presented as some sort of news) from a Republican source arguing that there’s no crime. The Court of Appeals has already considered that argument and rejected it. Then he claims that Joe Wilson is a liar, based largely on a statement by the most Republican partisan members of the 9/11 panel, which Darrell seems to believe is the official report of the panel itself. We have searched Iraq all over for the nuclear weapons program that Saddam needed to supply with yellowcake and it didn’t exist. White House intel on Iraq scores a perfect zero for accuracy—and Wilson is a liar?!
But the truly bizarre nature of the Darrell argument comes when he says Valerie Plame couldn’t have been an operative because her name is (or even was) on her husband’s Web-posted CV. I see. You can’t be a covert operative unless you hide your name and burn your fingerprints off with acid. Darrell, did it ever occur to you that cover is maintained best by having the appearance of a normal life? Lots of people knew that Valerie Plame was Wilson’s wife. A very small number of people knew of her past as an operative. Until Novak wrote his column, these two groups didn’t have linkage. Now they do. But in the interests of Bush Administration Security, there are no limits.
prob
Not to belabor the point, but Darrell uses the term “debunking” here. And when I pointed out that it was an “Opinion” piece he replied:
“I never referred to the opinion piece as “proof”. That is a lie..you lefties seem to have a problem with the truth, don’t you?”
But looking back at his posting of that Washington Post link this is what he said:
“That claim has already been debunked in the Washington Post and elsewhere”
So I checked what “debunk” means:
“to show that something is wrong or false.”
per the Encarta Dictionary: English (North America)
So “debunking”, at least to me, seems to mean “disproving”. But perhaps I am mistaken…
What I also found interesting was his need to insinuate that I am a liar…and assume that I have a position on the left side of the political spectrum. I am very new here…indeed, these are my first posts…so at the point he started calling me things and assuming my position the only thing he REALLY knew about me was that I took exception to his choice of “proof”…and I still do.
Thanks.
(I hope this doesn’t end up “double-posted”, I am getting messages that are somewhat confusing to me when I click to “post”) – pr
Darrell
Talk about dishonest, Mr. Lazarus, Wilson had loudly proclaimed that his wife had “nothing” to do with sending him to Niger. Yet according to the findings of a bipartisan Senate committee:
The report states that a CIA official told the Senate committee that Plame “offered up” Wilson’s name for the Niger trip, then on Feb. 12, 2002, sent a memo to a deputy chief in the CIA’s Directorate of Operations saying her husband “has good relations with both the PM [prime minister] and the former Minister of Mines (not to mention lots of French contacts), both of whom could possibly shed light on this sort of activity.” The next day, the operations official cabled an overseas officer seeking concurrence with the idea of sending Wilson, the report said.
Oh my, what a tangled web we weave..And that’s not even touching upon Wilson’s explanation, having been confronted by the committee on his slanderous lies, as (according to Wilson) “literary flair”
Anderson
If the CIA wanted Fitz to take their case seriously then they would have had to lie to him. In the course of the investigation Fitz would have found out that they lied to him, and then they would find out how pissed a Special Prosecutor gets when you lie to him.
Probably right, but there may be enough ambiguity about “covert” that the agency could fudge.
Myself, I think the evidence supports that she WAS covert and that somebody needs to go down for this one, but I’m trying to keep open to reasonable alternatives.
Especially when we’re confronted with so many examples of people who are trying to do no such thing.
Darrell
prob, you started out by putting words in my mouth I never said. Sorry for pointing that out to you
Thanks.
Tony Alva
Not a liberal nor a Democrat by the standard definition, but if Rove was blabbing about this women whether she had been previously outed or not he’s most defintately gotta go. I’d like to see more conclusive proof though.
jim rhoads (vnjagvet)
Gang:
The postings since my 2:22 post have reinforced my conclusions. First, a “referral” has no evidentiary value. If that were not so, we would have no need of an investigation. Second, nothing in the Cooper email (the only documentary evidence of any Rove Conversation) indicates zero knowledge of Ms. Plame’s undercover status, (if any) and reveals zero information which has been reasonably identified as “classified”.
The balance of the discussion has been name calling and political posturing, in my opinion, fun though it might be.
I see no budding prosecutorial talent among this group of bloggers so far.
Mr Furious
Don’t worry gratefulcub, I’m the lying scumbag, sack of shit “leftist” without honor or sincerity.
Even though I’ve not lied or done anything but state my honest, sincere opinion on the matter, based on readily available, mainstream information.
Guess that’s not good enough for some.
Sojourner
And you’re the one who’s tangled up in it.
prob
Darrell, I see…so you never made the below statement? If that is the case I must profusely apologize for making so scurrilous an assertion against such an honorable person…But I could swear I saw this in a post under your name…
Perhaps I was mistaken in assuming it was a remark about me…an easy mistake here, don’t you think? Still…
Humbly I stand branded with all the other liars exposed here by Diogenes…er…I mean Darrell…
Mr Furious
LOL! Good one Sojourner! And by Darrel’s account we’ve been weaving it repeatedly and for a long time, too.
gratefulcub
Mr. Furious,
I hear ya.
Attacks on an entire group just gets me a bit riled. Darrell can get me a bit more excited than I would like to admit as well (LOL D).
I did notice something in a previous post, and there is no way that I am going back to look for it. But, one of the defenses was that she hadn’t been covert since July 1998. Five years from July 98 is July 03. If I am reading the statute correctly, the parameters are that she had to be actively covert in the past 5 years. When did the leak happen? It was before July of 03 wasn’t it?
So, even if she wasn’t actively working undercover, she still had assets and contacts and undercover agents that she used to work with that were still undercover.
Ruining Plame isn’t the issue at that point, it is possible that outing her publicly could have outed many agents that were working on WMD.
None of us are in any way qualified to talk about the inner workings of covert CIA operations. We are going to have to leave that up to the lawyers and judges.
But, back to John’s original point, someone in the administration jeopardized some agents in the CIA that were working in WMD. Even if the elite in DC knew who she was, that doesn’t mean that it was known around the globe where agents were working. Now it is. Plus, they killed her cover company.
I am not crusifying Rove or anyone else at this point, but someone did something wrong. Illegal, I don’t know. But, if GWB is the straight shooter he claims to be, he should be cleaning house instead of spinning. He has the ability to find out exactly what happened, and take care of it by tomorrow morning. If nothing wrong was done, he has the ability to find that out too, and come out tomorrow and say that even though there is an investigation ongoing, that he can assure us that no one in his administration did anything unethical.
Christie S.
The Left has as many honest, sincere and honorable people as the Right.
Heh…how’s that for damning with faint praise?
Actually, Darrell…there are folks on both sides of the aisle who don’t feel that every bone of contention needs to be discussed at the top of our voice. Some of us are indeed clicking links, researching matters and reading for ourselves.
You rarely hear from us though, as we tend to avoid screaming matches.
Mr Furious
Yeah, but that would mean Bush would actually have to be the stand up guy he pretends he is.
gratefulcub
Christie,
That is the problem. Moderate voices aren’t heard. Michelle Malkin gets to be on TV, and even Ward Churchill has made an appearance or two. It makes great crossfire TV.
Here is something that might shock you, if you wait him out, and wait for most of the posters to move on to the next topic, even Darrell can discuss hot topics intelligently in a unheated manner. (Darrell, that wasn’t a backhanded compliment)
This was once a conservative blog, from what I hear, but now it is the voice of reason, which really draws us lefties in.
Tim F
Jim Rhoades, you’re making a mistake thinking of us as prosecutors. That’s Fitzgerald’s job. Think of this as a civil trial where the issue is whether to call Rove an asshole.
Christie S.
Grateful, actually I have witnessed Darrell’s ability to converse and debate without throwing burning pitch at his opponents. I enjoyed seeing that. That actually goes for most of the other posters here as well.
As for Moderates, I don’t know why we don’t get as much airtime or print inches as the other groups other than the fact that we tend to see both sides of the issues and wait for clarification before spouting off. At least I do, I really can’t speak for anyone else. I’ve always been keen on having concrete proof before I tar and feather someone.
While I don’t particularly care for the tone of politics in general, partisanship DOES have it’s place. I don’t think it really belongs in an investigation of this scope, though. Just my opinion.
Jim Rhoads (vnjagvet)
Tim:
As my earlier post acknowledges, I assumed you had already made up your mind that Rove fits that description.
It doesn’t matter what side a skilled political operative is on. The major occupational hazard is that the more effective they are, the more they will be loathed by the other side. Thick skin as well as skill are essential for the position.
What I am concerned about is whether Rove’s activities went beyond the customary activities of hard boiled political operatives regardless of party. IMO, outing a CIA covert agent or leaking classified information clearly crosses over the line. I simply don’t see that it happened here.
Bob
Did anyone mention that Victoria Toensing appeared, unidentified as to her many party affiliations, on NPR’s Talk of the Nation today? Same line, that is, no law was broken, yada yada.
She has a job as part of the Right-Wing noise machine. How does she get from studio to studio so fast, or does she just sit in a bunker with a really good digital phone line?
Sinequanon
YES.
I absolutely agree with that statement. Facts are facts, folks.
The Disenfranchised Voter
HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH! Wow, just fucking wow!
HHAHAHA, man I love SP.