His Silence Was Thunderous

From Rep. Waxman's opening statement at his Plame show trial today:

I have been advised by the CIA that even now, after all that has happened, I cannot disclose the full nature, scope, and character of Ms. 'Wilson's service to our nation without causing serious damage to our national security interests.

But General Hayden and the CIA have cleared these following comments for today's hearing.

During her employment at the CIA, Ms. Wilson was under cover.

Her employment status with the CIA was classified information prohibited from disclosure under Executive Order 12958.

At the time of the publication of Robert Novak's column on July 14, 2003, Ms. Wilson's CIA employment status was covert.

This was classified information.

First, I want a special counsel to indict Waxman for perjury - the relevant Executive Order is 13292, which amended and supplanted 12958 in March 2003, and which was effective immediately (except for section 1.6, related to markings - what are the odds the violation to which he refers is there?  Groan.  I want a lawyer...).

But before we take Mr. Waxman away in chains, let's talk about his statement.  The magic words we are all listening for are "Ms. Plame had covert status under the law as defined by the Intelligence Identities Protection Act."  His failure to speak those words speaks volumes - I have no doubt he will gull the NY Times (Mission Accomplished - see below), but folks in the know will see this for the smokescreen it is.

Please - don't tell me that there would have been vast national security implications if he had said "CIA lawyers who have studied her file have assured me that Ms. Plame had covert status under the IIPA".  There would have been no national security implications to his saying it, it would have strengthened his presentation to say it, yet he did not say it - what reasonable conclusion might one draw?

Telling us that the CIA considered her to be covert as per their employment practices is smoke - the WaPo understood this point this morning (but the Times never will).

MORE:  Ms. Toensing's opening statement makes points that regular readers here will find familiar.  From the archives, my thoughts on Ms. Plame's gloomy tradecraft; and here are some quick thoughts on the history of the IIPA as it relates to "service abroad".

From the other side, let me thank an emailer and single out this Kos diarist, a lawyer whose entire contribution to the debate seems to have been the nicknaming of Ms. Toensing as "Toestink".  Beyond that contribution, the writer does not make a single point not made roughly two or three years ago.  Move On, please - say something new. 

And I'll even help - just for starters, tell me why I should give zero weight to this definiton of "service abroad":

 

D. Service abroad means service on or after September 6, 1960, by an employee at a post of duty outside the United States and outside the employee's place of residence if that place of residence is a territory or possession of the United States.

Obviously, this is nowhere near dispositive since it is not a CIA definition.  But who out there is certain that this definition stands alone in opposition to common practice throughout the US government? Who suspects that maybe this is a common definition that crops up in other agencies as well?  How might a judge rule in light of that, and in light of the history of the Act?  And who would care to do a bit of, hmm, legal research to attempt to pin that down?

Or we could pass the time dreaming up names like "Toestink"; no worries.  I'm sort of proud of "Special Clownshow Fitzgerald" myself, if that is the road we are going to walk.

Comments

[Rick Ballard]

Thom,

Could we have a "Let's Pretend JOM is the Swamp" day (or hour, even)?

You could start by pithing a couple of thread lice. Well, you could if they had a brain.

[Pete]

The magic words we are all listening for are ....

The disclosure of Ms. Wilson's employment with the CIA had several serious effects. First, it terminated her covert job opportunities with CIA. Second, it placed her professional contacts at greater risk. And third, it undermined the trust and confidence with which future CIA employees and sources hold the United States. This disclosure of Ms. Wilson's classified employment status with the CIA was so detrimental that the CIA filed a crimes report with the Department of Justice.

[Sara (Squiggler)]

If Waxman had said that, Tom, then the investigation should be about the CIA practices and failures to protect a covert agent. They didn't because either they were incompetent in protecting one of their own or more likely, she wasn't covert.

[Sue]

First, it terminated her covert job opportunities with CIA.

I so wanted them to ask her about transitioning to State. No one did. Shame on them.

[Sue]

And shame on them for allowing Richard Armitage to remain unknown to the vast majority of the country.

[Barney Frank]

I posted this question on the other thread and was not answered. Anybody care to take a shot?

--Her employment status at the CIA was classified information, prohibited from disclosure under Executive Order 12958.--

Why exactly do they include the word status?
Does this mean her employment at the CIA was not classified, as in anyone could mention she worked there, but that her precise position could not be?

[Sara (Squiggler)]

Pete: Her days as a covert agent ended the day it was revealed that Aldrich Ames outed her. And according to Wilson himself, in an interview broadcast nationally, the classified info that was revealed was about Niger, not his wife.

[sferris]

This was a lot more entertaining then the Libby trial because it was carried live. It wasn't a stellar day for the White House by any stretch of the imagination of the posters here. Hey, but there are more hearings coming. Let the show trials go on!

[ErnestAbe]

TM, Waxman cannot make a determination that Plame was covert as defined by IIPA. That is a determination that could be made in a court of law if such charges are brought. But no charges have been brought under the IIPA, as you know.

And what is the difference between Ex Order 12958 and 13292? It looks to me like ROve and pals violated both.

[ErnestAbe]

It was weird how the WH security guy, who they sent over to talk about what a great job the WH does protecting classified info, did not know anything about Ex Order 12958 and 13292!

He as as embarrassing as Michael Brown.

[topsecretk9]

Boy, she just most be an utter embarrassment A to Z, to the Agency.

[dblaiseb]

Ostensibly, the hearings were to provide oversight relating to handling of classified information by the White House.

Odd, isn't it, that the issue of sending an independent contractor to investigate sensitive information relating to Iraq attempting to obtain yellowcake without having the guy execute a nondisclosure agreement never came up?

After all, had Wilson kept his mouth shut about his trip and not spoken to Kristoff (or the Dem policy group, or EPIC or his NYT OpEd), there would have been no reason for anyone in the administration to dispute the whole "behested" by the OVP.

As for Toensing's "witch factor", unless I see songbirds fly out of the two-car garage in the middle of Waxman's face when he cracks wise about her age, I refuse to believe she's a practitioner.

[topsecretk9]

BTW -- was she given immunity or was she sworn under oath? - it haven't had a chance to see - because you can be sure the first people to print off the transcript were the boys and girls at Williams and Connelly, in the event the civil trial in not dismissed. This is all fodder for discovery.

[XWL]

My personal Congressman for life (I bear the shame of living in his district), once again distinguishes himself as one of the least honest, least qualified members of Congress (and he's got some stiff opposition in that competition).

[Sue]

Top,

She raised her right hand and swore under oath.

[topsecretk9]

Sue

Besides all the ballyhoo, I can not believe her lawyers would want her to do this. Think for one second about a Williams and Connelly deposition...yikes.

[topsecretk9]

Wait...A Williams & Connelly, Patton Boggs, Baker Botts TAG team. YIKES.

[Sue]

I'm not sure why she agreed to this. To help her book/movie deal would be a likely guess. I suspect the civil trial will not go the way she envisions it. A civil deposition will be the defense attorneys questioning her, not her own lawyer. It will be a far cry from the experience she had today.

[Rick Ballard]

Barney,

I can't figure out "status" either. We found out she's a G-14, Step 6 pay grade (is that good for a 20 year employee of her "importance"?) but I think "status" may be equal to "position" as you state.

Armitage apparently disclosed the "position" to Novak (and Woodward) as it was taken down in the State Department guy's notes that were appended to the INR.

As Cathyf cogently (as always) notes - that screwup belongs to Val and the CIA. After all, the note writer did not include any information whatsoever concerning other CIA personnel present. Only poor Buttercup, too damn dumb to follow rules.

[Patton]

Hardball just jumped the shark.
David Gregory accused the White House of POLITICIZING POLITICAL APPOINTMENTS.

[kate]

This is for the final scene in the movie. What a silly couple.

[topsecretk9]

-- It will be a far cry from the experience she had today.--

Boy, will it ever. And it will a fews days of tag team grilling. Now that's the room I love to be a fly on the wall, if it isn't dismissed.

[Legal Lurker]

Wouldn't it be great if C-Span could carry live coverage of her deposition for the civil trial -- assuming it isn't thrown out before discovery begins.

[Patton]

Joe Wilson outed his wife when he went public as a CIA agent looking at WMD proliferation. Any intelligence organization could Google him and find his wifes name is Valerie Plame, you know that girl that's been calling about WMD proliferation.

[Cycloptichorn]

When the only standard of 'have they done something wrong' is criminal,

You know there's a serious problem with the administration!

It's obvious that there were deleterious effects to the US intelligence community caused by the outing. That doesn't matter at all to anyone here?

The partisanship around this place simply pushes both morals and logic right out the window...

[Sue]

Top,

I don't know about DC civil courts, but in Texas they are limited in the number of hours they can depose someone. Each party will be allowed so many hours to question her and that is it, without court permission to extend it. Maybe Clarice can tell us what DC civil law says on depositions. I suspect they tailor it after federal law which also limits the amount of time for questioning during depositions. It will still be a different experience for her. They will not be favorable to her and the questions will be specific to what each party's attorney wants to get out of her. I'm sure they will coordinate their questions, in order to get them all in.

[Jack Moss]

We may have a case of perjury on Plame as well. here

[Tom Maguire]

TM, Waxman cannot make a determination that Plame was covert as defined by IIPA. That is a determination that could be made in a court of law if such charges are brought.

Please don't repeat my arguments to me without linking to them - I risk schizophrenia.

Secondly, I specifically noted that Waxman could have offered the considered legal opinion of the CIA Counsel's office. That would not be dispositive, but it would be something. Why didn't he?

[topsecretk9]

Sue

Oh each party will get a fair allotted amount of time, but each party will be given a chance to follow up with questions raised by the other defendant parties. I suspect it will be at the **least** a 2 day affair.

[Jane]

Let the show trials go on!

Anything to allow the dems to avoid coming up with a plan for winning the war on terror.

The next time we are attacked sferris, let's all remember your words.

[topsecretk9]

if it doesn't get dismissed - which I think it will.

[clarice feldman]

Someone emailed me the transcript of the testimony of Plame which seems at odds w/ Grenier's trial testimony. If someone can find a way for me to post it w/out taking up a whole thread here, please email me.

[Sara (Squiggler)]

Having just gone thru the depo process for a civil case involving police brutality, I can tell you that about the first hour was taken up with establishing identity, the description of what I could expect from the questioner, etc. The second hour consisted of rather open-ended questions to me that covered maybe the first 15 minutes of a 4 hour ordeal that we went thru at the hands of 2 out-of-control officers. At that point, the other side said they wanted to break until the following Monday and at that time they would finish with me and start with the other witnesses. Come Monday, instead of more depo, I was offered a generous settlement. So, for the most part, my and our witness testimony never got on the record nor did any of my Mother's medical records indicating that she stopped breathing from fright and had to be put on a respirator (she is deceased now, so I was acting on my own behalf and also as a representative for her as both her designated health care provider and her only heir.)

So, by offering the generous settlement, they effectively limited what could or would go on the record. I could have insisted we go to trial and, frankly, I wanted to, but my attorney advised me that the fees I would need to pay the doctors to testify (there were 7 total) as experts would far exceed what the settlement would be. I caved, unhappily, but wisely.

One of the things we never got to in the depo was those 2 officers forcing me into their cruiser and then driving me around in the desert for over an hour, threatening me the whole time. I think they wanted to settle quickly because they knew that kidnapping and civil rights were in the offing in a second Federal case. By accepting the settlement, I'm prevented from pursuing the Fed. case.

Fortunately for Cheney, et al, lack of funds probably won't be a problem in taking the case to trial, but who is funding the Wilsons? They are the plaintiffs and will be expected to pay for the time for any witnesses they call. And if the defendants want,they can keep each of those witnesses either on the stand or hanging around for many many hours, not including all the hours devoted to pretrial depos and meetings, etc.

[Jane]

Clarice,

If you don't find someone who can convert the transcript, will you email me a copy? Thanks.

[Patton]

""""The partisanship around this place simply pushes both morals and logic right out the window...
Posted by: Cycloptichorn"""

Ohh what utter crapola. The left had a field day and enjoyed outing CIA agents for decades...read a book, learn your history. Plame is only special because she is the first CIA agent the left actually embraced. Normally their busy maligning them, calling them murderers, criminals, investigating them, etc. etc.

Now all the sudden the left has crocodile tears for a CIA employees, but don't seem to care one bit that she was outed first by her husband, second by an Iraqi liberation opponent, Armitage, and the left has only cheered when newspapers outed the NSA covert program, the CIA rendition program, the CIA flights, the CIA covert operations in Italy, etc. etc.

Go sell stupid somewhere else, perhaps a nice blog full of gullible idiots, like FDL.

[Brummy]

As stated above, Ms. Plame worked for the CIA from the time she graduated from university. Most likely, it is the only job she has ever held. She apparently was "covert" during her career. I would think that she received training along the way to become a very good liar. Just saying.

[Patton]

"""It's obvious that there were deleterious effects to the US intelligence community caused by the outing. That doesn't matter at all to anyone here?
Posted by: Cycloptichorn |"""

Yes, we all agree, whoever sent Wilson and allowed him to blabbed his lying mouth off in public should no longer work at the CIA.

JUST SO HAPPENS THAT THAT PERSON IS VALERIE PLAME. MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!

[Charlie (Colorado)]

You know there's a serious problem with the administration!

As opposed to the previous one, where the standard was "pled down from a felony to a misdemeanor."

[Charlie (Colorado)]

I would think that she received training along the way to become a very good liar. Just saying.

Not from my experience with CIA.

They do usually know all the good restaurants, though.

[Patton]

Lets look at Plame i another way, supposed she was actually Karl Rove.

Would the left buy her story??

That Karl Rove had nothing to do with sending his spouse, even though:

He had a conversation with with a person about sending his spouse.
Then they went to the boss and told him they should send his spouse.
Then Rove writes an e-mail recommending his spouse.
Then Rove takes his spouse to the meeting at HQ, and introduces his spouse to everyone.
Then Rove attends the debriefing of his spouse.

Would Waxman be saying Rove was clearly not involved in sending his spouse?

Yeah, right.....

[windansea]

enjoy trolls!

Rep. Kennedy: I Was Hooked on OxyContin

NEW YORK (AP) - Rep. Patrick Kennedy said Friday he sought treatment for an addiction to the painkiller OxyContin months before wrecking his car outside the U.S. Capitol last year.

The Rhode Island Democrat told NBC-TV's "Today" show that he felt great in his recovery from substance abuse and was determined not to let the disease "take its toll on me ever again."

Kennedy checked into the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota last May after the car crash, saying at the time that he had also been at the clinic the previous Christmas. He said only that he was addicted to "pain medication" and did not name OxyContin.

[Michael H]

"The name is Plame, Valkery Plame," she purred. "I like to stir the men before I shake them."

[Barney Frank]

Rick,

--As Cathyf cogently (as always) notes - that screwup belongs to Val and the CIA.--

Yeah, I meant to compliment Cathy on the other thread for that beautiful skewering of Plame's ambitious blunders.

[SlimGuy]

Thom,

Could we have a "Let's Pretend JOM is the Swamp" day (or hour, even)?

You could start by pithing a couple of thread lice. Well, you could if they had a brain.

Posted by: Rick Ballard | March 16, 2007 at 01:34 PM

Rick what I want to really know from these entities is do all 3 suns on their planet rise in sequence, are their orbits the same or different, and with three suns how or if they have to deal with global warming.

So many questions they have not addressed.

[SlimGuy]

Per the questioning today she was getting ready to be advanced to GS-15.

Now I would love the see the stats on just how many GS-15 or above field agents the CIA has.

That has all the markings of management and not low life front line grunt.

People are supposed to advance as they gain experience and value to the enterprise.

At that level even if she never was outed , her clear future was management, not active participation.

[Sara (Squiggler)]

OT -- According to the news, Senators Carl Levin (D) and Lindsey Graham (R) went to Gitmo and witnessed the KSM confession. Rosie O'Donnell looks even more stupid, if that's possible.

[SlimGuy]

He as as embarrassing as Michael Brown.

Posted by: ErnestAbe | March 16, 2007 at 01:50 PM

Like you really have a lot of room to talk!

[arcanorum]

her clear future was management, not active participation.

'In a hierarchy every employee tends to rise to his level of incompetence' -Peter Principle

she had nowhere to go but down.

[arcanorum]

Rosie O'Donnell looks even more stupid, if that's possible.

not unless she had peewee hermans head surgically attached next to her own.

[sylvia]

I'm sure this was discussed in the past here, but wasn't it a problem for Wilson to publish information from a classified "spying" trip? I heard something about no non-disclosure agreement, but still his mission was classified wasn't it?

[Jane]

She really gives gays a bad name!

[Rick Ballard]

Slim,

So you think they're pod people from an oddly Aristotelian solar system, right?

Hmmm...

Yeah, I can buy that. A place where sentient life never developed, totally static in every respect. The world was struck a glancing blow by a passing comet which picked up pod spores and then deposited them on Earth at the beginning of what became known as the Enlightment.

It all makes sense now.

[Patrick R. Sullivan]

C-Span has the video of the Waxman hearing. Click on the appropriate link.

Victoria Toensing's testimony starts at 3:19.

[Ralph L.]

"Valkery Plame"
Is Wilson her flying steed with a magnificent mane? Why did the CIA let her out of the ring of fire? Does that make Armitage her Siegfried?

[SlimGuy]

Someone emailed me the transcript of the testimony of Plame which seems at odds w/ Grenier's trial testimony. If someone can find a way for me to post it w/out taking up a whole thread here, please email me.

Posted by: clarice feldman | March 16, 2007 at 02:30 PM

Clarice

Ask them for a linky thingy for where they got it from or post it to a file sharing place and reference the link.

Two hours of transcript would overload the thread.

[Fresh Air]

Only poor Buttercup, too damn dumb to follow rules.

Well, you know Rick, she did graduate from Penn State.

[azaghal]

I hope I'm not repeating old info, but Toensing's testimony is up at:

ToensingTestimony

I couldn't load it.

[Rick Ballard]

Charlie (Colorado) put it up here - Plame transcript.

Thanks, Charlie.

[jerry]

"The name is Plame, Valkery Plame," she purred. "I like to stir the men before I shake them."

Yes, I'd surrender without a fight -- keep me away from anything secret.

[sylvia]

"At the time of the publication of Robert Novak's column on July 14,2003, Ms. Wilson's CIA employment status was covert."

Still, sadly, even if we don't agree, the fact that a CIA bigshot is even saying this meant that he probably said that to Fitz too, which meant that Fitz had cover to use the IIPA charge as a basis for an investigation. Even if it turned out not to be true later, Fitz could get away with it because he was going on the knowledge he had at the time. So even if there was no crime, I guess he could still say his investigation was obstructed.

It reminds me a little of search warrant issues. For example, if the police go into a private area after getting a tip, which later turns out to be wrong, mistakenly thinking a crime was being committed at that moment, and then they find out they were mistaken, but at the scene find a bunch of drugs, they are still allowed to bust the dwellers there for drugs, even without a search warrant. However, the cops are not allowed false pretense and to falsely claim that a crime is being committed in a house, to bust in to look for drugs. If the drugs were found in this circumstance with no search warrant and under false pretenses, such evidence would not be allowed.

So Fitz had reason to believe a crime was committed, according to the knowledge he had at the time, so the charges will stick I guess.

[clarice feldman]

Flares has put up the transcript of Plame's testimony:

http://yargb.blogspot.com/2007/03/transcript-of-plame-testimony.html>Waxman-Plame

[JOMJunkie]

I was listening to the hearing today on C-Span Radio via XM satellite and heard someone in the background shout "impreach Cheney first". The hearing was a complete joke and I'm outraged the Republicans took the day off.

[Patton]

I wonder if the person that 'happened by', this 'mysterious stranger' was Dick Cheney??

[KevinNYC]

Syvlia, No.

Wilson's misson was overt, not covert. He made this clear when the CIA asked him to go over. He said it would be impossible to do a covert mission there, because he was known in Niger and his presence in Niger would have been noticed.

[clarice feldman]

It was covert only to the WH which knew bupkus about Munchausen's Mission to Africa, however.

[darwin]

I'm not sure she was "sworn" in. Does it matter if one is not asked "to swear"? Someone noticed that she was merely asked to "promise".

http://www.penraker.com/archives/007721.html

[KevinNYC]

Sylvia, Fitz was not even appointed when Scooter Libby lied to the FBI. The Justice Department, long before Fitz was involved, determined there was enough of a crime to investigate. The CIA did make a recommendation that an IIPA investigation take place. Plame's covert status was probably affirmatively determined at the very beginning of the investigation. If the Justice Department doubted there was enough to investigate an IIPA disclosure, they wouldn't have had to interview Scooter Libby inf the first place.

[sylvia]

Okay I'm thinking a little more about my warrant example. Yes an honest mistake can give the police cover, but that mistake only goes so far. For instance, cops can mistakenly go into a house and if they see drugs lying around, they can bust the people. However, they can't go into a house, see that there is no crime, and THEN start SEARCHING for drugs, ie going through all the dresser drawers, into the garage etc. When they see there is no crime, and no other crime is apparent, they have to leave.

So it should be with Fitz. Yes he can start an investigation based on good-faith knowledge he got from the CIA, and charge any apparent crime that turn up. However if at any point Fitz realizes that no crime of the IIPA has occurred, then any crimes committed AFTER that point should not be brought forth. So the relevant question is, did Fitz have any reason to understand that Plame was not covert before any of the supposed crimes such as perjury occurred.

[jerry]

The idea that Toensing is the sole judge of IIPA protections is absurd, she's seriously compromised regarding this case, and from the hearing we've heard that she's also probably dead wrong in her interpretation - despite her long campaign to undermine the seriousness of l'affair Plame.

I'll say again that I'd put Toensing in front of a grand jury, she seems to be central to this case and has probably been defending an expert opinion she'd given people the WH back in 2003 (she is the sole global IIPA authority after all, and card carrying true-red Republican).

If I were the Wilson's I'd also want to ask spooky Victoria T (shiver) a bunch of questions.

With that I'll bid you all a Happy St. Patrick's Day, toss out the snakes.

[sylvia]

"The Justice Department, long before Fitz was involved, determined there was enough of a crime to investigate. "

Well probably true. But can we then accuse Fitz of NEGLIGENCE for not checking this out better? Again, a mistake can only get you so far. Negligence is also not allowed, and Fitz should have then taken it upon himself to investigate the situation more.

[tina]

I was watching a little of Hardball tonight, David Gregory was the host. The discussion of Plame came up; Cooper was one of the guests. Cooper said (and I will paraphrase) "The testimony during trial revealed that you David received a leak about Val"; David completely ignored the remark -- made no comment about it at all.

[Semanticleo]

Let's transfer off this bus to nowhere.

WASHINGTON — The White House dropped its contention Friday that former Counsel Harriet Miers first raised the idea of firing U.S. attorneys, blaming "hazy memories" as e-mails shed new light on Karl Rove's role. Support eroded further for Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.

Presidential press secretary Tony Snow previously had asserted Miers was the person who came up with the idea, but he said Friday, "I don't want to try to vouch for origination." He said, "At this juncture, people have hazy memories."

Hazy memories. >chuckle>

[Other Tom]

I missed much of today's blogging as the wife and I were at the change-of-command ceremony on the flight deck of USS NImitz, quite near to where we live. What a refreshing thing it was to see all those people, so enthusiastic and so smartly turned out. They've made two combat deployments to the Arabian Gulf, and are preparing for a third.

Such a contrast to come home and see that whining, puling CIA desk-jockey humiliating herself before the nation, aided by the oleaginous Mr. Waxman. At least the world now knows that her "outing" was not a crime at all. She injected herelf into partisan politics, and she got burned. Good. If other CIA employees learn to avoid partisan politics as a result, the nation will be well served.

As I said on an earlier thread, if in fact her career was ruined, I'm very glad. She made a poor choice of husbands, and it cost her. She's not the first, and she won't be the last.

[MikeS]

Valerie Plame’s status seems to have been more covert than the status of a CIA janitor, but somewhat less covert than what we generally think of as a spy. She was less covert than the agents the IIPA sought to protect. Indeed she was not even covert enough to warrant flagging her identity as covert by the CIA personnel who released the information about her. That is to say flagging was warranted but the CIA folks talking about her didn’t realize it.

[sylvia]

And by the way, there is tons of search warrant case law in the law books. It's a pretty popular thing to litigate apparently. I looked that up when the police searched my car at a roadblock, without any real reason I thought. Of course, I didn't have anything illegal, but it bothered me anyway. But the upside is now I have much more legal knowledge about that issue that I can use years later to help me figure out the Plame issue. It all works out in the end!

[Other Tom]

My own memory is rather hazy as well, Cleo, but as best I recall George Bush will be in the White House until January 20, 2009. I also seem to recall that Valerie Plame quit her job and is moving to Santa Fe, New Mexico. I think I heard recently that the surge seems to be working quite well in Baghdad, and that Rudy still has a comfortable lead over the Left's current front-runner, Mrs. Clinton.

Of course, it could all be early-onset Alzheimer's. Tell me where I've gone wrong.

[ben]

"Despite her campaign to undermine the seriousness of the Plame affair"

Sorry Jerry, it's impossible to undermine something that had zero seriousness to start with...

[Looking_for_a_way_out]

So I run some errands, and Plame is still the villain, and even the DCI doesn't know enough to identify someone as covert. I have read many threads on this site and at "the swamp" and my understanding of the IIPA at this point is that proving her status would be the responsibility of the prosecution in a criminal trial when a charge was violating the IIPA. The fact that no IIPA charge has been brought does not indicate whether Plame was "covert" or not. It simply means that the prosecutor did not feel he had a good case for the IIPA statute. Necessary witness testimony could be unclear, or any of the elements required to charge that statute could be missing. Now both the DCI and the investigating prosecutor in this case have gone out of their way to address Plame's status. Hayden has been appointed to two positions by GWB, if there was any debate as to her status, wouldn't he have hedged his statement to protect his boss' reputation? Wouldn't he have gone to the CIA's legal office to confirm her status as it pertained to the statute? Is the argument that, once again, GWB has appointed an incompetent that would provide such a damning doccument re: a flammable situation, to a congressional committee chaired by a member of the opposition party, without doing his due dilligence.

I look forward to a response.

TM - Thanks for the forum.

[KevinNYC]

Mike S, what CIA personnel released information about her?
Armitage, Rove, Fleischer, and Libby were the ones who released the information about her to the press.

Are you talking about internally released? Because in that case all the folks mentioned above swore not to release classified info.

[sylvia]

"Wilson's misson was overt, not covert"

Thanks Kevin.

[SlimGuy]

It all makes sense now.

Posted by: Rick Ballard | March 16, 2007 at 03:31 PM

Yup about as much sense as D Cup training bras!

Or at least something like that.

[Barney Frank]

--Tell me where I've gone wrong.--

Trying to have a conversation with an ass like Cleo?

[bbbustard]

Thunderous is the silence of the current CIA director - Waxman, and others, have said before the nation that Hayden agreed Plame was a covert agent.
If this is not in fact true. why is Hayden silent?

[MikeS]

Kevin:
Classified info is supposed to be 'flagged' as classified so that everyone knows they shouldn't talk about it.
Haven't you been paying attention?

[Rick Ballard]

"Armitage, Rove, Fleischer, and Libby were the ones who released the information about her to the press."

Not exactly. Let me fix it.

"Valerie Plame neglected basic security procedures involving meetings with non-identified briefers from other agencies, as a result of her carelessness the State Department note taker released the information about her to his boss in a manner that wound up in the press."

There. All better.

[maryrose]

tina:
I did a doubletake when I heard Cooper say that Gregory got a leak about Plame. I at first thought he was being disingenious but now believe he's upset that Gregory got off scot-free and yes Gregory said absolutely nothing in response. Call Gregory at the appeal hearing. He has something big to say in this case as per our leader TM asserts.

[sylvia]

Yeah Kevin, sadly I think you are right with this "Sylvia, Fitz was not even appointed when Scooter Libby lied to the FBI. The Justice Department, long before Fitz was involved, determined there was enough of a crime to investigate."

If the FBI and the Justice Department went on good faith knowledge, I suppose they can use any crimes that were committed at the FBI interiews. So if Libby wanted to make hay about this with anyone about false charges, it would have to be with the CIA.

Then once the crime of "false statement" was committed, the prosecutor could then open a grand jury into that crime, irregardless of the base charge.

[sylvia]

" as per our leader TM "

IS this a cult now?

[Jane]

maryrose,

There is no "appeal hearing".

[Semanticleo]

At least Patterico is on point, notwithstanding latimes OCD.

"But let me take a step back and make a few things clear:

* Alberto Gonzales is either a liar or incredibly incompetent. I think he’s a dead man walking. I predict that, late tomorrow (Friday) afternoon, or possibly one week from tomorrow, Alberto Gonzales is going to decide he needs to spend more time with his family.

* The Kyle Sampson plan to sneak in U.S. Attorneys under a little-known Patriot Act provision had a weaselly appearance to it. It had the immature feel of a little boy saying; “Hey, look! A new bike! Let’s ride it on the freeway!” And I am very upset with his scheming to lie to Congress about it.

* It looks horrible for Pete Domenici to have called up David Iglesias about a pending case."

[Looking_for_a_way_out]

"Hayden has been appointed to two positions by GWB, if there was any debate as to her status, wouldn't he have hedged his statement to protect his boss' reputation?"

It just occurred to me. Maybe Hayden did hedge his statement. After all, Tom was still able to find a reason to assert Plame was not covert per the definition of the statute.

[TMF]

Jerry

"The idea that Toensing is the sole judge of IIPA protections is absurd, she's seriously compromised regarding this case,"

Couldnt agree more. Its an astute point.

Thats why an impartial, non-partisan, unbiased legal expert named Fitzgerald looked at the IIPA and whether any violations occurred very carefully.

And .....agreed with TOENSING

However, Im sure if you put a REAL OBJECTIVE EXPERT on the IIPA, like, say, Dave Corn, or Chris Matthews, or Henry Wackoff, im sure youd get a different result

[sylvia]

"So if Libby wanted to make hay about this with anyone about false charges, it would have to be with the CIA."

I'm responding to my own post now. I don't even think Libby can do that, because to get the CIA legally on that, if say Plame was not legally covert, he would have to prove malicious intent or severe indifference on the part of the CIA to give out wrong information about Plame. Since at worst it was probably an honest mistake on the CIA's part, Libby won't be able to get any legal satisfaction out of that route.

I think Libby better stick to the memory expert.

fyi - the Plame issue is on Hardball repeat now..

[KevinNYC]

MikeS, illuminate me.

Where did the folks in the White House/State Department learn about Valerie Plame? Was was it not marked as classified?

[Ralph L.]

" as per our leader TM "
Is this a cult now?

Only when he becomes "our Beloved Leader TM"

[lurker]

Why exactly do they include the word status? Does this mean her employment at the CIA was not classified, as in anyone could mention she worked there, but that her precise position could not be?

I take it that it means whether she had Top Secret, Secret, or Confidential status is classified.

[Jane]

Where did the folks in the White House/State Department learn about Valerie Plame? Was was it not marked as classified?

I believe they learned it from Robert Novak's column which was definately not marked as classified.

[Semanticleo]

" as per our leader TM "

Maguire is merely a demigod.

Glenn Reynolds is the genuine "El Supremo'

[sylvia]

Man, Cooper didn't put Gregory on the spot enough. He said "even you might have gotten the leak David" but he kept talking on and didn't wait for Gregory to answer. He let Gregory off. Too bad.

[bbbustard]

You all seem to feeel that there's a preponderance of evidence that anyone in D.C. this morning was guilty of perjury. I do realize that it's a dull town.
But I also see desperately parsed posts about the definition of covert.
The precise legal definition of Plame's status is irrelevant. What matters is what her husband found, and what the President said. All else is sort of silly.