Posted on 01/12/2005 6:02:02 AM PST by Pikamax
By Victoria Toensing and Bruce W. Sanford
Wednesday, January 12, 2005; Page A21
Why have so many people rushed to assume that a crime was committed when someone "in the administration" gave columnist Robert D. Novak the name of CIA "operative" Valerie Plame? Novak published her name while suggesting that nepotism might have lurked behind the CIA assignment of her husband, Joseph Wilson, to a job for which he was credentially challenged: The agency sent him to Niger to determine whether Iraq was interested in acquiring uranium from that country, although he was an expert neither on nuclear weapons nor on Niger.
Journalists are being threatened with jail for not testifying who gave them information about Plame -- even journalists who did not write about Plame but only talked with sources about her. Ironically, the special prosecutor has pursued this case with characteristic zeal after major publications editorialized that a full investigation and prosecution of the government source was necessary. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution even claimed that the allegations came "perilously close to treason."
It's time for a timeout on a misguided and mechanical investigation in which there is serious doubt that a crime was even committed. Federal courts have stated that a reporter should not be subpoenaed when the testimony sought is remote from criminal conduct or when there is no compelling "government interest," i.e., no crime. As two people who drafted and negotiated the scope of the 1982 Intelligence Identities Protection Act, we can tell you: The Novak column and the surrounding facts do not support evidence of criminal conduct.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Did Leaky Leahy see any jail time?
Full reposts from WP are prohibited, even in replies..
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1111944/posts
Thanks,
AM
The special prosecutor and reporters should ask Chief U.S. District Judge Thomas Hogan, who is overseeing the grand jury, to conduct a hearing to require the CIA to identify all affirmative measures it was taking to shield Plame's identity. Before we even think about sending reporters to prison for doing their jobs, the court should determine that all the elements of a crime are present.a pretty reasonable approach.
Why? Only because it doesn't involve a neocommunist reporter. If Herbert or Dowd had done EXACTLY the same thing, there would be no investigation! It is sort of like Berger stealing official documents; were he a Republican, the media would be beating the drums 24/7 and calling for results and his immediate execution. As a dem, EVERYONE knows he is a lying, scumbag thief and, so, what do you expect; where's the news?
Bump
Bump
Who outted valerie?
My guess her own Hubby as re was a high ranking EMPLOYEE of the US Gov when he went to Niger.
If it was a REP it would have been leaked prior to the ELECTION!!!
This investigation sure is dragging on. By comparison, the 9-11 Commission - despite its glaring faults - was a model of dispatch and efficiency. How long can it take to investigate one leak? I guess we'll know when this investigation finally wraps up.
My thinking on this is that there has been other criminal activity unearthed in the Grand Jury investigation. Following other leads is what is taking more time.
Toensing and Sanford are making an obvious mistake in their article - namely that they are presupposing that the only possible crime that the grand jury is investigating is the outing of Plame as a CIA operative. Since grand jury proceedings are secret, the target of the inquiry may not even be known by outsiders. It's entirely plausible that the grand jury is investigating other criminal acts, for example, the possibility that Wilson was a knowing participant in a conspiracy (with elements inside the CIA) to misuse that agency's resources in a blatant attempt to damage national security, either to falsely discredit the Bush administration or to help Saddam Hussein. It would not surprise me to discover that some of the UN's oil-for-fraud money was involved here. Remember the forged 'yellowcake' memo (which came to light as a forgery after Wilson had done his Niger trek and published his NYT piece), which supposedly was crafted by French intelligence agents as part of an elaborate double-cross, probably intended to embarass London and Washington and shield Saddam's real clandestine uranium supply activity? Isn't it plausible that the grand jury's charter is much broader than simply the Plame affair?
"Was there a crime." ? Do the authors know who they're slobbering for, or is a natural reflexive action when a lib has his b*lls in a bind.??
Only if one thinks that's really what Fitzgerald is looking at...
The 9/11 Commission was public (except the occasional sitting or former president) and had a deadline: before the election.
Fitzgerald is conducting a grand jury.
Completely different.
You are correct.
However, I did put this article in my Plame/Wilson folder because it does a marvelous point by point of refuting the conventional wisdom angle.
Isn't it plausible that the grand jury's charter is much broader than simply the Plame affair?
Yes, and I've long stated that's exactly what's going on.
Thank you for the ping. That appellate ruling on the contempt citations is due any day now...
What are your thoughts on this story, exactly?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.