Posted on 07/13/2005 10:33:50 PM PDT by Crackingham
"The fact is, Karl Rove did not leak classified information." So said Ken Mehlman, head of the Republican Party.
"I didn't know her name. I didn't leak her name." So said Karl Rove of Valerie Wilson/Plame last year on CNN.
"He did not tell any reporter that Valerie Plame worked for the CIA." So said Robert Luskin, Rove's attorney, after Newsweek reported Rove had been a source for Time magazine's Matt Cooper but before Newsweek revealed a Cooper email that said Rove had told Cooper that "wilson's wife...apparently works at the agency on wmd issues."
The White House may be stonewalling on the Rove scandal, but the Rove camp--aided by its echo-ists in the conservative media--has been busy establishing the twin-foundation for his defense: he did not mention Valerie Wilson/Plame by name; he did not disclose classified information. The first of these two assertions is misleading and irrelevant; the second is wrong.
According to Cooper's email, Rove told Cooper that "Wilson's wife"--not "Valerie Plame," or "Valerie Wilson"--worked at the CIA. But this distinction has absolutely no legal relevance. Under the relevant law--the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982--a crime is committed when a government official (not a journalist) "intentionally discloses any information identifying" an undercover intelligence officer. The act does not say a name must be disclosed. By telling a reporter that Joseph Wilson's wife was a CIA officer, Rove was clearly disclosing "identifying" information. There was only one Mrs. Joseph Wilson. With such information in hand, Cooper or anyone else could easily have ascertained the name of this officer. (A Google search at the time would have yielded the name--and maiden name--of Wilson's wife.) Revealing the name is not the crime; it's disclosing information that IDs the officer. Imagine if a government official told a reporter, "At 3:15, a fellow in a green hat, carrying a red umbrella and holding a six-pack of Mountain Dew, will be tap-dancing in front of the Starbucks at Connecticut Avenue and R Street--he's the CIA's best undercover officer working North Korea." That official could not defend himself, under this law, by claiming that he had not revealed the name of this officer. The issue is identifying, not naming. Rove and his allies cannot hide behind his no-name claim.
A reading of this law also indicates that if Cooper's email is accurate then Rove did pass classified information to Cooper. It's possible that Rove did so unwittingly. That is, he did not know Valerie Wilson's employment status at the CIA was classified information. But he and his posse cannot say the information he slipped to Cooper was not classified.
The Intelligence Identities Protection Act makes it a crime to identify "a covert agent" of the United States. The law defines "covert agent," in part, as "a present or retired officer or employee of an intelligence agency or a present or retired member of the Armed Forces assigned to duty with an intelligence agency whose identity as such an officer, employee, or member is classified information." (My emphasis.)
This definition clearly recognizes that the identity of an undercover intelligence officer is "classified information." The law also notes that a "covert agent" has a "classified relationship to the United States." Since the CIA asked the Justice Department to investigate the Plame/CIA leak and the Justice Department affirmed the need for an investigation and special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, once handed the case, pursued the matter vigorously, it is reasonable to assume that Valerie Wilson fits the definition of a "covert agent." That means she has a "classified relationship" with the government.
By disclosing Valerie Wilson's relationship to the CIA, Rove was passing classified information to a reporter.
David Corn is a moron.
Ohio newspaper holding two investigative stories after NY Times reporter jailed
http://www.ap.org/pages/indnews/
Excerpt:
"The climate has always been different," Clifton said. "Let's face it: During the Watergate years with Deep Throat, it was never even thought of. It wasn't even a remote possibility that someone was going to get subpoenaed because of Deep Throat squealing. That has changed so dramatically in the last few years."
THEY'RE GETTING NERVOUS! LOL!
Does everyone realize society has had the pleasure of one less MSM reporterettee because she is in jail?
We have a reporterette who is in jail and not making more leftwing spin stories.
If Rove was the source, he waived confidentiality and she would have been able to disclose her source. She spent all these days in jail because rove is NOT the source.
Anyways, one less wacko left wing reporterette.
No, not exactly. The Email says, "it was, KR said, wilson's wife, who apparently works at the agency on wmd issues who authorized the trip."
IOW, Cooper added the phrase, "who apparently works at the agency on wmd issues". He didn't say, IN THE EMAIL, that Rove said that phrase. Just using the actual Email itself, you cannot conclude that Rove said anything other than, "Wilson's wife authorized the trip."
Now, Rove MAY HAVE said this to Cooper, but you cannot draw that conclusion FROM COOPER'S EMAIL. It is a logical conclusion for Cooper himself to draw, but the Email doesn't say that Rove said that. Think about it: If Rove only said that Wilson's wife authorized the Niger trip, it would be a logical conclusion that his wife worked at the CIA.
With that in mind, can you see how the phrase, "who apparently works at the agency on wmd issues" might be Cooper's conclusion, rather than Rove's actual words during the phone call?
Or is there evidence from Rove or Luskin that Rove said that phrase?
Thanks Phil, I'll be sure to check that out! :)
There is a poll to FReep that is wayyyyyyyy slanted the other way. I don't know why these folks are frothing at the mouth over this, but they sure are.
http://www.hamptonroads.com/pilotonline/
There is a poll to FReep that is wayyyyyyyy slanted the other way. I don't know why these folks are frothing at the mouth over this, but they sure are.
http://www.hamptonroads.com/pilotonline/
yaaawwwnnnn......
Post 86 brought to you by the Department of Redundancy Department. :)
Good Lord, I live in Hampton Roads. Sick.
If the press gave 1/10 of the coverage to the FACT Sandy Berger stuffed top secret documents down his pants, maybe I'd take them a bit more seriously.
The left's response, shouting, with facial expression all screwed up:
Because he is an evil, Evil REPUBLICAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!
CA....
They left pathetic many moons ago, they have progressed into insanity.
I saw one of the repub reps on FOX - and he was the one who said it - and the host agreed the column came waaaaay before the Cooper/Rove conversation.
You could probably Google Novak's column and get that date - and then maybe the RNC would have info re the date of Karl's conversation.
Two possibilities:
1. George Tennant. He held a press conference the evening of the day that Rove spoke with Cooper in order to clarify that the CIA had not sent Wilson on an official mission at the behest of the Vice President (as Wilson was suggesting).
And why did Rove tell Cooper?
From the context of Cooper's e-mail, it sounds very much like Rove was trying to do Cooper and Time a favor -- suggesting that they not "get too far out there" on Wilson's story, which contained some easily identifiable errors of fact.
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.