Replies

from http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0507/14/wbr.01.html

BLITZER: But the other argument that's been made against you is that you've sought to capitalize on this extravaganza, having that photo shoot with your wife, who was a clandestine officer of the CIA, and that you've tried to enrich yourself writing this book and all of that.

What do you make of those accusations, which are serious accusations, as you know, that have been leveled against you?

WILSON: My wife was not a clandestine officer the day that Bob Novak blew her identity.

BLITZER: But she hadn't been a clandestine officer for some time before that?

WILSON: That's not anything that I can talk about. And, indeed, I'll go back to what I said earlier, the CIA believed that a possible crime had been committed, and that's why they referred it to the Justice Department.

She was not a clandestine officer at the time that that article in "Vanity Fair" appeared. And I have every right to have the American public know who I am and not to have myself defined by those who would write the sorts of things that are coming out, being spewed out of the mouths of the RNC...

I appreciate your desire for precision, but I do not understand your point. The last paragraph seems to be a total non sequitur. Wilson must have known perfectly well what Blitzer was trying to confirm, namely, since she had not been a cladestine agent in a foreign country for over 5 years at the time she was identified as CIA, nobody broke the law. He is clearly wriggling, by introducing irrelevant material. Strangely, his answer is to the questions that Blitzer has yet to ask!! --
"I have every right to have the American public know who I am and not to have myself defined by those who would write the sorts of things that are coming out, being spewed out of the mouths of the RNC..."

Blitzer then obliges by asking the question:

"BLITZER: Who did you vote for in 2000?"

I would swear the phrase "defined by" was in answer to Couric's question about whether he is a Democrat. Can anybody verify.

The whole interchange with Blitzer is bizarre. Wilson's clarification does not clarify anything, except that if someone is known to work for the CIA and their picture shows up in Vanity Fair they are not likely to sent anytime soon on a covert operation. I kind of doubt that anybody was sending the wife of an Ambassador on a cladestine operation period. Once she married Wilson her cover was blown!

I agree that the exchange was disjointed, but I was focusing on the 'clarified' statement - I put that in quotes because I kind of thought that was what he was saying yesterday. Wolf is asking him to respond to various allegations of 'wrongdoing' - trying to make book money, etc., and specifically mentions the 'photo shoot' with his 'clandestine officer' wife. In response, Wilson says she wasn't a 'clandestine officer' on the day Novak published. IF he is responding to the question, it reads to me like he is saying, "There was nothing wrong with doing that photo shoot because my wife wasn't clandestine - she'd already been outed by Novak." Then, when Wolf asks the follow-up, he declined to answer.

Now, clearly there was a point in the day - after the Trib hit the street? - when Plame was no longer clandestine. Her name was in the paper as a CIA 'operative'. The question that didn't get asked is whether she was clandestine on that day BEFORE Novak's column hit the street.

Of course, given web publishing, the column was probably available the night before or early that morning. ;-)

So, IF he was saying what is being construed here, i.e. "My wife was NO LONGER covert when Novak wrote his column," then he was not responding even a little bit to the question that was asked - you see my point? If he was saying, "She was covert any more because Novak published," he is responding, somewhat, to the question.

""BLITZER: But she hadn't been a clandestine officer for some time before that?

WILSON: That's not anything that I can talk about. And, indeed, I'll go back to what I said earlier, the CIA believed that a possible crime had been committed, and that's why they referred it to the Justice Department.

She was not a clandestine officer at the time that that article in "Vanity Fair" appeared. And I have every right to have the American public know who I am and not to have myself defined by those who would write the sorts of things that are coming out, being spewed out of the mouths of the RNC..."""

For Wilson's twists on Rove, Wilson sure has a few of his own. Blitzer raises the legitimate subject about Plame's appearing in a photo. Wilson twists it into a persecution of himself, the "RNC" somehow defining him and not permitting him to speak out.

Also, and not for the first time, he points to an unsourced leak to the press that his wife didn't recommend him to prove the Senate Intel Committee's findings otherwise were wrong.