Posted on 10/24/2005 9:05:41 PM PDT by InvisibleChurch
Monday, Oct. 24, 2005 10:24 p.m. EDT Times: Cheney First Disclosed CIA Official's Name
The New York Times reported late Monday that Vice President Cheney has been directly linked to the so-called "Plamegate" scandal involving the disclosure of the name of Valerie Plame, a CIA officer.
The paper reported that Cheney's chief of staff, Lewis "Scooter" Libby "first learned about the C.I.A. officer at the heart of the leak investigation in a conversation with Mr. Cheney weeks before her identity became public in 2003."
The paper sourced their story to "lawyers involved in the case."
The Times said that notes taken by Libby differ from his own testimony before the grand jury as to when he first learned of Plame's identity.
"The notes, taken by Mr. Libby during the conversation, for the first time place Mr. Cheney in the middle of an effort by the White House to learn about Ms. Wilson’s husband, Joseph C. Wilson IV, who was questioning the administration’s handling of intelligence about Iraq’s nuclear program to justify the war."
Cheney apparently discovered details of Plame's CIA work after he questioned then CIA Director George J. Tenet about her husband, Ambassador Wilson.
But even if Libby or Cheney had disclosed Plame's identity as a CIA officer they may not have committed a crime.
"Disclosing a covert agent’s identity can be a crime, but only if the person who discloses it knows the agent’s undercover status," the Times said.
I would imagine this is a sort of policy conversation that the VP could legitimately have with any significant staff member with clearance. This is leaving aside the fact that Plame was not a covert agent then anyway, and furthermore that there is no indication he knew that she ever had been. It must have been Tenet who gave him the name and the fact that she had recommended her husband for the job, indicating that she was an employee of the CIA (which she was, at a regular above-board desk job). So what's the big deal?
"I think the NYT has fallen over the edge. This sounds like wild eyed hysteria."
It is a mindless obsession with hate and trying anything to destroy the Bush administration.
The Times and their pals are lost in another world.
What will they try next? Catch Bush at failing to brush his teeth before going to bed one night?
Amazingly, you appear to have convicted the White House on the basis of an unattributed story in the NYT.
Who told Cheney?
And who told that person and so on and so on.
It really comes down to who told Novak (and knowing he would then print it.)
Chief of staff blabs to UNCLEARED pressies ----FOUL!!!! Ref's Flags litter the field.
***
Pick up the flags, there is no foul, since F/Plame was not covert. 2nd down.
Um, wasn't her name on a PUBLIC WEB SITE before then?????? Listed as a CIA employee????? So how is this "leaking" anything?
If her name was on a public website listed as a CIA employee, I would have to agree with you. I hadn't seen that info. Searching web for story.
It's been posted here a million times, and I don't really keep links. The only question is the DATE of the website and of Wilson outing his own wife. That I can't tell you.
What about those of us who would rather not see Republicans govern like Democrats?
No, it wasn't.
We've apparently arrived at the stage of this where Fitz is determining if Libby gave inconsistent testimony. I don't think there's anything else going on in this case.
Does anyone really care about this?
Heck I think everybody knew about Valerie. I recall seeing her name, job rank, and phone number on a number of walls of Truck Stops of America. ha!
It sure is. They are desperately trying to turn this minor story into another Watergate.
If there is a trial to come, it's going to last forever!
That's it -- the agenda/ bash Bush. Machiavellian.
Vice President George Allen
You don't get it. In order for a perjury charge to stick, the false information must be material. You can't just throw a bunch of alleged crimes against a wall and expect me to see that any of them will stick.
A witness in a murder case can deliberately lie about the color of his socks if it has nothing to do without the murder, and not have to worry about perjury charges.
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.