[angkor]

1) Is it in your mind plausible that Fitzgerald didn't know whether Plame was or wasn't covert under the Identities Act within the first week of his investigation?

About as plausible as President Bush adding gravitas to the investigation by similar utterances.

---

Now you see, that's an evasion. Fitzgerald was working from the Counterintelligence office at DoJ, which is very specifically charged with investigating and prosecuting intelligence cases (e.g. Ames).

Fitzgerald was tasked to answer the question: was the disclosure of Plame's CIA status a violation of the law. If so, who did it?

Hence, Fitzgerald's first duty would be to determine Plame's actual status. For all he knew, she could have been a receptionist or a secretary.

It defies common sense to assert that Fitzgerald would take one further step in his investigation without determining (a) Plame's status and (b) whether any law applied to her specific "outing".

Based on the paucity of indictments, Fitzgerald's verbal evasions, the widespread Beltway knowledge that Plame was CIA, her domestic assignment with CIA, the age of her children, etc., it seems very unlikely that Plame could meet the legal standard for "covert".

And Fitzgerald would have known this from the outset. The Identities Act is very clear and very specific. CIA management would know whether she met the terms of the Identities Act, and would certainly have disclosed that information to the DoJ Counterintelligence office.

Surely you don't assert that Fitzgerald had a legal mission to identify perjurers inside the Beltway, and this is the reason he continued his investigation despite knowing that his original case was no case at all?

The only other scenario here is that CIA management mislead and duped Fitzgerald as to Plame's status.

[Cboldt]

About as plausible as President Bush adding gravitas to the investigation by similar utterances.

Now you see, that's an evasion.

How's this -- I think President Bush, the Attorney General's Office, and the Independent Investigator are all guilty of pretending covert status might attach to Plame.

This entire affair could have been dismissed the day after Novak's article, by one sentence by the President or the Attorney General - "I have checked Plame's status, and she is not covert." If done soon enough, it would have cut off Schumer and company's demand for independent counsel, would have saved all that cost, Miller wouldn't have gone to jail, etc.

Instead, he said "this is a serious matter and a serious investigation." Serious enough that he agreed to an independent prosecutor. Serious enough that to this very day, there is no "official" word from the DoJ or CIA (both of which work for the President) as to Plame's "covert" status.

Fitzgerald was tasked to answer the question: was the disclosure of Plame's CIA status a violation of the law. If so, who did it?

The grant of authority reads:

I hereby delegate to you all the authority of the Attorney General with respect to the Department's investigation into the alleged unauthorized disclosure of a CIA employee's identity, and I direct you to exercise that authority as Special Counsel independent of the supervision or control of any officer of the Department.

Comey / Acting Att'y General / Dec. 30, 2003

... it seems very unlikely that Plame could meet the legal standard for "covert". And Fitzgerald would have known this from the outset.

Those who charged him with the task could have reached the same conclusion just as easily as he could.

Anybody under his gun has the power to assert that they won't cooperate because they view the prosecution as bogus. Libby could have refused to answer questions, except he was under orders from the President to cooperate with investigators. Do you think the President would permit a perjury trap to operate under his watch?

Surely you don't assert that Fitzgerald had a legal mission to identify perjurers inside the Beltway, and this is the reason he continued his investigation despite knowing that his original case was no case at all?

Like I said, I'm not inside Fitzgerald's head, and I'm not defending his prosecution of the investigation. I think it was a bogus investigation. I also think that more people than him have been and are now playing politics with the case.

But lying to investigators isn't excused on account of the investigation being bogus.