Posted on 05/29/2007 3:40:41 PM PDT by lowbridge
MSNBC:
“The employment history indicates that while she was assigned to CPD, Plame, “engaged in temporary duty travel overseas on official business.” The report says, “she traveled at least seven times to more than ten times.” When overseas Plame traveled undercover, “sometimes in true name and sometimes in alias — but always using cover — whether official or non-official (NOC) — with no ostensible relationship to the CIA.”
-— end —
Sorry, this is not “covert” under the meaning of the law.
Finally, the Fitzgerald filings shed some new light on Valerie Plame Wilson’s job status at the CIA. In an exhibit attached to the sentencing memo, Fitzgerald reveals that at the time her name was published by columnist Robert Novak — July 14, 2003 — Mrs. Wilson was moving into an administrative position at CIA headquarters. “In August 2003, Ms. Wilson was assigned to a senior personnel position in CPD [Counterproliferation Division], where she supervised staffing, recruiting, and training for CPD,” the document says. “She had been selected for this position prior to the leak.”
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YzlhNDU5MzExNWRjNTU2MWQ5NDZlNzdhMjg2YWYzNTU=
So, let me get this straight, her COVERT status was disclosed in an UNCLASSIFIED document?
MSNBC is just lying. Covert is basically meaningless. If it weren’t, Libby would be awaiting sentencing for that. I hope the President pardons him. He deserves it.
It’s to show the judge during sentencing that Libby was guilty of a crime which wasn’t charged or proven, yet should be used as evidence toward a harsher sentence. Fitz should be tossed out. He is a disgrace, akin to Nifong.
Who told David Corn that Plame was "undercover"?
If that is the case then her husband was the one that outed her.
This is MSNBC. Nobody over there can read. I’ll bet their report is wrong.
How can Libby obstruct an investigation that was finished the day it started?
The leakers admitted their mistake to Fitz on the first day. There was never any mystery on Fitz’ part where the leak came from. The only ones in the dark were “us”, the public. Fitz told Armitage to keep his role in the leak secret until after the “investigation” was complete.
So Fitz was investigating Libby knowing full well he had no part in the leak.
This is an abuse of office.
“Although he claimed in Mr. Libby’s indictment that Ms. Plame’s employment status was “classified,” Mr. Fitzgerald refuses to provide the basis for that fact and, even if true, can point to no law that would be violated by revealing a “classified” (not covert) employment. It was this gap in the law that created the need to pass the act in the first place.” Victoria Toensing, author of the law http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110008948
PK- so I got it mixed up - revealing covert is illegal, but Armitage did that before Libby, therefore he is the one who leaked it. The whole thing is a sham, and Fitzie was fooled by the Democrat idiots at the CIA.
Ya' gotta wonder:
Read the title again...."Plame was ‘covert’ agent at time of name leak (unclassified document details CIA employment)"
Sounds impressive but apparently the document was never classified...its an 'unclassified document' accepted in lieu of a Fitzmas present by the MSM.
And, you ain't covert when your car is sitting in the lot with an "I'm from the CIA" access sticker on it!
(Wondering if she had an assigned space for "Ms. Plame/Wilson, covert person"?)
Things like this evil persecution of an innocent man remind me why I voted for Bush - Plame and Wilson supported Kerry. Crooks and/or lies all.
If true, then there is a certain far-left website that should be worried considering how hard they worked to get this story in the news.
Nope. What's worse, Fitz knows it.
From this link...
Hubris Responding to David Corn responding to me.
...Whatever she was in the early 1990s, she was not covert within five years of Novak’s 2003 column. “Covert” is a legal term requiring numerous factors, including a foreign assignment at time of publication or within five years. Another factor is that the CIA had to be taking affirmative measures to protect the covert person’s identity. Hardly the situation here where Plame went daily to Langley, and where the CIA press person admitted to Novak she was employed by the agency.
Hope your reputation was woth it, Fitz.
Bullcrap. Plame wasn’t covert just because Patrick Fitzgerald says so
"First, your speechwriter's father, Novak, leaks Plame's name.
Then, we claim it was 'secret' and blame it on Cheney and Libby,
even though everyone who can actually read, will know that Novak
was the first to publish it, thereby setting up Cheney and Libby.
It WILL work because we still have the FBI files."
Utter nonsense. Plame was recalled from her last post as a covert agent in Russia in 1997, on the assumption that her covert status had been compromised by Aldrich Ames. From that point forward, the CIA operated on the assumption that her covert status had been compromised, i.e. that anyone who really mattered knew she was a CIA operative. Her covert career was absolutely over at that point. If any other real covert agents had been using the Brewster-Jennings front, they would have been presumed compromised at the same time (since Plame had already used it at the time she was presumed compromised). The fact that she — a compromised former covert agent — listed herself as an employee of Brewster-Jennings in 1999 in connection with her $1000 donation to Al Gore’s campaign, obviously knowing that such affiliations become a matter of public record, proves that Brewster-Jennings was no longer a cover for any covert agents at that time.
Not every front company the CIA uses is cover for covert agents; many are just for convenience. Truly covert agents are generally planted in REAL companies or government offices (of both US and foreign governments). When CIA-created front companies are used by covert agents, the compromising of one agent would necessitate the immediate dismantling of the company, or at least immediate cessation of its use as any kind of cover.
This so-called classified summary of her employment isn’t even signed or dated. For all we know, the maintenance man could have written it, or Plame herself. Without identifying who actually put the summary together and provided it to Fitzpatrick, leaves questions as to its authenticity and the facts provided therein. During her testimony to Congress, didn’t she mention some supervisor who had stated she was “covert?” I’m thinking that this “summary” might just have been written by that same individual. She lied about her status, and he backed her up. They should have subpoenaed the individual who actually wrote the document, and have him swear to her being a “covert” agent under oath. I’d bet he’d change his tune real quick.
Hogwash. Fitzgerald had already discovered who the leaker was before Libby ever testified. It was not feasible for Libby to interfere with that discovery. Case closed.
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.