Posted on 07/22/2003 12:37:53 AM PDT by RDangerfield
The identity of an undercover CIA officer whose husband started the Iraq uranium intelligence controversy has been publicly revealed by a conservative Washington columnist citing "two senior administration officials."
Intelligence officials confirmed to Newsday Monday that Valerie Plame, wife of retired Ambassador Joseph Wilson, works at the agency on weapons of mass destruction issues in an undercover capacity -- at least she was undercover until last week when she was named by columnist Robert Novak.
Wilson and a retired CIA official said Monday that the "senior administration officials" who named Plame had, if their description of her employment was accurate, violated the law and may have endangered her career and possibly the lives of her contacts in foreign countries.
A current intelligence official said that blowing the cover of an undercover officer could affect the officer's future assignments and put them and everyone they dealt with overseas in the past at risk.
"If what the two senior administration officials said is true," Wilson said carefully, "they will have compromised an entire career of networks, relationships and operations." What's more, it would mean that "this White House has taken an asset out of the" weapons of mass destruction fight, "not to mention putting at risk any contacts she might have had where the services are hostile."
Novak, in an interview, said his sources had come to him with the information. "I didn't dig it out, it was given to me," he said.
(Excerpt) Read more at nynewsday.com ...
But not that she's with the CIA, if indeed she is.
The president and his administration don't leak . To even imply that they did, is disengenuous at best.
I agree with this, of course -- there are many, many unanswered questions.
By the way, David Corn had an article on this same subject in the July 16, 2003, issue of The Nation. Here is a link.
Wilson caused problems for the White House, and his wife was outed as an undercover CIA officer. Wilson says, "I will not answer questions about my wife. This is not about me and less so about my wife. It has always been about the facts underpinning the President's statement in the state of the union speech."
I could be wrong, but I don't recall reading that she was an "undercover agent". just that she work for the CIA
Plus, she was an ambassadors wife, wouldn't that be kind of hard to do if she was an undercover agent?
A senior intelligence official confirmed that Plame was a Directorate of Operations undercover officer who worked "alongside" the operations officers who asked her husband to travel to Niger.But it almost doesn't matter. Unless Novak is lying, these administration officials either revealed the identity of an undercover agent or else implied that somebody was an undercover agent who was not.
The warning effect to (other) undercover agents is the same either way.
No it is not ok! This should be investigated and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. If found guilty, the responsible parties should face the maximum penalty possible. If that means death due to treason so be it.
Why would he ruin his wife's career and possibly endanger her? I don't see it.
As for picking Novak as a conduit, a paleo-con is naturally the kind of columnist who would print such a claim. This doesn't mean that the Bush administration is behind it, but Novak is an understandable choice for whoever wanted to get this story in circulation.
If it's the Bush administration, the reason wouldn't be to frighten Wilson into silence; the purpose would be a warning to others.
The second option is that Clinton holdovers, quite possibly even the wife herself, are doing this to continue what Wilson started.
If it's Clinton holdovers doing this to embarrass Bush, I suspect it was done without the knowledge or approval of either Wilson or his wife. The Clinton-holdover theory, however, requires Novak to be lying or exaggerating about his sources being "senior administration officials".
But would Clinton holdovers benefit from doing this? It seems that it might be to their disadvantage, since it would discourage other people with stories to tell from coming forward (just as in option 1).
The latter option explains why Novak was choosen as the press can call him a conservative and ignore his stance on the war - knowing full well the public will believe conservative = pro-war.
Yes, I agree with this -- for both options, in fact. If a liberal columnist had published this, it would have been widely viewed as politically motivated and therefore would have been dismissed by many. But Novak is a conservative (paleo, but still a conservative).
"If what the two senior administration officials said is true," Wilson said carefully,Strangely, I don't see him confirming anything. As a matter of fact, the author says this:
Intelligence officials confirmed to Newsdaybut the article makes it clear neither quite did confirm that:
Wilson and a retired CIA official said Monday that the "senior administration officials" who named Plame had, if their description of her employment was accurate,and
"If what the two senior administration officials said is true,"
Wilson is playing games.
Some government officials, noting that Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, is a CIA official who monitors the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, intimate that she was involved in his being dispatched Niger to investigate reports that Saddam Hussein's government had sought to purchase large quantities of uranium ore, sometimes referred to as yellow cake, for the purposes of building nuclear devices.
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.