THE LEAK "SCANDAL"

I need to see more than what's out there to think this is anything like the big deal the press and the Democrats are making it out to be. I'm all in favor of having the Justice Department investigate. I'm all in favor of firing whoever did the leaking, if he or she did as the reports suggest. But it sounds like the leaker is dropping in rank and importance as is the transgression. Wilson's wife is a desk jockey and much of the Washington cocktail circuit knew that already.

It seems to me that the energy driving this is A) Obvious Democratic opportunism and scandal-hunger B) Media opportunism as this is the first Bush "scandal" that isn't manufactured outside the White House (could someone explain what Bush did wrong on Enron again?) C) A burning desire to flesh out a fleshless storyline that the Bush White House clamps down on "dissenters" D) An even more burning desire to make Karl Rove into the Sid Blumenthal of this administration.

Which brings us to another issue: comparisons between this administration and the last. First of all, Rove is not Blumenthal for several reasons but the most important is that Rove's got real power. Blumenthal was a Tolkieneque Wormtongue at best and more likely a slipper-carrier. On the larger front, I will be able to take only so much sermonizing from liberals over this scandal considering the fact that the last White House knowingly filed false criminal charges against inconvenient employees (the Travel Office), invented new privileges and abused old ones to stonewall at ever turn (Bush is commanding full cooperating), and generally accused critics of every form of bad faith imaginable.

So yes, by all means investigate what I predict will be a very minor story. But let's not pretend the Republic is in danger.

So we can spend millions of dollars on a ridiculous investigation that will go no where because the press will not divulge their sources. The Democrats know this and they can allude to a WH leak that will never be resolved. Basically we the taxpayers are going to assist the Democrats in 2004 with campaign fodder. Can you just see the ads now? There will be an ominous picture of George Bush whispering to Karl Rove with a HUGE CIA emblem stamped TOP SECRET and a voice whispering "Did Bush endanger the lives of our secret agents?"

But we know who first appointed him to the diplomatic corps, don't we? 41.

Actually, he is a Carter appointee not a Bush 41 appointee.

http://www.mideasti.org/html/bio-wilson.html

Ambassador Wilson was a member of the U.S. Diplomatic Service from 1976 until 1998. His early assignments included Niamey, Niger, 1976-1978; Lome, Togo, 1978-79; the State Department Bureau of African Affairs, 1979-1981; and Pretoria, South Africa, 1981-1982.

In 1982, he was appointed Deputy Chief of Mission in Bujumbura, Burundi. In 1985-1986, he served in the offices of Senator Albert Gore and the House Majority Whip, Representative Thomas Foley, as an American Political Science Association Congressional Fellow. He was Deputy Chief of Mission in Brazzaville, Congo, 1986-88, prior to his assignment to Baghdad.

"So we can spend millions of dollars on a ridiculous investigation that will go no where because the press will not divulge their sources."
There are other ways to determine who Novak spoke to. Consider phone records, both incoming & outgoing that all phone systems track - and Mr. Novak's number can't be all that difficult to find. It's not classified information or a matter of national security.
It seems that the identity of Mr. Wilson's wife just might be considered "Classified" along with what she did for the CIA. Divulging classified info, to anyone is never a good idea - otherwise why bother with security clearances?

Well, even if I accepted your premise (which I don't), her name was know. Here name is published on Mr. Wilson's own biography page at the Middle East Institute [SOURCE].

Known facts:
1. The CIA wanted to send someone to Niger to investigate Yellowcake claims.
2. Mrs. Wilson works for the CIA (in some capacity).
3. The CIA asked Mr. Wilson's wife to discuss it with Wilson.
4. Mrs. Wilson discussed it with Mr. Wilson.
5. Mr. Wilson went to Niger.
6. Mr. Wilson stayed at (read: inside) the U.S. embassy in Niger for all 8 days he was there, drinking tea and talking with people about the established Italian and British intelligence reports.
7. Mr. Wilson came back and wrote an op-ed in the NY Times that there was "nothing" to the claims that Saddam was trying to obtain Yellowcake from Niger. 8. Questions arose about who he was and how he was making these claims.
9. Mr. Wilson is married and his wife's name is published on his own biography page. 10. It is known in Washington circles that Mr. Wilson's wife works for the CIA. 11. Cliff May (of National Review) and Bob Novak (of Chicago Sun-Times) wrote articles critical about Wilson's involvement and how this came about. Novak includes Mrs. Wilson's name.

12. According to Novak, he was told that Mrs. Wilson was not a covert agent, but was an analyst. You can not believe Novak all you want. He is a well-known journalist with an impeccable 46 years of reporting and commenting. He has never been accused of anything untoward or inappropriate. Even his colleagues on the other side of the political spectrum have a notable appreciation for his journalistic skill.

The established facts above can't be disputed. How Novak came up with the name would be interesting to know (was he told the name or did he research it himself?). The investigation will determine what it determines. An investigation means nothing other than something might have occured.

You should use a little more caution in buying the most favorable spin.

Well, I'm not sure what you are talking about here.

» That Novak has an established reputation as an honest reporter/commentator isn't spin.
»Accepting Mr. Novak's statements as they are isn't spin.

»Reading more into Mr. Novak's statements is spin.
»Accusing Mr. Novak of trying to get himself off the hook is spin.
»Stating that Mr. Wilson was appointed by Bush 41, when, in fact, was appointed by President Carter is not only spin (actually spin from Mr. Wilson himself last night on Paula Zahn), but factually incorrect.
» Not providing ample time for the facts to become clear is premature.

What a joke. YOU are the one who said the CIA "tacitly" gave the go-ahead to release her name. Not only is that silly, it is flat-out untrue. And you base it entirely upon a so-called "confidential" source. Spin, spin, spin. We'll talk about this when the facts so many want to run from are front and center.

This much can't be disputed, even if you believe Novak: The CIA didn't want her name and affiliation with them released. "Senior administration officials" told Novak that Plame worked for the CIA. If Novak didn't know it already, then "everybody in Washington" most certainly didn't - Novak would certainly know something like that if it were common knowledge. White House counsel says she was an "undercover CIA agent." Even though the CIA didn't want her named, "senior administration officials" outed her as CIA and Novak named her. Facts, not spin.

That is a very interesting question, indeed. As I understand it, Mr. Wilson made an official report in 2002 about his trip to Niger.

Mr. Wilson says he didn't find anything. However, he did learn about in incident in 1999 where Iraq approached a Nigerian official about a possible purchase of uranium, but dismissed the claim because it wasn't a "significant quantity". Other than that, his lack of evidence might have had something to do with the FACT that he never left the U.S. embassy and sat around drinking tea and talking. He really didn't do any investigating.

His official report was filed in 2002. To him, it was done and over. In 2003, he was struck by the "16 words" regarding uranium. Following up on this with some friends in the State department, he started to conclude that the "16 words" were incorrect.

He then wrote an op-ed in the NY Times called "What I Didn't Find in Africa" where he rencounts his trip to Africa and states that they hadn't found anything at all. He neglects to include the incident that might have made the 16 words possible, if not correct.

As I noted, he did find something. In his 2002 report, he found some (antecdotal) evidence that Iraq had made overtures in 1999 to a Nigerian official about purchasing uranium. But, again, he dismissed the claim because it wasn't a significant quantity.

This whole thing goes back to the 16 words that the President said in SOTU address:

The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.

It just shows how arrogant Mr. Wilson is. He took the 16 words as a rebuke to his report. Where, in fact, the President was citing British intelligence.

Perhaps Mr. Wilson wasn't the only person that might have investigated the possibility of significant amounts of uranium being sought?

Maybe someone did a more thorouh investigation? Perhaps, I don't know, the BRITISH?!

Maybe the British investigation actually included leaving the British embassy?

I mean, even his insulated investigation reveal 1 incident, even though it wasn't a significant amount. Maybe if his investigation actually left the US embassy, maybe he would have found more evidence?

White House counsel says she was an "undercover CIA agent

That's not correct. The White House Counsel said:

We were informed last evening by the Department of Justice that it has opened an investigation into possible unauthorized disclosures concerning the identity of an undercover CIA employee.

They didn't say that she was or wasn't. They said that there is an investigation into whether a possible unauthorized disclosure occurred.

lug, you are the one that is spinning here.

Seems to me word "SCANDAL" is rightly bracketed by quotation marks; we should give the same treatment to the word "LEAK."

I don't see that any "LEAK" necessarily took place.

Sounds to me as if Novak talked to people who simply relayed the background of the story -- that Mrs. Joseph Wilson was instrumental in getting her husband sent to "investigate" the yellowcake story.

Since her status as a CIA employee was common knowledge (according to Cliff May at NRO), that was mere incidental information. NOT a "LEAK."

Good point.

In fact, that seems to be the case. I have read accounts that Mrs. Wilson was left to discuss this with Mr. Wilson, but the actual decision was made by other at CIA. I have also heard that she was invovled some and thought that he would be a good person to go, because of his previous service in Niger and surrounding countries (such as Gabon).

Indeed, it is well known that she worked for CIA.
It is also well known that she is married to Mr. Wilson.
It is also well known (as cited here on countless threads) that Mr. Wilson himself placed his wife's name (maiden name) on his biography page at the Middle East Institute.

As the Beatles said, "1 and 1 and 1 is 3". Novak is a freakin' investigative reporter. If the CIA didn't tell him her name, it is pretty damn easy to figure out.

It may come out that no one in government tolk Novak the name. In his July 14 article, Novak is investigating how Wilson came to do his investigation in Niger. [SOURCE].

From the original Novak article:

Some excerpts...

The CIA's decision to send retired diplomat Joseph C. Wilson to Africa in February 2002 to investigate possible Iraqi purchases of uranium was made routinely at a low level without Director George Tenet's knowledge.

Wilson's mission was created after an early 2002 report by the Italian intelligence service about attempted uranium purchases from Niger, derived from forged documents prepared by what the CIA calls a "con man." This misinformation, peddled by Italian journalists, spread through the U.S. government. The White House, State Department and Pentagon, and not just Vice President Dick Cheney, asked the CIA to look into it.

Wilson never worked for the CIA, but his wife, Valerie Plame, is an Agency operative on weapons of mass destruction. Two senior administration officials told me Wilson's wife suggested sending him to Niger to investigate the Italian report. The CIA says its counter-proliferation officials selected Wilson and asked his wife to contact him.

TPM: interview summary of his trip:In some retellings of it, in the way some people describe the trip, you basically went over there and said, "Have you guys been selling Iraq any uranium?" and they said no, and that was good enough for you.

WILSON: There was Ari Fleischer who said, that, well, he went over there and obtained the denials of the government and wouldn't any government deny this? I did not obtain the denials of the government, in fact, as I pointed out after Ari said that. What I did is this, I went over and I looked in some detail at how the uranium business operates. And it was much less a question of obtaining their denials, and much more a question of how would a government make a decision that would generate this report of a memorandum of agreement. (covering the sale of uranium). It would be very difficult for a legitimate transaction undertaken by the government of Niger with the government of Iraq to be secret. Not impossible--and it's sort of worth trying to ask yourself whether or not the president, a coup leader, could do a side deal outside the context of the government, for his own account, or for the military.
At a minimum, it would have involved the managing operating partner, which is the French uranium company.
The French have a--nuclear energy is an important component of the French electrical power grid. They need uranium, they need to have a steady source of supply. They need to make sure that they're irreproachable in that, so they can continue to have a steady supply of uranium without running afoul of the IAEA or other international organizations.

A new thread was just posted on FR by James Taranto that provides some additional insight on why this isn't as big a deal as everyone is trying to make it, even if she was a covert agent.

Link

Here's a taste:

The Washington Post has a useful backgrounder on the law in question, the Intelligence Identities Protection Act, enacted in 1982 after former CIA agent Philip Agee (who now lives in communist Cuba) published a book and various articles revealing the names of undercover CIA agents in an effort to sabotage U.S. intelligence activities. Even if Plame does turn out to be a covert agent, revealing her identity wouldn't automatically be illegal:

The law enacted to stop Agee and others imposes maximum penalties of 10 years in prison and $50,000 in fines for the unauthorized disclosure of covert agents' identities by government employees who have access to classified information.

The statute includes three other elements necessary to obtain a conviction: that the disclosure was intentional, the accused knew the person being identified was a covert agent and the accused also knew that "the United States is taking affirmative measures to conceal such covert agent's intelligence relationship to the United States."

In order to violate the law, in other words, one must disclose a genuine secret. Was Plame's association with the CIA a secret? As we said yesterday, the CIA's blasé attitude toward Novak's inquiries suggests not. Bolstering that inference, Clifford May writes in National Review Online that Plame's CIA connection "wasn't news to me. I had been told that--but not by anyone working in the White House. Rather, I learned it from someone who formerly worked in the government and he mentioned it in an offhand manner, leading me to infer it was something that insiders were well aware of."

The Justice Department has now undertaken an investigation of the matter, the Associated Press reports, so eventually things will become much clearer.

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.