Payback Time [Wilson/Plame CIA-WH-FBI Saga]

NewsMax ^ | September 30, 2003 | John LeBoutillier

[AntiGuv]

The burgeoning flap over the leaking to the press of the name of a CIA agent - a clear and serious violation of federal law - is a serious, serious legal and political problem for the Bush White House.

Let us explore the numerous implications:

1) The facts: In July two high level White House aides called at least six DC reporters - one of whom was Robert Novak - to 'slime' whistle-blowing former US Ambassador Joseph Wilson and his wife, by revealing that she, Valeria Plame, is a CIA agent.

2) The CIA is furious over the 'politicization' of the identity of one of their agents. CIA Director George Tenet has asked the Department of Justice to investigate and bring criminal charges.

3) Former Ambassador Wilson - once appointed by the first President Bush and the last US Ambassador to meet with Saddam before the 1990 invasion of Kuwait - believes it was G.W. Bush's closest political advisor, Karl Rove, who either made or authorized the 'sliming' phone calls. Wilson is so angry over this lawbreaking that he has called for Rove to be arrested and "frog marched out of the White House in handcuffs."

4) The Bush White House was angry at Wilson for writing a July 1, 2003 op-ed piece in the New York Times explaining his Administration-authorized investigation into the 'Saddam tries to buys uranium from Niger' story. After shooting down that tale, Wilson was shocked to see the President make the same claim in this year's State of the Union speech.

5) Now, here is a key question: who in the White House was so angry with Wilson for 'blowing the whistle' that they authorized these six phone calls? Certainly no one can believe that low-level aides would even know that Plame was a CIA agent let alone feel free to have a concerted 'leaking campaign.'

6) Clearly whoever orchestrated this anti-Wilson campaign was looking for payback - payback for having the temerity to challenge the veracity of the President of the United States. But their anger took them over the edge into lawbreaking. Who in this disciplined, top-down, well oiled White House would read Wilson's op-ed and slam his fist down on the desk and proclaim, "That bastard is going to pay! What do we have on him? Let's get it out there!"

7) Whoever authorized the Plame leak could possibly go to jail for this willful act of lawbreaking. And those who actually called the six reporters could also go to jail - unless they cop a plea and rat out others.

8) Preliminary reports are that there is a great dissension inside the White House staff over this leak. Many are described as 'disgusted' at the outing of Ms. Plame.

9) There is still the question of whether or not the Ashcroft Justice Department will honestly investigate the Bush White House. Already Capitol Hill Democrats are calling for an Independent Counsel to do this investigation. But that law expired and has not been renewed.

10) Meanwhile over at the Langley HQ of the CIA, there is much disgust over the way they are always made the scapegoats by this White House. After all, CIA Director Tenet had kept the African uranium tale out of the Cincinnati speech last October that helped escalate the case for a pre-emptive war against Iraq. But if heads don't roll over the Plame leak, you can bet that CIA will leak things of their own about the Bush White House.

11) Leaking and blackmail have always been a part of governing inside the Beltway. But it has been one of this Administration's unexplained curiosities why President Bush has kept Clinton's CIA Director - especially after so many massive intelligence failures: 9/11; our failure to get Osama; our failure to prove the existence of WMD before the war; our failure to get Saddam; and our failure to find WMD in the six months since the end of the war.

12) Many have wondered if Tenet has 'something' on the Bushes. Now many more are wondering who made those six phone calls - and who authorized them?

13) We need to reverse things: if the Clinton White House had sold out an active-duty CIA agent as 'payback' for some whistle-blowing article, we would be outraged. This crime is no less serious because it was done in a Republican White House.

14) Long ago, in a piece entitled "Bush's Achilles Heel," I wrote that this Bush's weakness was the entire mystery, secrecy and sometimes-illegality of the intelligence community. This Plame leak now threatens to become a huge story - involving lawbreaking, revenge, abuse of power and the inevitable cover-up. Plus the 10 Democrats running for President and the media are going to have a field day with it.

15) Yep, 'tis true: payback is a bitch.

[Mo1]

From what I know is that she was the Ambs to Iraq and Wilson was acting ambassador at the US Embassy in Iraq

I have seen comments where she is suppose to have made about the border to Kuwait

http://www.pbs.org/now/printable/transcript_wilson_print.html

MOYERS: Such as?

WILSON: So he will, for example — four days after he invaded Kuwait when I saw him in August of 1990 — he said that the United States lacked the intestinal fortitude and the stamina to confront his invasion in Kuwait. And it was clear to me that he was drawing upon his interpretation of our experiences in Vietnam, Beirut and possibly Tehran. And he had drawn exactly the wrong lessons from that.

We, in fact, stayed in Vietnam far longer than we should have perhaps. We were there for 15 years. And we suffered 50,000 casualties. We did not cut and run. We did spill the blood of our soldiers for many, many years. Give you another example, the whole decision to go into Kuwait was, from his perspective, rational based upon his understanding of the region and of what the international community would do.

MOYERS: His decision to go…

WILSON: His decision to go into Kuwait. The only reason he had Ambassador Gillespie in to see him and then me in to see him four days after the invasion. Both were unprecedented meetings. He would normally meet only with senior diplomats resident in Baghdad when they were accompanying envoys from their respective capitals. So for him to have Ambassador Gillepsie and then me was really a first.

And it was clear that what he wanted to do in that is he wanted to deflect attention from what he really intended to do. And that's what he did with April Gillespie. He lied to her. He lied to President Mubarak that he was going to allow the negotiating process to go forward.

And with me, he wanted to make sure that the United States would not respond unilaterally. And so that he would get this thrown into the United Nations. And the reason he wanted it in the United Nations was because his experience was with Israeli-Palestinian issues, specifically Resolutions 242 and 338, which related to occupation of Palestinian territories. And as most people know, the Israeli withdrawal from Palestinian territories has not taken place even though those territories were occupied in the '60s and early '70s.

MOYERS: So what does he conclude from that?

WILSON: He concludes from that that if it goes into the United Nations system, he's got 25 or 30 years to occupy Kuwait during which time he can flag Kuwait City with Iraqis, pump all their oil, steal all their money and then submit it to a referendum which he would have stacked the odds for his victory.

MOYERS: So President Bush is not being naive to think that the UN may backfire on him. He's not being naive when he thinks that Saddam Hussein is lying to us, deceiving us, right?

WILSON: One should never believe Saddam Hussein. We certainly have enough experience with his deception and his lies not to be too trusting with him. With respect to the United Nations, it seems to me that the United Nations has far more often acted in a way that is-- that is consistent with our interests. And it has a obstacle to our interests. And it is our interests who have a broad international support for an objective.

And in order to get that broad international support, you have to frame your goals in such a way that you can get the allies as we did in the Gulf War.

MOYERS: So you're saying that it is important to enforce United Nations resolutions.

WILSON: Absolutely.

[Palladin]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/992677/posts

Ha! Here's the nitty-gritty.

The divine Ms. Valerie is 40 years old. That means, according to this idiot Larry Johnson, that she started her undercover job with the CIA when she was ten!

Those Democrats--damn liars every single one of them!!

Oh, and she's the THIRD wife of the narcissistic babyboomer Clintonista Joe Wilson.

FEH!

[AntiGuv]

Hey, coward, why didn't you stay around and answer the forum?

What the hell are you talking about? If you're talking about me, my ISP has been offline since about the time I posted this thread..

[AntiGuv]

You say this:

Ummm..no. I didn't say that, rather John LeBoutillier said that.. However, since you ask me directly, one of the other contacted reporters is Andrea Mitchell (Alan Greenspan's wife) who said so herself. Two others are near certainly Knut Royce and Timothy Phelps of Newsday, because their cited along with Bob Novak in the White House memo on this from Alberto Gonzales.

The statement itself quotes the administration source from the Washington Post's sunday front page report, but I agree that it's only an allegation at this juncture.

The preponderance of the evidence at this point strongly suggests that someone/s from the White House did indeed contact a number of reporters with Valerie Plame's identity. That's what all the Beltline journalists are transparently indicating on all the broadcasts I've seen. Also, since the FBI has opened a formal investigation, then it's rather certain that their inquiry has produced evidence of a crime.

[AntiGuv]

A "frog march" is when someone refuses to go along with the authorities, so they have to be carried by their four limbs, facing down. Does that make sense? Picture it...and then picture a frog..

[AntiGuv]

This is from the Sept 30 memo issued by Alberto Gonzales to the White House staff:

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.

It would appear that the White House, or at least the FBI, agrees she's not merely an analyst..

[AntiGuv]

This is from the Sept 30 memo issued by Alberto Gonzales to the White House staff:

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.

It would appear that the White House, or at least the FBI, agrees she's not merely an analyst..

[AntiGuv]

This AntiGuv guy hasn't read Novak's denial and acts like he is in the know.

I didn't author that NewsMax op-ed, you idiot, John LeBoutillier did. Moreover, I watched Novak's non-denial denial when he issued it on Crossfire.

[AntiGuv]

BTW, here's the link to the White House memo, in case you want to read that in full (it's some ways down).

[Stentor]

What's to back up.

The individual claimed that he had some sort of knowledge of CIA referral procedure that would indicate she was an undercover operative. His post had an oily liberal troll quality. I wanted him to back up his bullsh*t with evidence. So far there has been silence... except from you.

[lawdude]

"of an undercover CIA employee. "

All CIA employees are "undercover" in a sense. That does not mean they are spys. I was cleared and 'involved' with NSA activity and was not then or now allowed to discuss detail. And that was 20 years ago. Still dowsn't wash and I stand by my comments. The whole thing is media/democrat hype to cause embarrassment ot Bush.

[Gothmog]

"8) Preliminary reports are that there is a great dissension inside the White House staff over this leak. Many are described as 'disgusted' at the outing of Ms. Plame."

I guess his preliminary info is slightly skewed. The New York Times (10/1/03) reports:

"For all the developments, the White House projected an image of business as usual."

Snip

"Republican officials said they were confident that the firestorm would blow over relatively quickly.

"'The general view inside the White House among senior staff is that this is going to create a few rocky political days, that it's mainly the Democrats pushing it and that if all the Republicans stay on board, the story goes away,' a Republican worker with close ties to the White House said."

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/01/politics/01LEAK.html?pagewanted=2&hp

The author is a) a fool, b) uninformed) or c) pushing an agenda. Personally, I think he's a fool pushing an agenda.

[PLMerite]

They must have taken it down..."gonzales" comes up negative on a search of that page.

But one cannot assume that Alberto Gonzales is using the correct terms either.

We shall see.

[kevao]

Clearly whoever orchestrated this anti-Wilson campaign was looking for payback

Leaving aside questions of legality, exactly how is "outing" someone's wife as a CIA employee (whether analyst or operative) payback? Is working for the CIA something to be ashamed of?

[AntiGuv]

Washington Times

A source who is informed about the spreading investigation into the leak said widespread reports are incorrect in reporting that Mrs. Wilson is an analyst whose identity would not be protected, and that the very fact the FBI received the CIA report indicates her role fit definitions of "undercover intelligence officer" and "covert agent" in the Protection Act.

[PLMerite]

Supposedly the CIA refers about fifty cases annualy to the Justice Department. Is this "source" implying that fifty "agents" are "outed" each year?

[AntiGuv]

From other media reports, this is the first time the CIA has ever referred a case involving the Intelligence Identities Protection Act. The widely cited fifty referrals encompass all potential leaks of classified info..