Weasels......Trying to say the Plame case is not a crime...

[EC]

The Plame game: Was leak to Novak even a crime?
January 14, 2005

<snip>

The law also requires that the disclosure be made intentionally, with the knowledge that the government is taking "affirmative measures to conceal relationship" to the United States. Merely knowing that Plame works for the CIA does not provide the knowledge that the government is keeping her relationship secret. In fact, just the opposite is the case. If it were known on the Washington cocktail circuit, as has been alleged, that Wilson's wife is with the agency, a possessor of that gossip would have no reason to believe that information is classified -- or that "affirmative measures" were being taken to protect her cover.

There are ways of perceiving whether the government was actually taking the required necessary affirmative measures to conceal its relationship with Plame. We can look, for example, at how the CIA reacted when Novak informed the press office that he was going to publish her name. Did the general counsel call to threaten prosecution, as we know has been done to other reporters under similar circumstances? No. Did then-Director George Tenet or his deputy pick up the phone to tell Novak that the publication of her name would threaten national security and her safety, as we know is done when the CIA is serious about prohibiting publication? No. Did some high-ranking government official ask to visit Novak or the president of his newspaper syndicate to talk him out of publishing -- another common strategy to prevent a story? No.

Novak has written that the CIA person designated to talk with him replied that although Plame was probably not getting another foreign assignment, exposure "might cause difficulties if she were to travel abroad." He certainly never told Novak that Plame would be endangered. Such a meager response falls far legally shy of "affirmative measures."

There is even more telling CIA conduct about Plame's status. According to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence's "Report on the U.S. Intelligence Community's Prewar Intelligence Assessments on Iraq," when the agency asked Plame's husband to take on the Niger assignment, he did not have to sign a confidentiality agreement, a requirement for just about anybody else doing work for an intelligence agency. This omission opened the door for Wilson to write an op-ed piece for the New York Times describing his Niger trip. Did it not occur to our super sleuths of spycraft that a nationally distributed piece about the incendiary topic of weapons of mass destruction -- which happens to be Wilson's wife's expertise -- could result in her involvement being raised? The special prosecutor and reporters should ask Chief U.S. District Judge Thomas Hogan, who is overseeing the grand jury, to conduct a hearing to require the CIA to identify all affirmative measures it was taking to shield Plame's identity. Before we even think about sending reporters to prison for doing their jobs, the court should determine that all the elements of a crime are present.


Victoria Toensing was chief counsel to the Senate intelligence committee from 1981 to 1984 and served as a deputy assistant attorney general in the Reagan administration. Bruce Sanford is a Washington lawyer specializing in First Amendment issues. This commentary originally appeared in the Washington Post.



http://www.suntimes.com/output/otherviews/cst-edt-ref14.html

[JDPriestly]

1. Besides,

Novak did not have sex with "that woman."

[H2O Man]

2. You would do well

to read the response by Plame's lawyer, which is available through google.com

[H2O Man]

10. See this:

Plame Investigation Is Not a 'Game'
Tuesday, January 18, 2005; Page A16
In their Jan. 12 op-ed column <"The Plame Game: Was This a Crime?"> Victoria Toensing and Bruce W. Sanford misrepresented the scope of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act, which certainly does cover former covert agents who remain at risk (along with their contacts) even after their covert operations end.

They also said that Valerie Plame's status was allegedly known on the "Washington cocktail circuit," implying that it was widely known that she worked as a covert agent for the CIA. But columnist Robert D. Novak has said that he learned of Ms. Plame's status through a leak by senior administration officials. Even I, Ms. Plame's lawyer and neighbor, was unaware of her status until Mr. Novak blew her cover.

The column said that Mr. Novak had suggested that Ms. Plame's husband, Joseph Wilson, was "credentially challenged" to determine whether Iraq was trying to obtain uranium in Niger. However, Mr. Wilson had served in three African nations that produced uranium, including Niger, and had been ambassador to one of them, Gabon. In all, he served in seven African countries and as senior director for African affairs in the National Security Council under President Bill Clinton. His bona fides for the trip are spelled out in the report by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, which divulged that Mr. Wilson had traveled to Niger in 1999 at the request of the CIA to look into other uranium-related allegations.

The Plame investigation is not a "game." Reporters may need to be protected, but calling for a halt to the investigation into the leaking of Ms. Plame's identity to Robert Novak is not the way to do that.


CHRISTOPHER WOLF
Washington
The writer is the attorney for Ambassador Joseph Wilson and Valerie Plame.

[itzamirakul]

3. Now why in the world would we think that Novakula would ever

be held responsible for outing Plame? Is Ken Lay being held responsible for the Enron debacle? Martha Stewart has been tried, has nearly served her time in prison and will be released soon, yet Ken Lay has not even been to a preliminary hearing yet.

Novak is golden to these criminals. Why would they ever blame him for any crime that he may have committed. And you can believe that he will be exaonerated in the newspapers and on the tv talk shows.

[Dookus]

4. sigh

I've been saying this forever - Novak broke no law. Somebody in the government MAY have broken the law by leaking to him. But journalists are NOT responsible for maintaining government secrets.

If you read the law in question, it does NOT apply to Novak.

[rodeodance]

8. so--Novak just took advantage of the situation! it is an ethical issue-

not a legal issue. Either way--Novak goes about business as usual.

[itzamirakul]

9. OK...maybe I'm a little thick here and I have not

read the law in question. From what I understand, ANYONE who gives the name of an operative is guilty of treason.

But it really doesn't matter because Novakula could have been caught in bed with a dead prostitute and he would still walk. He has friends in all the right places.

[Merlot]

11. anyone who give the name

I don't really care if novack gets put in jail. We need the person AT THE WHITEHOUSE that gave the name. That's the person who should go to jail.

[itzamirakul]

12. True that! n/t

[Dookus]

14. Exactly right...

Believe me, we do NOT want journalists jailed for publishing the truth. Does ANYBODY think such a precedent would work in our favor?

[Dookus]

13. You're very mistaken

Treason doesn't enter into it at all.

Treason is very clearly defined in the constitution, one of the very few crimes (the only?) one defined therein.

The law in question states that people with authorized access to information identifying covert agents commit a felony when they release such information.

Novak did NOT have authorized access to such information. Somebody in the government evidently did. THAT person violated the law.

[The Zanti Regent]

5. Of course it is not a crime when Republicans do it!

We now live in a society where Nazi Republicans are above the law!

[sellitman]

7. The Pukes are the law

They control everything. They will until the voting machines are made UN-touchable and the Dem's get some backbone. A few more Conyers & Boxers are needed for sure.

[The Backlash Cometh]

6. I understand that the person who wrote this is a Novak sycophant.