The When and How of Leak Being Probed (WP: technical/Plame)

[struggle4progress]

By Susan Schmidt
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, November 26, 2004; Page A06

A federal prosecutor investigating whether administration officials illegally leaked the name of an undercover CIA operative has directed considerable effort at learning how widely the operative's identity was disseminated to reporters before it was published last year by columnist Robert D. Novak, according to people with knowledge of the case.

Special prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald is trying to pinpoint precisely when and from whom several journalists learned that Joseph C. Wilson IV, an outspoken critic of the administration, was sent on an Iraq-related intelligence mission after a recommendation by his wife, Valerie Plame, a covert CIA employee. Plame's name first appeared in a July 14, 2003, column by Novak.

The timing could be a critical element in assessing whether classified information was illegally disclosed. If White House aides directed reporters to information that had already been published by Novak, they may not have disclosed classified information.

Fitzgerald is continuing to ask questions that suggest he is still trying to assess the accuracy of some of the more serious allegations about administration leaks to reporters other than Novak, according to people involved in the case. Prosecutors have questioned numerous witnesses, some of them repeatedly, to learn whether two senior White House aides actively peddled Plame's identity to more than half a dozen reporters before Novak revealed it in print -- an allegation made by an anonymous administration official in a Sept. 28, 2003, Washington Post article. <snip>

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A13258-2004Nov25.html

This horsesh*t strongly suggests there will never be any prosecution in the Plame case.

[The Traveler]

1. I am not sure the timing legally matters

When classified info is leaked, it is unlawful for those with access to confirm or deny to those w/o proper access to the information. Or at least, it was so in the 80's.

[struggle4progress]

4. Right. eom

[Syrinx]

2. as I asked in another thread

The White Housters may be considered innocent of wrongdoing if they leaked the classified information to other "reporters" before they finally found one sleazy enough to actually print it? Is that right? Their earliest leaks of the classified info in essence declassified it, so that by the time Novak printed it was no longer classified? :shrug:

[Hello_Kitty]

3. If Novak could publish her name, then someone leaked it.

"If White House aides directed reporters to information that had already been published by Novak, they may not have disclosed classified information."

What kind of freaky doublespeak is that? Well, Novak already published it so our guys are off the hook now. He must have acquired the knowledge through telepathy. Yeah, that's it. Not from, oh I don't know, people connected to the White House. Noooo. Move along folks. Nothing to see here.

[autorank]

5. "Schmid" byline is of concern but WashPo is all Steno Sue's now.

Wait and see. The real question is how many years do they have to file chartes. If this prosecutor doesn't do it, well maybe, just maybe, we'll get a chance to appoint one.