FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
JULY 14, 2005
12:46 PM
CONTACT: Committee on Government Reform Minority Office
Karen Lightfoot, 202-225-5051
Rep. Waxman Questions the Post-Leak Actions of the White House
in the Rove Case
WASHINGTON - July 14 - Today Rep. Waxman wrote to White House
Chief of Staff Andrew Card to ask whether the White House
complied with Executive Order 12958, which require an internal
investigation and the implementation of remedial measures,
after the White House learned about the outing of covert CIA
agent Valerie Wilson. The text of the letter follows:
July 14, 2005
The Honorable Andrew Card
Chief of Staff
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20500
In the past week, there has been extensive attention given to
reports disclosing new details about the role that your
deputy, Karl Rove, played in the leak of the identity of CIA
agent Valerie Wilson. These accounts raise many important
questions that need to be answered, including the culpability
of Mr. Rove and whether he acted in isolation or as part of a
broader White House conspiracy to out a covert CIA operative
to discredit her husband, Ambassador Joseph Wilson.
I am writing, however, about a different - and often
overlooked - matter, which is whether the White House complied
with its legal responsibilities to investigate and take
remedial action in the days between July 14, 2003, when Robert
Novak's column disclosing Ms. Wilson's identity was first
published, and September 28, 2003, when it was publicly
disclosed that the CIA requested a Justice Department
investigation.
Executive Order 12958 sets out specific requirements that the
White House must take after it learns of a potential release
of classified information, including investigating the source
of the leak and taking remedial actions to prevent future
breaches of national security. These actions should have been
triggered immediately after the publication of Mr. Novak's
article on July 14, 2003, yet there is no indication that the
White House took any of these steps. To the contrary, White
House spokesman Scott McClellan dismissed suggestions that an
internal investigation was warranted at press conferences on
July 22 and July 23, 2003.
In this and other instances, the Administration's response to
security breaches appears to be dictated by politics, not the
national interest. Administration officials have reacted
sharply and demanded immediate investigations when an alleged
leak calls White House actions into question. The
Administration opened an investigation into whether former
Secretary of the Treasury Paul O'Neill disclosed classified
information after he criticized the Administration in a
television interview, and the Administration demanded an
immediate investigation after the disclosure of evidence that
there may have been advance warnings of possible attacks on
September 11. Yet no action appears to have been taken after
the outing of Ms. Wilson or the disclosure of classified
information to journalists who portray President Bush in a
favorable light.
I hope you can clarify these important matters. Independent of
who leaked Ms. Wilson's identity, Congress and the public
should know whether the White House acted responsibly - and in
compliance with its legal obligations - in the days after this
serious national security breach occurred.
Procedures for Safeguarding Classified Information
Executive Order 12958 sets forth a range of administrative
requirements concerning how federal agencies should safeguard
national security secrets. These requirements apply to the
White House.[1]
Under E.O. 12958, agencies must establish procedures to
restrict access to classified information to employees who
have undergone background checks and signed "Classified
Information Nondisclosure Agreements," which are
contracts in which employees agree not to divulge classified
information.[2] In addition, agencies must establish an
effective system to restrict access to classified information
to only those employees with an official "need to
know."[3] The executive order defines a "need to
know" as "a determination made by an authorized
holder of classified information that a prospective recipient
requires access to specific classified information in order to
perform or assist in a lawful and authorized governmental
function."[4]
E.O. 12958 also requires that persons with access to
classified information receive appropriate training on their
obligations to protect the information.[5] This security
training includes instruction on how to store classified
information, as well as instruction on what constitutes an
impermissible disclosure. The executive order makes clear that
confirming the accuracy of classified information, or calling
attention to classified information that has appeared
publicly, is considered just as much a violation as an
unauthorized leak.[6]
Several key requirements apply when a leak occurs. Under E.O.
12958, executive branch officials must investigate the
security breach, take administrative actions against employees
who violate these rules, and adjust procedures in order to
prevent similar security breaches in the future. E.O. 12958
provides that when a violation or infraction of the
administrative rules occurs, each agency must "take
appropriate and prompt corrective action."[7] This may
include a determination of whether individual employees
improperly obtained access to or disseminated classified
information. If employees violated their nondisclosure
agreements, sanctions may be warranted.[8] The executive order
requires that "at a minimum," the agency must
"promptly remove the classification authority of any
individual who demonstrates reckless disregard or a pattern of
error in applying the classification standards."[9]
The Bush Administration's Response
There are important unanswered questions regarding whether the
White House followed these administrative requirements after
Ms. Wilson's identity was revealed by Robert Novak on July 14,
2003.
The publication of Mr. Novak's column was indisputable
evidence of a security breach. It revealed that Valerie Wilson
"worked for the CIA" and was "an agency
operative on weapons of mass destruction."[10] According
to Mr. Novak's column, his sources were "two senior
administration officials."[11] Shortly after the
publication of the column, Mr. Novak reiterated that two Bush
Administration officials provided him with the information he
published on Ms. Wilson.[12]
Under E.O. 12958, the White House should have taken
"prompt" action to ensure that the breach was
investigated. The White House had a legal and moral obligation
to determine whether any nondisclosure agreements were
violated, whether individuals without security clearance
obtained classified information, and whether national security
information was compromised. The White House also should have
assessed its systems for safeguarding classified information
and taken any corrective action necessary to prevent future
security breaches.
There is little evidence, however, that the White House
responded as the executive order required. To the contrary,
the White House appeared to ignore or dismiss questions about
whether it would investigate the matter. When asked on July 22
whether the White House would "support an
investigation" into the security breach, White House
spokesman Scott McClellan would not address the question,
stating instead: "let me make it very clear, that's just
not the way this White House operates."[13]
On the next day, July 23, 2003, a reporter asked Mr. McClellan
whether the White House was doing an internal investigation to
find out whether White House officials disclosed the agent's
identity. Mr. McClellan again dodged the question, replying:
"I have no reason to believe that there is any truth that
that had happened."[14] When he was pressed in follow-up
question, Mr. McClellan dismissed the value of an
investigation, saying: "it's usually a fruitless
search."[15]
This apparent failure to take Mr. Novak's disclosures
seriously continued for over two months. There did not appear
to be a change in the White House approach until September 28,
2003, when the Washington Post reported that CIA Director
George Tenet had requested a Justice Department investigation
of the leak.[16]
After the Washington Post disclosed the CIA's request for an
investigation, the public statements from the White House
changed in tone. For example, the President's spokesman stated
on September 29, 2003, that "the President believes
leaking classified information is a very serious
matter."[17] Shortly thereafter, the President
reiterated, "This is a very serious matter, and our
administration takes it seriously. ... I have told my staff, I
want full cooperation with the Justice Department. ... I want
there to be full participation because ... I am most
interested in finding the truth."[18] Yet even now, it is
unclear if the White House ever undertook its own inquiry, as
the executive order requires. The Washington Post reported
yesterday that, according to administration aides, "Rove
has not been asked by senior White House officials whether he
did anything illegal or potentially embarrassing to the
president."[19]
There are also other administrative procedures that may have
been violated by the White House following the publication of
Mr. Novak's column. Some press accounts have suggested that
White House officials compounded the security breach by
directing reporters to the classified information after it was
published in the Novak column.[20] Such actions would violate
the administrative requirement against further dissemination
of classified information or confirming the accuracy of
classified information in a public source.
The Bush Administration's Responses to Other Alleged Security
Breaches
The Administration's response to the alleged disclosures
relating to Ms. Wilson stands in stark contrast to the
Administration's swift response to other alleged breaches. For
example:
· On Sunday evening, January 11, 2004, CBS's 60 Minutes aired
an interview with Secretary O'Neill in which he made negative
comments about the Administration.[21] On Monday, January 12,
2004, the Department of the Treasury announced that its Office
of the Inspector General was investigating whether Secretary
O'Neill inappropriately disclosed official documents, noting
that a document marked "secret" was shown on the 60
Minutes program as part of the interview.[22]
· On June 19, 2002, media accounts disclosed that National
Security Agency intercepts from September 10, 2001, contained
cryptic references to possible attacks the next day, but that
U.S. intelligence didn't translate them until September 12,
2001.[23] On June 20, 2002, "an irate" Vice
President Cheney reportedly told congressional leaders that
the President had "deep concerns" about these media
reports, which had cited congressional sources. Congressional
leaders immediately requested a Department of Justice
investigation of the disclosure.[24]
On the other hand, Administration officials apparently had a
different policy regarding the extensive access Washington
Post reporter Bob Woodward had to classified information in
writing his book, Bush At War, which portrayed the White House
favorably. In the introduction to this book, Mr. Woodward
stated that Bush At War was based in part on
"contemporaneous notes taken during more than 50 National
Security Council and other meetings where the most important
decisions were discussed and made" and "the written
record - both classified and unclassified."[25] Mr.
Woodward also said: "War planning and war making involve
secret information. I have used a good deal of it."[26]
Yet there appears to have been negligible investigation by the
Administration of how Mr. Woodward obtained access to so much
classified information.
As these examples demonstrate, there appears to be a pattern
to the Administration's responses to security breaches.
Serious national security violations - including the outing of
a covert CIA agent - appear to be ignored if the disclosures
advance President Bush's political agenda. But even groundless
allegations, such as those made against former Secretary
O'Neill, are vigorously pursued if the disclosures damage the
White House. If this is accurate, it would be a reprehensible
abrogation of America's national security interests.
Conclusion
The White House's refusal to respond to responsible questions
about the outing of Ms. Wilson is compounding suspicions about
the White House's actions and motives. There should be no
impediment, however, to your responding to questions about how
the White House acted after the publication of Mr. Novak's
column. These questions do not seek information about who
leaked Ms. Wilson's identity or whether federal laws were
violated. Instead, they ask about whether the Administration
complied with its obligations under E.O. 12958 after the leak
occurred.
For this reason, I urge you to explain what steps, if any, the
Administration took after the July 14, 2003, disclosure by
Robert Novak to comply with E.O. 12958. This explanation
should, at a minimum, address whether the White House
conducted an investigation of the alleged disclosure of
sensitive information, whether the White House suspended any
security clearances, and whether the White House took any
other remedial action.
I look forward to your prompt response.
Sincerely,
Henry A. Waxman
Ranking Minority Member
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] Exec. Order No. 12958 (as amended), sec. 6.1(b) (defining
the term "agency" to include "any other entity
within the executive branch that comes into possession of
classified information").
[2] Id. at sec. 4.1(a).
[3] Id. at sec. 4.1(a)(3).
[4] Id. at sec. 6.1(z).
[5] Id. at sec. 4.1(b) ("Every person who has met the
standards for access to classified information ... shall
receive contemporaneous training on the proper safeguarding of
classified information and on the criminal, civil, and
administrative sanctions that may be imposed").
[6] Id. at sec. 1.1(b) ("Classified information shall not
be declassified automatically as a result of any unauthorized
disclosure of identical or similar information"). See
also Information Security Oversight Office, National Archives
and Records Administration, Briefing Booklet: Classified
Information Nondisclosure Agreement (Standard Form 312)
(undated):
Question 19: If information that a signer of the SF 312 knows
to have been classified appears in a public source, for
example, in a newspaper article, may the signer assume that
the information has been declassified and disseminate it
elsewhere?
Answer: No. Information remains classified until it has been
officially declassified. Its disclosure in a public source
does not declassify the information. Of course, merely quoting
the public source in the abstract is not a second unauthorized
disclosure. However, before disseminating the information
elsewhere or confirming the accuracy of what appears in the
public source, the signer of the SF 312 must confirm through
an authorized official that the information has, in fact, been
declassified. If it has not, further dissemination of the
information or confirmation of its accuracy is also an
unauthorized disclosure.
[7] Id. at sec. 5.5(e).
[8] Id. at sec. 5.5(c) ("Sanctions may include reprimand,
suspension without pay, removal, termination of classification
authority, loss or denial of access to classified information,
or other sanctions").
[9] Id. at sec. 5.5(d).
[10] The Mission to Niger, Chicago Sun-Times (July 14, 2003).
[11] Id.
[12] On July 17, 2003, The Nation's David Corn reported,
"Novak tells me he was indeed tipped off by government
officials and had no reluctance about naming her [Plame]. 'I
figured if they gave it to me,' he says, 'they'd give it to
others.'" Nigergate Thuggery, The Nation (posted on the
magazine's website on July 17, 2003, and printed in the August
4, 2003, edition). In addition, Newsday reported on July 23,
2003: "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. 'They thought it was significant, they
gave me the name and I used it.'" Columnist Blows CIA
Agent's Cover, Newsday (July 23, 2003).
[13] The White House, Press Briefing by Scott McClellan (July
22, 2003).
[14] The White House, Press Briefing by Scott McClellan (July
23, 2003).
[15] Id.
[16] Bush Administration Is Focus of Inquiry; CIA Agent's
Identity Was Leaked to the Media, Washington Post (Sept. 28,
2003).
[17] The White House, Press Briefing by Scott McClellan (Sept.
29, 2003).
[18] The White House, President Bush, Kenyan President Kibaki
Discuss State Visit (Oct. 6, 2003).
[19] GOP on Offense in Defense of Rove, Washington Post (July
13, 2005).
[20] Probe Focuses on Month before Leak to Reporters,
Washington Post (Oct. 12, 2003) (White House Press Secretary
Scott McClellan "has denied that Rove was involved in
leaking classified material but has refused to discuss the
possibility of a campaign to call attention to the revelations
in Novak's column"); see also Terror Watch: Criminal or
Just Plain Stupid?, Newsweek (Oct. 8, 2003) (reporting that
Karl Rove spoke directly to Chris Matthews, the host of the
MSNBC show Hardball, about the Novak column and Ms. Plame:
"A source familiar with Rove's conversation acknowledged
that Rove spoke to Matthews a few days after Novak's column
appeared" and further acknowledged that Mr. Rove said it
"was reasonable to discuss who sent Wilson to
Niger"). See also Privilege Claim Is Possible in Leak
Probe, Los Angeles Times (Oct. 7, 2003) (reporting that White
House officials have "attempted to draw a distinction
between leaking the name of an operative and thereby breaking
the law, and calling the attention of reporters to that
information after it already has been made public").
[21] 60 Minutes, CBS News Transcripts (Jan. 11, 2004).
[22] O'Neill Says He Didn't Take U.S. Treasury Documents,
Reuters (Jan. 13, 2004).
[23] See, e.g., NSA Studies Taped September 10 Messages,
Associated Press (June 19, 2002).
[24] White House Angered by Leaks on Intelligence, Los Angeles
Times (June 21, 2002).
[25] Bob Woodward, Bush At War, xi-xii (2002).
[26] Id. at xii.
###
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
