Questions about Plame/Wilson/Treasongate...

[SimpleMan]

...I like the term "treasongate" best for this issue, BTW.

According to Today`s article in the Washington Post, the outed CIA agent is a "NOC." She was/is "creme de la creme of spies... Even their fellow operatives don't know who they are."

"NOC" or "Non Offical Cover" means that even the CIA won't admit that she works there if she ever got caught. Knowledge of her existance with the agency is held at the highest level of secrecy.

Now, the questions:

1. Does anyone know exactly who would have clearance and access to this information? I suspect that the list is VERY short, including Bush, Cheney, Tenant...but who else?

2. How could Novak have possibly verified her employment with the agency?

[Junkdrawer]

1. Number two is a damn good question...

If the whole point of her working for a front company was to keep anyone from knowing she was CIA, how could Nofacts verify she was CIA with a casual phone call????

[ma4t]

20. Agreed. That is why I'm very skeptical about this whole deal.

Novak being able to confirm her position with a phone call to the CIA seems to me to be a strong indication that she was NOT an undercover, clandestine or secret agent at all.

Let's think about this a minute. Novak called up the CIA to confirm a report that Ms. Plame is a CIA employee and the CIA responds, "Well, yes, she is an employee but please don't use her name." ????!!?!?!! Were she an agent I can imagine the CIA responding with, "We neither confirm or deny anyone's status with the agency," or "It will be very serious if you print this." I can't believe that they would just meekly acknowledge her employment were she actually a spy. If you want to believe Novak then Ms. Plame was actually outed by the CIA itself.

The more I think about this the more it looks like a chance for a lot of folks to get out on a limb only to have it sawn off by the Bush administration later, making everyone look very silly.

[htuttle]

22. Unless Novak lied about confirming her identity with the CIA

So you're going to assume that the whole thing is nothing but a wisp of smoke, on the basis of a statement by a known liar and scoundrel, Bob Novak?

WHY would the CIA out one of it's own agents? Do you realize what that would do to morale there? Do you think that the various spokespersons for VIPS and people like Ray Johnson are just shilling for the Bushes to out one of their own? Ray Johnson used to work with Plame, and knows that she was a NOC. He's also a Republican.

You think all this is simply engineered to create a 'false' scandal that will make some people look silly? Why would they look silly if they were ernestly and honestly investigating what looks like a treasonous breach of national security? Even if it turned out to be nothing, they are SUPPOSED to investigate allegations like this.

I think your theory is full of hooey. The White House committed treason, and caused serious damage to national security in the realm of tracking stolen nuclear weapons materials. You just can't minimize that, no matter what the White House's original intentions. (In other words, I don't care if they 'meant' to do that or not. They did it.).

[ma4t]

23. That's the problem with Novak

Why would you believe the Novak was lying about confirming Plame's identity with the CIA but believe that he was telling the truth about being told by two "high administration officials"? I have a hard time thinking that he would be truthful about the one but lie about the other. Of course, I haven't worn my tin-foil hat lately.

Neither do I believe that the whole thing was "engineered to create a 'false' scandal". What I think is that Ms. Plame worked for the CIA but not in a especially covert role and therefore the person at the CIA who confirmed her identity did not think it was a real security breach to do so.

Remember that "outing" her is not a crime unless she has been in a covert role overseas within the past 5 years and the CIA was actively trying to protect her covert identity. For the CIA to confirm her employment to Novak pretty much blows away the latter requirement. I wonder if her assignments would satisfy the former.

I'm not saying that this is not serious; I'm just saying that there has been a lot of wild-eyed speculation by a lot of folks who should know better. When there are lots of accusations flying around it's easier to dismiss the whole lot by pointing out a selected few that are demonstratably false. That's why I would rather see D's stop, take a deep breath, and focus on what is provable. Unfortunately, I think its too late for that.

[htuttle]

24. So you think Larry Johnson is blowing smoke?

Have you read this?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1053934,00.html

Larry Johnson, a former CIA officer, said he was trained 14 years ago with Valerie Plame, a specialist on weapons of mass destruction, whose naming by a Washington journalist quoting senior administration officials has triggered a criminal investigation of the White House.

(snip)

"I was an analyst. She's not," he told the Guardian. "In any case, it is a red herring. Even when I was an analyst my own parents did not know who I worked for. The day we walked into the agency we were under cover and we only knew each other by last initials.

"She's under cover, working in a clandestine situation, and it was exposed for the sake of cheap, tawdry politics. Assessing the damage for this could be difficult and will take some time," Mr Johnson said.

"I'm a registered Republican and I'm sickened by this," he added. "I've spoken with four colleagues who have since left the agency who worked with her. And they are livid."

Or this:
http://www.al.com/news/birminghamnews/index.ssf?/base/news/1065691166195970.xml

Her activities during her years overseas remain classified, but she became the creme de la creme of spies: a "noc," an officer with "nonofficial cover." Nocs have cover jobs that have nothing to do with the U.S. government. They work in business, in social clubs, as scientists or secretaries (they are prohibited from posing as journalists), and if detected or arrested by a foreign government, they do not have diplomatic protection and rights. They are on their own. Even their fellow operatives don't know who they are, and only the strongest and smartest are picked for these assignments.

What, exactly, will it take for you to think that the Administration fucked up bad on this? Just curious.

[ma4t]

26. Not necessarilly

I don't know if Larry Johnson is blowing smoke or not. Frankly, I doubt if you know either. We each have to judge for ourselves based on the totality of evidence.

As to your other question. I already think the administration has messed up bad on this issue. That is not my argument. I'm saying that just because the administration has made a big mess there is no need for D's (especially office-holders and candidates) to step in it themselves. I'm afraid that this is exactly what is happening when folks who have absolutely no way of knowing who the leaker was start accusing Karl Rove et. al. with no proof. If it proves to be Rove he should be fired and prosecuted, but if it proves to be someone else why would you want false accusations to make him into a sympathetic character?

Would you rather the general public (which, by the way is not paying too much attention) to perceive D's as calm, reasoned champions for the national interest or as rabid partisans taking cheap shots at anyone they dislike because this gives them an opportunity? I would prefer the former. To acheive that would require some reasonable restraint. Note that restraint is not the same as capitulation.

[htuttle]

28. We've tried 'Reasonable Restraint'...

...and it's lost us the Congress and the Presidency. Rabid Partisanship seems to work for the Republicans. Maybe it's time for the Democrats to give it a shot.

And the accusation about Rove was not spun out of thin air. Wilson was TOLD by a reporter that Rove called him about Wilson's wife being 'fair game'.

[TacticalPeek]

39. Its true that Rove is looking now more like a conspirator than leaker.

And is not even a likely candidate for Nofacts to be chatting up for info on Wilson's trip in the first place. However, when he's shown to be a conspirator (investigators have already talked to the Wilsons and Nofacts), he is likely to receive little sympathy for fanning the flames licking at our national security.

The logical place Nofacts would be talking with is the office of the VP, who had originally asked 'Whazzup with this yellowcake?', the same VP office where Larry Johnson said he'd start looking.

Since Libby has apparently denied, if we accept his denial, then Cheney becomes a very likely leaker. Nofacts, with 46+ years of repuke cronies, could get Dick on the horn. And Robert Joseph, nuke prolif at NSC a la Plame at CIA, is the logical confirmer.

Just based on reports, etc.

:)

[Kool Kitty]

43. Apparently, this angered agents enough to call Ted Koeppel

so that they could go on Nightline and talk about it. Outing an agent is a crime, no matter what level the agent works. I don't think it is unreasonable at all for anyone to demand a special prosecutor, as the Idiot's administration has as much as said they could invoke executive privilege.

[TacticalPeek]

25. "not in a especially covert role" ???

snip
The publication of her name left CIA officers aghast. "All the people who had innocent lunches with her overseas or went shopping or played tennis with her, I'm sure they are having heart attacks right now," said one classmate of Plame's who participated in covert operations. "I would be in hiding now if I were them."
snip

Plame underwent training at "The Farm," as the facility near Williamsburg, Va., is known to its graduates. As part of her courses, the new spy was taken hostage and taught how to reduce messages to microdots. She became expert at firing an AK-47. She learned to blow up cars and drive under fire -- all to see if she could handle the rigors of being an undercover case officer in the CIA's Directorate of Operations, or DO. Fellow graduates recall that off-hours included a trip to the movies to watch the Dan Aykroyd parody "Spies Like Us."

Plame also learned how to recruit foreign nationals to serve as spies, and how to hunt others and evade those who would hunt her -- some who might look as harmless as she herself does now as a mom with a model's poise and shoulder-length blond hair.
snip

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A58650-2003Oct7.html

And "actively trying to protect her covert identity", is what CIA was doing when they told Nofacts to not identify her.

This is why Nofacts has repeatedly curbed his free speech tongue on-air, 'on the advice of my attorney'.

First Amendment or Fifth, Bob?

[SimpleMan]

34. Amen!!!

Excellent points. It's "Larry" Johnson, BTW. And in case you didn't see it in an earlier post, I e-mailed him and he responded:
___________

"Thanks for the kind words. We (my former colleagues) are genuinely alarmed and worried by these abuses. The White House spin about this as politics as usual is a lie and must be shown for what it is.
Best
Larry Johnson"
___________

[htuttle]

44. Doh!

Yes, *Larry* Johnson. I got his name right in a later post. I'd munged his name with Ray McGovern's.

I've never had to keep track of so many angry CIA agents' names before.

:)

I recently read another article quoting Johnson where he said that he and the other agents are so angry about this, they feel like the peasants with torches and pitchforks.

[never cry wolf]

37. There is one other possible explanation

What if Nofacts called his contact at the CIA and said, "Cheney just told me this Wilson guy's wife, Valerie Plame, is a CIA operative and Libby confirmed it. I am running with that in my column tomorrow. Would I be incorrect?" The response could have been, "Oh my God, he told you that?? Please don't use her name."

[never cry wolf]

40. Your scenario is a confirmation

They did not have to say, "Well, yes, she is an employee but please don't use her name."

"It will be very serious if you print this." is a confirmation in and of itself. Didn't you ever watch all the president's men??

[ma4t]

50. exactly my point

I can't believe that the person at the CIA that Novak called for confirmation was someone he had never spoken to before. Likewise it is hard for me to believe that people at the CIA don't know to give the standard "We never confirm or deny the identities of agents," line. So for the CIA person to say anything else leads me to the inescapable conclusion that perhaps Ms. Plame was not an agent or, at least, was no longer and active agent.

I readily admit that I may have missed something but what other logical explanation can someone offer for the CIA person's behavoir? And if you think that Novak was lying about the CIA confirmation why would you believe him about the source of the leak?

I'm not trying to be argumentative, I just can't make all the pieces of the puzzle fit into a coherent whole.

[Woodstock]

2. kick

I've tried to keep this subject front and center all day, only to have it drop like a hot potato. I know Arnold is a big topic, but...

There's an election coming up in 2004, and Democratic candidates who have been getting very little press lately.

There are voting machines that can be easily rigged from a Company whose CEO vowed to deliver votes to Bush.

There are shady dealings in Congress giving away our money, our resources, our civil liberties, our reproductive choice.

There are American soldiers dying and having their arms and legs blown off every day in Iraq.

And there's a White House "investigating itself" - and any day now, Ashcroft's stooge will say, "Case Closed." The Republican Congress will stonewall any further investigations, as they have in all other cases including 9/11. Bush should have been impeached long ago, but he keeps getting away with it.

So yes, the Republican power grab in California was bad, but we have to keep fighting these other battles. The Republicans would LOVE it if we talked Arnold 24/7 for the next few months.

But we HAVE to keep the pressure on Bush.

At SOME point the sheeple will wake up, but not if we give up.

Let's make some noise!

[DoYouEverWonder]

3. Don't worry

Neither Amb Wilson nor the CIA will let this one go away very easily.

[lovedems]

11. Go Joe!

[SimpleMan]

4. I agree...

And this could be the big one...if we push it hard enough. Even Repugs can't stand a traitor. This is the one issue that will create bond of a common cause from both sides of the spectrum.

While many things Bush has done are impeachable offenses, the Repugs can maintain some kind of "plausible" positions to protect the administration. This case, however, is different...not too many folks will try to defend such an obvious traitor.

[Octafish]

16. Not too many THINKING folks can stand a traitor.

You make an excellent point, SimpleMan: No matter what a person's political philosophy or party preference, a thinking person will see, understand and oppose acts of treason. Those who don't are traitors themselves.

Unfortunately, most today have not a clue one way or another. They’ve been addled into believing whatever comes out of the television is true or real. Those who DO think, know exactly what kind of a crook Smirko and Sneer are: world-class stooges for a vast criminal state we abbreviate as the BFEE.

[dutchdemocrat]

8. Why is this getting buried?

To me the leakage of the rest of the NIA report which solidly shows that Bushco lied is rather large news which is fodder for impeachment. But it too fell down the ladder to land in oblivia. Read the bottom article first... from Worldnetdaily of all sources but Sperry is legit.

=====================

The Research
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/wot/iraq/politicizedintelligence.html

More support evidence
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/jksonc/docs/nie-iraq-wmd.html

The off-the-record press briefing
Source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/nation/nationalsecurity/documents/ nie_iraq_wmd.pdf. Page numbers of the NIE (pp.24, 84) were disclosed at the White House ‘background’ (off-the-record) press briefing on July 18 2003, 1:10-2:24 p.m. EDT (copies: FAS, DoS, DoS).

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/07/print/20030718-8.html


The Editorial
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=34930

Yes, Bush lied
Posted: October 6, 2003
1:00 a.m. Eastern


© 2003 WorldNetDaily.com


WASHINGTON – A year ago, on Oct. 1, one of the most important documents in U.S. history was published and couriered over to the White House.

The 90-page, top-secret report, drafted by the National Intelligence Council at Langley, included an executive summary for President Bush known as the "key judgments." It summed up the findings of the U.S. intelligence community regarding the threat posed by Iraq, findings the president says formed the foundation for his decision to preemptively invade Iraq without provocation. The report "was good, sound intelligence," Bush has remarked.

Most of it deals with alleged weapons of mass destruction.

But page 4 of the report, called the National Intelligence Estimate, deals with terrorism, and draws conclusions that would come as a shock to most Americans, judging from recent polls on Iraq. The CIA, Defense Intelligence Agency and the other U.S. spy agencies unanimously agreed that Baghdad:



had not sponsored past terrorist attacks against America,

was not operating in concert with al-Qaida,

and was not a terrorist threat to America.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=34930

SNIP

Impeach.

[SimpleMan]

10. Thank you for posting this...

Both stories ought to be front and center! We really need to push them both.

[maggrwaggr]

5. CIA will never admit someone's an agent

You call the CIA. You ask is so-and-so an agent.

What do you expect them to say?

"oh yes, by golly, she is indeed! How'd you ever find out? Be sure not to tell anyone. Thanks for calling".

No. Doesn't work that way.

[LibInternationalist]

6. I don't know if Novak actually "verified" anything

my understanding is that the CIA just told him not to publish it (without confirmation) -- I could be wrong, though

[grasswire]

7. consider Richard Perle

Did Perle have access to that info through his back-channel? What about the OSP that was created within the Pentagon? Surely someone there would know that Plame was CIA, even if they didn't know she was a NOC.

Novak has a history of getting leaks from Perle.

[Unknown Known]

12. Yes, and remember Woolsey (CIA) is part of this group

He would have access to this info

[SimpleMan]

35. Yeah, but...

Woolsey is ex-CIA. I doubt he would have the same clearance he once had as Director. Maybe I'm wrong, but this woman was under the highest form of cover and secrecy.

[nannygoat]

32. Here's an article that backs you up, grasswire

Novak leak column has familiar sound
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A53226-2003Oct6.html

[SimpleMan]

9. Here's what Novak said...

In his column dated October 1, he said:

"At the CIA, the official designated to talk to me denied that Wilson's wife had inspired his selection but said she was delegated to request his help. He asked me not to use her name, saying she probably never again will be given a foreign assignment but that exposure of her name might cause ''difficulties'' if she travels abroad."

That's pretty much a confirmation...and more.

[Junkdrawer]

13. And so he goes ahead and publishes her name anyway...

Lovely fellow. Reading between the lines, I see, not a battle between the CIA and the White House, but a battle between two camps both in the CIA and the White House. Who "designated" the official for Novak? Temper all this with the fact that Novak has changed his story several times now.

[Samantha]

14. One way or another, this story is not going away

Read a statement this week in The Washington Post (sorry too tired to go get the link) from the Wilsons' attorney. Offhand, I will guess they must have read John Dean's article. The attorney is threatening to file a civil lawsuit for damages caused by the leaker(s) to the Wilsons.

Think of the discovery process. It will be a nightmare for the White House. A lot of other stuff will flow from those discovery pursuits. The standard of proof will be a lot lower than in a criminal case. Yet, should a lot of material evidence substantiating a criminal suit emanate from the discovery, I am sure those criminal charges will be filed in the future.

The reputation of those against whom the suit will be filed will be openly discussed, analyzed and dissected under the public microscope, and here's the best part, DURING A PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION YEAR.

Even if it should pan out Rove was not the initial leaker, his subsequent call to Matthews stating Wilson's wife was fair game (if that's true, and what reason do we have to believe it is not) suggests he was part of a CONSPIRACY to do, at a minimum, personal damage to Ms. Wilson. Ultimately there would be some kind of price to pay, if not criminally, at least financially, and publicly. Couldn't happen to a nicer guy.

We've got a lot to look forward to in the near political future.

[TacticalPeek]

15. Away is not where this is going.

From last night's CNN Paula Zahn bit with ex-Agency guy:

ZAHN: Mr. Marcinkowski, help us understand what this means to an agent in the field, particularly a covert one. Do they now view their government as a threat?

MARCINKOWSKI: Certainly, the act itself has been an unprecedented act. This is not the leak, as usual from Washington, of classified information. And that should not be condoned. However, this is the leak of an identification of an intelligence agent of the United States. So the fact that it's unprecedented sends a ripple effect throughout the intelligence community and drastically affects national security throughout -- throughout the world, and the United States in particular.

As an operations officer on scene in a country, the effects of this are that anyone who knows you or did know you now will look at your mosaic. They will look at the people you've come in contact with. They will suspect those people, be they official contacts or innocent contacts. They will suspect those persons of being intelligence agents. They could be subject to interrogation, imprisonment and even death, depending on the regime that you may be operating under.

There's also ramifications for CIA morale. I'm not naive enough to say this is having a huge impact, but certainly, it contributes to a decline in morale when you know that your own government can identify you as a clandestine operator. Certainly, there's going to be a reluctance on the part of foreign nationals that may want to help the United States in these trying times. They're going to be reluctant to serve and help us with information, based on the fact that their identification may be revealed by the government.

Obviously, in this particular case, there's further problems with looking at the ambassador's wife. Obviously, now all intelligence services across the world will be looking at ambassadors' wives and suspecting them. They may subject them now to surveillance and added security measures.

The continued revelations by Bob Novak of purported front companies also subjects the traveling businessman to added...

ZAHN: All right...

MARCINKOWSKI: ... scrutiny by foreign governments.

snip

http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0310/07/pzn.00.html

[Octafish]

17. "Treasongate" doesn't roll off the NASCAR tongue like "Traitorgate."

True: "Treasongate" is more elegant and befitting the Constitutional standards of High Crimes. I completely agree, for it is a case of treason the likes of which our country has never imagined possible.

In the current case, the White House endangered the life of a dedicated career public servant — a top spy — in order to put political pressure on opponents to their pro-permawar line. Furthermore, in outing this particular operative, the White House compromised the national security of the United States.

That’s a double-whammy for everybody on the big blotted political spectrum. For it’s a double-case of Treason. Or, a double-shot of Traitorgate, which for the currently preferred NASCAR demographic has the requisite onomatopoeic tone of Trailergate.

To try an answer to your interesting questions:

1. Add: Card, Rice, CIADO,

2. Cheney would have authorization. If the leak ends up going through Libby’s office, the next stop would be Cheney’s desk.

With luck, we may get the names from the six reporters who the White House contacted and would be willing to divulge the name of their sources if threatened with public outing.

By withholding the facts they know from their readers, listeners or viewers (Hi, Candy Crowley! How’s George?), they’re probably afraid for their careers right now. If not, they should be fearing for their lives.

[SimpleMan]

18. "Traitorgate" works for me too...

...just make it resonate everywhere.

It's time everybody got pissed off about this one.

[Octafish]

19. Agreed. Remember Tesla's "resonant frequency" idea?

According to a book now lost in the mists of my memory, young Nikola believed every object had a certain essential vibration. If struck at the right frequency, a harmonic would build and build and eventually shake the object apart.

The author wrote Tesla tested his theory on a New York City suspension bridge. He had a tiny tapping thing akin to a metronome he set a-tapping on the sidewalk surface of this bridge. He fine-tuned the rate of the tapper and after a couple of hourse the bridge had built up a discernable, rhythmic shudder. He stopped the thing before the bridge became unstable.

Similarly, Treasongate is the magic bullet for bringing down the BFEE. To your cogent analysis of the unifying benefits of a case of treason, I add that we need to call and get a special prosecutor to start pulling the strings wherever they lead. We'll find that Treasongate leads straight through the looming no-more-oil crisis to the Iraqi Invasion to 9-11 to ENRON-Arthur Anderson-FERC-California Energy Crisis to the stolen election.

All we have to do to bring down their house of cards is to start tapping. Treason..... Treason.... Treason... Treason.. Treason. It'll start to build. And the BFEE will start to fall. Let's hope it's before they get us.

[SimpleMan]

21. Exactly what I am trying to say...

The louder and more often we say it, the more resonance it will accumulate. This is the big one. If we let this one pass, we deserve what we get.

[nannygoat]

27. Here's another good read about this

Tom Engelhardt: 'The Wilson Affair'
http://www.smirkingchimp.com/print.php?sid=13286

[MCVet]

29. How exactly....

....does Joe Wilson KNOW who outed his wife, and what their motives were?

I've never actually heard an answer.
Sure, he can ASSUME as we all do, that Rove is evil enough to do such a thing.
But the assumption of motive sure makes it sound as though Wilson just has an overly grand view of himself.

Wouldn't common sense indicate that the CIA outed her, and that she's NOT actually undercover?

I've yet to hear anything concrete that says otherwise.

If we make a big deal about something that MIGHT not be true, and has little evidence, people will be numb to a REAL scandal, when it arises (I.E.: Arnold, Bill, groping allegations, and "it's no big deal").

[nannygoat]

31. I think some of the six journalists

who had also received phone calls from the leakers called him either to give him a heads-up or ask for a comment. So it's just hearsay as far as what he knows--he needs the journalists to come forward and spill the beans.

The article posted by SimpleMan has the following paragraph (17th paragraph):

"Her activities during her years overseas remain classified, but she became the creme de la creme of spies: a "noc," an officer with "nonofficial cover." Nocs have cover jobs that have nothing to do with the U.S. government. They work in business, in social clubs, as scientists or secretaries (they are prohibited from posing as journalists), and if detected or arrested by a foreign government, they do not have diplomatic protection and rights. They are on their own. Even their fellow operatives don't know who they are, and only the strongest and smartest are picked for these assignments."

[never cry wolf]

41. Someone told Wilson

that Rove was calling around to journalists telling them that his wife was still fair game. I heard him say this in an interview on TV. What would be your assumption as to motive and who was behind it??

[NoKingGeorge]

30. Not just her name ,her Dept., her duties... the details.

Someone who should not have had this information , gave Nofacts her maiden name, her department AND her duties (WMD and terrorists). I doubt if her co workers knew all those details.
Someone with such a need-to-know clearance gave that information to the TWO who comitted TREASON.
As far as I have found only Condi as head of NSC and the foolinchief himself have need-to-know for this information.

[MCVet]

33. I doubt that...

* actually would possess such info.
Doesn't he prefer to "delegate"?

No amount of wishful thinking will turn * into an evil genius.

Sometimes the truth is what is obvious.
I'm not willing to leap to so many assumptions, just because I wish them to be so.

Even Wilson was slippery when he said that the release of the info "could" have put her in danger.
After all, wouldn't HE know?
IF she was undercover then it would indeed put her in danger.
If not, then no.

I'd really love for there to be some real facts.

[never cry wolf]

38. What is obvious is

that Wilson wrote to the NY Times and embarassed Cheney and the admin. One week later their lap dog write a column utilizing priviledged and secret info in order to pay him back as well as to serve as a warning to others.

When it first came out, Wilson would not acknowledge his wife was CIA, and only would say "if she were CIA." Hence the "could" put her in danger. There are plenty of real facts in the links on this page, unless you are looking for facts that exonerate the repugs.

[Kool Kitty]

42. I think he was just protecting his wife, not being slippery.

(I think you may be confused as to who the slippery ones are.) At first, he was not going to comment on whether his wife was or wasn't an agent. Then more of the story came out, and it was taken out of his hands.

[oldcoot]

48. It is unlikely that the CIA would expose her

From what I know about the CIA, I find it unlikely that the CIA would deliberately expose Plame even if she was no longer working undercover. Indeed, the jerk (or jerks) who leaked her identity may have created a nightmare for the CIA.

Recently, "Nightline" interviewed a group of former CIA employees about Wilson and Plame (If you are interested in reading the transcript, you can purchase a copy from ABC's website). Not surprisingly, every single one of them was outraged. Each of these individuals also explained the various problems that outing a CIA operative can cause.

1) Exposing Plame means exposing any assets she recruited. The CIA frequently recruits foreign nationals to provide intelligence. Since these nationals or assets are often committing treason against their own governments, it is necessary to protect their identities. Even if Plame is no longer undercover, her assets could still be working in their native countries for the CIA. Since Novak published his article, foreign governments might start taking a bigger interest in investigating everyone who associated with or came in contact with Plame.

2) Since spying is risky work, it may become harder for the CIA to recruit assets as a result of Novak's article. If the U.S. can not protect the identity of one its own agents, how can it protect the identity of an asset?


3) Even innocent people could face prosecution, torture and execution if they had contact with Plame. Some nations ignore civil liberties and torture suspected spies. If the suspect is innocent, too bad.

I do not blame Wilson for any concern he may have about the safety of his wife. The CIA is not the most loved agency in the world. Some creeps may view killing or injuring a CIA operative as a way of getting even with the CIA. Former associates might be angry at her. They may suspect her of spying on them or fear that their governments might assume that they worked for her.

I do not know whether or not there is enough evidence to convict any member of the Bush administration (especially since Ashcroft so kindly gave the administration an extra day to shred relevant documents). However, the willingness to expose this woman to get back at her husband demonstrates the vindictiveness of this administration. Unfortunately, this is not the first time that the administration has personally attacked its critics. This time the Bush administration must be held accountable for its disgraceful behavior. We need to remind Bush that he promised that he would bring honor and dignity back to the White House. Personally attacking your critics and their families is not honorable behavior.

[SimpleMan]

36. My point exactly...

Besides Bush and Rice, Tenant would also know...and probably Cheney.

[htuttle]

45. That's who had a *right* to know

Given the way Bush runs this White House, I would NOT be surprised to find out that they routinely violate classified material handling rules, and share information they shouldn't with their political cronies who aren't cleared to receive it.

Can you imagine Bush keeping anything from Karl Rove?

[SimpleMan]

46. Never in a million years...

I suspect that it works the other way around, in fact. Karl tells Bush what to think, do, and say.

[sattahipdeep]

49. Heres a thought

Can you imagine Krongard keeping anything from Bush.

Curious trades. Curious connections. No public release of AN investigative
findings...And no one talks abou it anymore. ALL coincidence?

Krongard was promoted to CIA Executive Director by Bush.

Tenet, Krongard Alter CIA Power Structure

The heads of those entities will join the CIA's Executive
Board, where they will be on a par with the leaders of the
agency's three primary power centers, the Directorates of
Operations, Intelligence, and Science & Technology.

Krongard, former head of Alex. Brown & Co., a Baltimore-based
investment bank, devised the reorganization after embarking on a
30-day review following his appointment as executive director in
mid-March.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A25386-2001Apr30?language=printer

[unpsyops]

47. This story may die

Reminder: This mis-administration was able to stonewall any real investigation of 09-11-01. We the people are the enemy to these traitors and our children are nothing but cannon-fodder.

I suspect that right now the CIA is scrambling in damage control mode trying to rescue potentially lost assets and data because of this compromise. (If there was one.)
If its a set-up it could be a bit of arm-twisting to force a "high administration official" to change his or her position on something. Either way - something huge is on the WH back burner and we the people will pay for it.