Defending the liberal tradition in history, science, and philosophy.
The Plame silliness has reached a fever pitch this week. Quoth my good friend John:
The Democrats are wasting their time in a desperate attempt to get Rove and it's going to derail them. It's almost too grotesque to watch.
That's pretty much how I see it.
Related Posts (on one page):
A note on our important Editorial Policy.
Or you could buy something for Dean from his WISH LIST!
Celia Farber
Music, Movies, Books, and Etc.
Questioning the HIV/AIDS establishment
|
Dean's World uses and recommends:
Scroogle Search
Your donations also make Dean's World possible.
Or you could buy something for Dean from his WISH LIST!
From my comment over at Roger Simon's:
This is pure unadulturated horse pucky. Fortunately we in the Blogos know differently. Unfortunately the American people and the free world do not.
[...]
Unfortunately they smell blood on the Rove story. As Jihadist are to Iraq as moths are to a porch lite, the LL and the MSM are drawn to any smell of blood that would taint this President.
The Rove story is a much ado about nothing, a tempest in a teapot and a non story, but they can't help themselves like sharks churning the water on a chum line.
[...]
*****
Bottom line is Ms. Plames status at the time of the disclosure with the CIA does not meet the elements as required in the federal statute. She had not been in such a status for a number of years.
I suppose it's possible there'll be some other shocking allegation, but I doubt it.
I think Bush is blessed with incompetent enemies. They are dramatically overplaying their hand. The WH press conference on Monday was disgraceful. They asked the same question over and over and over.
It's like Groundhog Day.
Each and every day finds a new 'scandal' the press blows way out of any proportion and then, when it all falls apart, they are standing there with a little less credibility than before. They can't get basic facts right and merely regurgitate any lefty talking points that they think sound plausible.
Like hammering away that Bush promised to fire anybody involved in the deal. Bush said anybody who broke the law would be punished.
It would be funny if it wasn't so important. We really need a credible press that doesn't just make up 'facts' to suit their agenda. It's really poisoned the country but they're too ignorant, lazy and biased to notice or care.
But it's obvious (at least to me) that although the target of the ire from the left side of the blogosphere is Rove, the game is the president and I've had it up to here with government by impeachment regardless of who's practicing it.
I had some fun over at Eschaton the other day by reminding them of the backstory on this -- i.e., Joe Wilson's incessant and voluble public lying about national security matters. Surprise, they seem to have forgotten all about the Senate Intel report. Summary in my blog if anyone cares.
Go figure.
I'll use it right away. I will note that it was your point.
But I checked your link on "John". All I found was this/that about the local housing market. So where exactly did you get that quote from?
Arnold Harris
Mount Horeb WI
They should have explained this immediately rather than try to bury it. If they released the 2002 NIE before the war, we might not have such a problem with support for the reconstruction. I'm seeing too much cronyism in play and too little statemanship.
So now I wonder, does Bush really have control of the proliferation/terrorism problem? I am beginning to doubt it.
Rove should go.
If he doesn't, his judgment is extremely questionable. I'm giving him the benefit of a doubt on that (although the Putin incident gives me pause).
A President should also be able hold his staff to account to make good on the trust of the people in performing their duties to the highest standard. This again is a very serious problem. (Recall Tenet). Rove allowed our law enforcement resources to be squandered on this investigation for partisan political gain.
And I'll throw this in. Bush never should have floated Gonzales' name for SCOTUS. That is a betrayal of a serious campaign promise. Note also that he has not enforced fiscal discipline on the budget. There is a pattern here of lack of resolve coupled with a dangerous aversion to politcal responsibility.
Yours,
Wince
It has been well documented that Wilson was a bit loose with the truth. But that doesn’t mean Rove is without guilt. So until we see some statements made under oath, I am not passing judgment on Rove, positive or negative.
That's it. At what point do you think they could have stopped this? Hmm? How? When? Why? Where? Exactly what could have been said or done to stop it? Explain please.
That much was fine. However, at about that time a partisan war erupted over the fact that Plame was "outed" by a source in the administration.
Bush promised to investigate and they have been doing that ever since--footdragging. At the very point that the accussation of outing was made (a serious breach of trust) Rove should have stepped forward with a complete explanation ad taken whatever heat there was to take.
Yes, he was negligent in speaking to Cooper. He should have known enough not to mention the "wife". He could have said "connected source in the CIA", etc. The administration should have had the CIA investigate why they sent Wilson at which point it would have come out that Plame was to blame--and they would have been properly hung out to dry. Rove was stupid.
Rove should have come forward immediately with the facts of the conversation as soon as it hit the press. Instead, Rove took the weasel's way out. He ducked and allowed Bush's administration to carry the cloud for his guilt. This unnecessarily jeopardized the faith that the people place in their government during a time of pending war. That is damnable.
Rove's actions also made Bush out to be a fool who cannot hold his own staff to account. When he promised to get to the bottom of the leak, I expected lie-detctors to be brought in that day. Instead, Rove and Bush allowed Scooter Libby to absorb some of the suspicion. That is dishonest and disloyal.
Finally, Rove allowed our law enforcement resources to be squandered on a pointless investigation. That was also damnable and I would count it as a violation of his oath.
Does this answer your questions?
There was nothing--nothing at all--either illegal or unethical about mentioning Wilson's wife. Nothing. No breach of trust there at all. Furthermore, there was no "leak." Plame's position at CIA was quite public and there was nothing at all wrong with noting that Wilson got his job because his quite public employee of the CIA wife recommended him.
Absolutely nothing wrong with noting any of that. It does not qualify as a "leak" or a breach of anyone's trust.
And of course, the administration did come forward immediately and say all it knew. And promised to look into any allegations that someone outed a CIA agent. I see absolutely no foot-dragging here--just the obvious fact that it's unlikely that anyone did any such thing.
You have yet to back up the claim that Rove or anyone else "allowed" this pointless investigation. They came forward with everything. The investigation ground on regardless. What else you expect of them I have no idea.
Here’s the problem I have with your line of thinking. Your entire post is based on one claim in your first paragraph: “the fact that Plame was "outed" by a source in the administration”.
I haven’t seen ANY proof that she was “outed”. Just speculation. It seems like it was common knowledge that she worked at the CIA, and that her work was not covert. Now, it could be possible that there was some sort of truly covert work she may have been involved with, and that info hasn’t been made public yet. So the jury is still out on that angle, IMO.
And let me give you a real world example of what I am talking about. I have a neighbor who works for the CIA. I know it, his friends know it, and if you ask him where he works, he’ll tell you. And I could post his name, address, and telephone number if I so desired. I won’t do that, but not because its illegal, but because I respect his privacy. (And for all I know, he could be reading this right now….)
All joking aside, my point is, I have no idea what he does for the CIA. Could be something covert, but I doubt it. But even if his work is covert, my telling you that he works at the CIA isn’t “outing” him.
And now let’s assume she actually was officially “outed”. There hasn’t been a shred of evidence shown to date that even hints that someone in the administration committed the act. All we have is a line from a reporter who used the term “a source in the Administration”. And based on some of the bogus info coming out of the media the last few years, I want to see some evidence to back up that claim before I start demanding resignations in the administration.
Perhaps. It's also possible that Bush just considers this typical Washington scandal mongering and a p*ss-poor way to run a country.
Or maybe he thinks it is typical Washington scandal mongering, aka "dropping bricks", and a normal part of the hurly-burly political process at the heart and soul of this democratic republic.
Who knows what Bush is thinking?
Which are both positions that are as reasonable as yours, even if yours is right, and since he is President, whatever his is, is what we get.
Yours,
Wince
If he is not thinking that this undermines the credibility of the administration, then he has problems.
He ought to know how his base thinks--maybe a little time on the blogs would help him.
Jaymaster,
I'm just stating a fact. Personally, I think it was highly unlikely that Rove intended to "out" anyone. Nonetheless, he did and it (thanks to a partisan press) became a scandal. I agree that Plame should have had no expectation of cover. However, Rove should not have assumed this. He fumbled.
Dean,
The problem was not really with what Rove said, it was with what Rove did not say thereafter.
The administration has not been forthright on a (trivial) matter related to national security that is not a serious matter of public trust.
Rove's sin is one of ommission. Rove did not come forward. The investigation was allowed to drag on for years. Why? Everyday it brought continuing discredit to the admnistration.
That should be is now a serious matter of public trust.
If Plame was not covert, and it is so easy to establish, why isn't this investigation over?
Yours,
Wince
is what is has been now forced to tell.
Simple.
Sorry, but you did not state a fact.
Now if you would have said something like
However, at about that time a partisan war erupted over the
factCLAIM that Plame was "outed" by a source in the administration.Then, yes, I would agree.
In fact, he was right to mention it. I would have done the same thing in his shoes. It was the right thing to do.
The White House has maintained from day one that they don't believe anyone outed a CIA agent, said the only thing they knew of was that people in the administration HAD said she worked for CIA, and produced the un-classified, non-secret memo to prove it. But they promised to look into allegations that someone may have gone further and actually outed a CIA agent.
Since they had no way of knowing for sure if #3 were true or not--if someone did it and refused to admit it, how would they know who?--what else can be expected of them? So suspicion ranged around to all kinds of people. How could it not? That's not selling your people out--that's keeping your promise.
This is what typifies a witch hunt: no one's actually done anything wrong, but somebody insists that there was wrongdoing. So the hunt goes on and on, and nothing changes because no one did anything wrong.
It was not wrong to mention that Valerie Plame worked for CIA and recommended her husband for a job. Sorry, but it just wasn't. This witch hunt should have stopped the day the memo was produced on CIA letterhead with her signature. That the witch hunt has proceeded apace is illustrative of nothing but Washington stupidity.
And I have yet to see anything that the White House could ever have done differently in this case. Except, I suppose, have Rove come forward and say "yeah I was those reporters' source." Question being: did he even know he was the one they were holding out on, and did he have an obligation to help a press that was so obviously partisan and so obviously on a witch hunt for a scandal that didn't exist?
And I would add that as long as the reporter who is sitting in jail refuses to disclose her source, the investigation can never really end.
Then why is this all news now?
Rove was free to make a statement to the press to clear up the matter an he did not.
It is a fact that Plame was outed.
Before the Novak column, I had no idea who she was or that she worked for the CIA.
After the column, I did.
Novak claimed to have an administration source, an embroglio followed, and here we are now: Rove did indeed identify Plame as a CIA employee (Wilson's wife).
Rove knew he did this and stayed mum.
One more time:
You can only out a covert agent. You can’t out just any garden variety CIA employee.
And I am not playing games with words here. There is a significant difference between stating that someone works for the CIA, and stating that someone works undercover for the CIA.
I've already spent more time arguing on this than it's worth. It's Joe Wilson--who's been repeatedly exposed as making multiple mis-statements--who you should be saving your ire for.
I've about had enough myself. I'm not interested in arguing anymore. This is already way more energy than the entire joke of a witch hunt is worth.
But here’s my take on why this is news now, and why it will remain news for a long time.
It was fess up or go to jail time for two reporters. That is always big news. And one of them fessed up, and allegedly pointed the finger at Rove. I say allegedly, because we are all just going by a NewsWeek report at this point.
If that really is true, it is most certainly BIG news for enemies of Rove/Bush. And that’s irregardless of whether what Rove did (if anything) was good/bad, legal/illegal or somewhere in between.
As long as there is uncertainty, this issue can be spun in the most negative way, as it most certainly has been. And I have no doubt that the enemies of Bush will try to keep this in the headlines as long as possible.
And this is also big news because the second reporter won’t reveal her source. She was willing to go to jail, where she still sits. And unless she opens up her mouth, the investigation can never be closed. I’ll repeat that one more time: unless she opens up her mouth, the investigation can never be closed. So this story will remain big news until the public gets sick of hearing about it.
And Rove can’t do anything to change any of this. The best he could do, which he has already done, was to give permission to anyone who used him as a source to admit it.
Even if Rove knows that he was A source, he can't possibly know if he was the ONLY source. And the whole purpose of the exercise was to find the source of leaks, right?
If Rove was her source, why is she not admitting it now? He has given her permission. She is the only one who can reveal whether there was one source, more than one source, or no source at all. Until she reveals her source or sources, this issue will never be resolved.
If I understand things correctly, I haven't outed Val as a covert agent under the statute, even if she was covert, because I did not know she was covert.
And ethically speaking, since the memo wasn't marked classified I haven't done anything wrong either - just like when I tell you my father worked for Bendix and casually mentioned his trips to Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore Labs I haven't outed him as a former engineer working on classified nuclear weapons.
My Dad, who understands that loose lips sink ships, never comfirmed that, BTW, so I could be wrong.
Yours,
Wince
I’m not a lawyer, but the way I understand it, I would say you haven’t outed the CIA agent, or your father.
You say you don’t know for sure whether your father worked on classified nuclear weapons. OK, I don’t either. But what would be gained (or lost) if you or I did know? Not much really. As you say, it could be easily inferred from his trips to the labs.
But the real secret information that needed protection in that case were the facts associated with the weapons, and not the fact that your father worked with them. Only your father could release that classified information.
And for all you know, maybe your father actually WAS a covert CIA agent. His engineering job might have just been a cover. Maybe while you thought he was at the lab, he was actually out whacking commies…..
With a covert agent, the very fact that the person is a secret agent is a crucial piece of information that needs to be protected. Blowing that cover is releasing classified information, and thats why its a crime.
And I’ll add again I know a few people who work for the CIA and the NSA, and other organizations which probably employ covert agents. And it is common knowledge that these people work where they do. In fact, many of them have little parking stickers on their windshields that say as much. It just isn’t a secret, because it doesn’t need to be.
Could one of these folks be an undercover agent? I really doubt it, but I guess maybe they could be. Just like your father might have been one. And that is why I am leaving one caveat in this case. Although the facts as we know them now don’t point to it, maybe Plame actually was an undercover agent. Whether we’ll ever find out, I really don’t know.
It is news that Rove leaked the fact that Wilson's wife worked for the CIA. There is an ongoing (how many years now?) investigation to answer just this question.
Of course, if you knew this before, why didn't you tell us?
Plame had some sort of cover (working for an imaginary firm). That is cover enough to qualify as "outing".
Was it a crime? No. Was it improper enough that Rove felt it would be politically costly to come forward? Yes.
The proof of the outing is in the hushing.
Dean's point is that Rove did come forward. He testified at the Grand Jury some time ago.
Yours,
Wince
I understand that Rove complied with whatever request that a prosecutor made. That cooperation is absolutely minimal.
Rove needed to make a public statement and offer an explanation when he first realized that this was a matter of public concern. He did not.
I still believe that we deserve a government that does not require investigations to bring the information to the public. We expect more from our servicemen ad women. I expect more from Rove.
Does Plame fall under any of these categories? If not, all this spinning is wasted effort.
I find it doubtful that the present investigation is aimed at finding out that Rove told Cooper that Wilson's wife works for the CIA. It doesn't explain why Judith Miller is in jail or why the investigation hasn't ended already.
There is enough information available at this time to make the judgment I made about Rove. It is not necessary to have committed espionage to strip him of a position of public trust. We should not be asked to stuff our heads in a dark place and suspend accountability in regard to Rove any longer. The more time this takes for Rove to resign, the more accumulated damage to the nation.