An excellent NPR report on the White House exposing a CIA agent.

[Dinner]

http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/001031.html

Indictments come tomorrow and the targets of the indictments got a letter today informing them of what is going to be announced tomorrow. The indictments will still be sealed but they will officially be filed tomorrow while Fritz is going to have a press confrence Thursday to go over the major details.

Many people are curious if Fritz will deal only with the outing of the CIA agent or if he will, as many believe, expand the case to also include how the Administration corrupted intelligence which was used to justify invading Iraq. It seems at least Libby will get served, it is likely that Rove will be to, and it is a long shot (but still possible) that Cheney could also be indicted. No one knows if any underlings will also get served.

[OzzyKP]

Originally posted by Oerdin
She was a covert agent something like a year before she was exposed and the law protects current and former agents for something like 10 years after they completed their assignments. The reason is the CIA has to end several cover operations and then has to worry about sources being exposed as foreign governments piece together which cover groups are associated with the CIA and which people used to visit them.

Do you have a source on the fact she was covert/undercover?

That seems to be the main argument of those fans of the Admin brushing this off as a liberal witch-hunt. So gimmie a reliable site that she was indeed undercover and still within that 10 year rule and I'll have something to fire back with.

[DRoseDARs]

Originally posted by Oerdin

http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/001031.html

Indictments come tomorrow and the targets of the indictments got a letter today informing them of what is going to be announced tomorrow. The indictments will still be sealed but they will officially be filed tomorrow while Fritz is going to have a press confrence Thursday to go over the major details.

Many people are curious if Fritz will deal only with the outing of the CIA agent or if he will, as many believe, expand the case to also include how the Administration corrupted intelligence which was used to justify invading Iraq. It seems at least Libby will get served, it is likely that Rove will be to, and it is a long shot (but still possible) that Cheney could also be indicted. No one knows if any underlings will also get served.

[Dinner]

From CNN.

Sources told CNN that Plame works in the CIA's Directorate of Operations -- the part of the agency in charge of spying -- and worked in the field for many years as an undercover officer.

"If she were only an analyst, not an operative, we would not have filed a crimes report" with the Justice Department, a senior intelligence official said.

http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/09/30/wilson.cia/

From BBC:

Newspaper columnist Robert Novak first publicly revealed that Ms Plame was a covert CIA agent in July 2003, citing two administration officials.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4691367.stm

The special prosecutor must determine if anyone deliberately revealed Ms Plame's identity to journalists and whether they knew she was a covert agent.

http://newswww.bbc.net.uk/2/hi/americas/4335018.stm

[Dinner]

Here's one from WaPo:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/20/AR2005072002517.html

The paragraph identifying her as the wife of former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV was clearly marked to show that it contained classified material at the "secret" level, two sources said. The CIA classifies as "secret" the names of officers whose identities are covert, according to former senior agency officials.

[SpencerH]

Originally posted by Oerdin


The so what is that Libby testified before the Grand Jury saying he knew nothing about Plame's identity until it was in the papers and reporters started hounding him. Clearly he lied.

Its still no smoking gun and I don't think people should go to jail over a misdemenor (which I belive this is) but publicly exposing a CIA agent is a felony. Felonies are a whole different matter.

Libby lied. OK.

The implication that the VP was involved in the leak (other than telling him that Plame is CIA) comes from where?

[SpencerH]

Originally posted by Oerdin


She was a covert agent something like a year before she was exposed and the law protects current and former agents for something like 10 years after they completed their assignments. The reason is the CIA has to end several cover operations and then has to worry about sources being exposed as foreign governments piece together which cover groups are associated with the CIA and which people used to visit them.

I dont know whether Valerie Plame was a NOC (the protection of which is the real intent of the law) during her early days at the CIA. Based on my experience, I very much doubt that she was a NOC after becoming married to Wilson (since she would have become too high profile to function in that manner).

Originally posted by Oerdin Here's one from WaPo:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...5072002517.html

quote:

The paragraph identifying her as the wife of former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV was clearly marked to show that it contained classified material at the "secret" level, two sources said. The CIA classifies as "secret" the names of officers whose identities are covert, according to former senior agency officials.

The paragraph was marked as "secret". That doesnt mean that her name was "secret". I know that intel based upon info from NOC's is not classified "secret". It is amongst the, if not THE, most guarded subject matter. Therefore, this news report is evidence to me that while she had 'covert' status i.e. it wasnt advertised where she worked, she no longer worked as a NOC.

As I've said before, however, the whole thing stinks and those responsible should resign.

[Ramo]

Copyright 2003 The New York Times Company
The New York Times

October 5, 2003 Sunday
Correction Appended
Late Edition - Final

SECTION: Section 1; Column 2; National Desk; Pg. 1

LENGTH: 1316 words

HEADLINE: DEBATING A LEAK: THE DIRECTOR;
C.I.A. Chief Is Caught in Middle by Leak Inquiry

BYLINE: By ELISABETH BUMILLER

DATELINE: WASHINGTON, Oct. 4

BODY:


At a few minutes before eight on Thursday morning, George J. Tenet, the director of central intelligence, was parked in his usual chair just outside the Oval Office waiting to brief his chief patron, the president of the United States.

The morning newspapers were full of developments in what amounted to a war between the Central Intelligence Agency and the White House, and a Justice Department investigation that was barely 48 hours old into whether administration officials had illegally disclosed the name of an undercover C.I.A. officer.

Angry agency officials suspected that someone in the White House had exposed the officer, Valerie Plame, as a way to punish her husband, former Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, for his criticism of the administration's use of intelligence to justify the war in Iraq.

But after President Bush told his chief of staff, Andrew H. Card Jr., that he was ready to see Mr. Tenet -- "O.K., George, let's go," Mr. Card called out to the intelligence chief -- Mr. Tenet, a rare holdover from the Clinton administration and a politically savvy survivor, did not even bring up the issue that was roiling his agency, Mr. Card said in an interview.

Instead, Mr. Tenet briefed the president on the latest intelligence reports, as he always does, and left it to the White House to make the first move about Mr. Wilson and Ms. Plame.

"I think I was the one who initiated it," Mr. Card recalled. The subsequent conversation between the president and Mr. Tenet about the investigation, he added, did not consume "any significant amount of time or discussion or angst. It was basically, 'We're cooperating, you're cooperating, I'm glad to see the process is moving forward the way it should.' " In conclusion, Mr. Card said, "it certainly didn't reflect a strain in any relationship."

And yet, six years into running the nation's primary spy organization, Mr. Tenet finds himself at one of the most difficult points in his tenure, caught between his loyalty to the president and defending an agency enraged at the White House. Although the leak investigation that is consuming Washington's political class has not, by all accounts, affected the chummy personal ties between the president and the director, it has still taken its toll on Mr. Tenet.

Even before this latest blowup, Mr. Tenet told friends that he was worn out from the relentlessness of his job since the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and that he felt he had served long enough. (Only Allen W. Dulles and Richard Helms held the job longer.) Mr. Tenet, who has directed an extensive overhaul and expansion of the C.I.A. since the attacks, had talked about stepping down by late summer or early fall, people close to him said.

"It's a lot harder job than it was in the Dulles era, and he's been doing it for a long while," an agency official said. "But I think he's for the moment happily engaged."

Friends of Mr. Tenet's said that the leak investigation might now keep him in place longer than he wanted, if only to prove that he was not a casualty of the latest furor -- or of the political fallout from the failure so far to find chemical or biological weapons in Iraq.

"He wants to leave on his own terms, but he doesn't want to leave when it looks like he's being chased out of town," a former C.I.A. official said. David Kay, the government's chief weapons inspector, who was chosen and supervised by Mr. Tenet, told Congress on Thursday that his team had failed to find illicit weapons after a three-month search in Iraq, a major setback for the White House.

The latest fight has turned out to be a particularly angry one in an intelligence tug of war that began before the invasion of Iraq. Some C.I.A. officers have long said that they believe the White House and the Pentagon exaggerated intelligence about Saddam Hussein's weapons programs to justify the war, while White House and Pentagon officials have long said that the C.I.A. had been too cautious in its findings.

In the summer, the conflict broke into the open when Condoleezza Rice, the national security adviser, said that Mr. Tenet had been primarily responsible for not stripping from the president's State of the Union address an insupportable claim that Iraq had sought to buy uranium from Niger. Mr. Tenet and his allies were enraged, and Stephen J. Hadley, Ms. Rice's deputy, eventually took the blame.

But within the C.I.A., the exposure of Ms. Plame is now considered an even greater instance of treachery. Ms. Plame, a specialist in nonconventional weapons who worked overseas, had "nonofficial cover," and was what in C.I.A. parlance is called a Noc, the most difficult kind of false identity for the agency to create. While most undercover agency officers disguise their real profession by pretending to be American embassy diplomats or other United States government employees, Ms. Plame passed herself off as a private energy expert. Intelligence experts said that Nocs have especially dangerous jobs.

"Nocs are the holiest of holies," said Kenneth M. Pollack, a former agency officer who is now director of research at the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution. "This is real James Bond stuff. You're going overseas posing as a businessman, and if the other government finds out about you, they're probably going to shoot you. The United States has basically no way to protect you."

Mr. Tenet's latest battle with the White House began on July 6, when Mr. Wilson, in an article on the Op-Ed page of The New York Times, wrote of a mission the C.I.A. sent him on in 2002 to investigate whether Iraq had tried to buy uranium for its nuclear weapons program from Niger. Mr. Wilson concluded that Iraq had not, and that the administration had twisted evidence to make the case for war in Iraq.

Eight days later, the syndicated columnist Robert D. Novak wrote that it was Mr. Wilson's wife who had suggested sending him on the mission, implying that Mr. Wilson's trip was of limited importance. Mr. Novak identified Ms. Plame, and attributed the information to "two senior administration officials." Mr. Wilson subsequently accused Karl Rove, the president's chief political aide, of involvement in leaking the information to Mr. Novak to intimidate Mr. Wilson into silence and to keep others from coming forward. But he has since backed off and said that Mr. Rove at least condoned the leak.

But Mr. Tenet was aware of the Novak column, and was not pleased, the C.I.A. official said. As required by law, the agency notified the Justice Department in late July that there had been a release of classified information; it is a felony for any official with access to such information to disclose the identity of a covert American officer. It is unclear when Mr. Tenet became aware of the referral, but when he did, he supported it, the C.I.A. official said, even though it was clearly going to cause problems for the White House. "I don't think he lost any sleep over it," the official said.

The important thing, the official said, was that "the agency was standing up for itself."

Friends of Mr. Tenet's say that he knows how important it is that he be seen as defending the agency from political attacks, and that one reason he has stayed so long is to demonstrate that the directorship of central intelligence is not a partisan job. The other reason for his longevity, friends and detractors alike say, is that this son of a Greek restaurant ownerfrom Queens has been brilliant at cultivating the Yale-educated son of the only president, George H. W. Bush, to have been director of central intelligence.

Last week, Mr. Card said, the director took time out from the grimness of the intelligence reports to talk about a subject dear to the president. "Baseball," Mr. Card said.

As the former C.I.A. official summed up Mr. Tenet: "He's not liked by everybody in the administration, but the president loves him."


URL: http://www.nytimes.com

CORRECTION-DATE: October 17, 2003

CORRECTION:


An article on Oct. 5 about tensions between the White House and George J. Tenet, the director of central intelligence, referred incorrectly to the comment in President Bush's State of the Union address that Mr. Tenet was blamed for not having deleted. The president said Iraq had been seeking to buy uranium in Africa. He did not specifically mention the African country of Niger, though it was identified several weeks earlier -- along with Somalia and Congo -- in the National Intelligence Estimate provided to members of Congress on Iraqi purchase attempts.

GRAPHIC: Photo: George J. Tenet is in one of the most difficult times of his tenure. (Photo by Paul Hosefros/The New York Times)(pg. 22)

LOAD-DATE: October 5, 2003

We also have corroboration from Larry Johnson and others that Plame was an NOC.

[SpencerH]

I've had this discussion with you before. Larry Johnson has not worked for the CIA since 1989. Neither he nor Ms. Bumiller is in a position to know what Plames status was at the time of the leak. If they did know, or were able to determine, that she was a NOC then she was not very covert was she?

As I said, because of where I worked for 3 years, I know that intel based upon info from NOC's is amongst the most protected. Although I have no personal knowledge in this regard, the status and identity of NOC's themselves must be no less guarded. Starting from that position, you should understand why I question the reliability of these sources and Ms Plames status as a NOC. I have no doubt that if Ms Plame was a NOC that any enquiries as to her status (even from the VP) would have been questioned. It is simply not something that would have been casually discussed by anyone even at the highest levels.

[Ramo]

Except for members of this Administration, apparantly.

Bumiller didn't know if she was a NOC before the leak, but her contacts apparantly did.

Johnson may not have known at the time, but i.e. Cannistraro did.

Starting from the point that there would be no investigation if she were not a NOC, that Rove and Libby wouldn't be under investigation (and likely indicted this week) if she were not a NOC, there's just no question. The first question Fitz would've asked Tenet in front of the grand jury is if Plame was an NOC and if she ran operations. I don't know why you continue to insist that she was not an NOC. There's absolutely no good reason to believe that.

[SpencerH]

Originally posted by Ramo
Except for members of this Administration, apparantly.

That she worked for the CIA, yes. So what? Lots of people do.

Bumiller didn't know if she was a NOC before the leak, but her contacts apparantly did.

Shouldnt we get a hold of these 'contacts' who are leaking very sensitive info to the press?

Johnson may not have known at the time, but i.e. Cannistraro did.

Cannistraro, who hasnt worked for the CIA since 1984 and who left the NSC in 1987 knew what she was doing? Man, the CIA is the leakiest intel service in the world.

Starting from the point that there would be no investigation if she were not a NOC, that Rove and Libby wouldn't be under investigation (and likely indicted this week) if she were not a NOC, there's just no question.

That needs no further comment.

The first question Fitz would've asked Tenet in front of the grand jury is if Plame was an NOC and if she ran operations.

I doubt that Fitz would be stupid enough to ask a question to which the only answer, whether true or not, would be no.

I don't know why you continue to insist that she was not an NOC. There's absolutely no good reason to believe that.

I think its quite clear why I dont believe she was a NOC when it became public knowledge that she worked for the CIA. I wrote them down in a previous post.

[Ramo]

Shouldnt we get a hold of these 'contacts' who are leaking very sensitive info to the press?

The only sensitive info was that she worked for the CIA. Leaking whether or not she was a NOC doesn't matter beyond that. If she's a NOC and it was reported that she was CIA, the cover would be blown.

That needs no further comment.

You really think that the CIA would've pushed this hard for an investigation if she were merely an analyst, and Rove/Libby didn't compromise our operations?

Cannistraro, who hasnt worked for the CIA since 1984 and who left the NSC in 1987 knew what she was doing?

My mistake, I was confusing him with another person.

I doubt that Fitz would be stupid enough to ask a question to which the only answer, whether true or not, would be no.

Johnson said otherwise. I'll trust the legitimacy of him over some random person on the internet.

There's just no reason to keep whether or not she's a NOC sensitive after she's been outed as CIA. It just doesn't make any sense. At all.

I think its quite clear why I dont believe she was a NOC when it became public knowledge that she worked for the CIA. I wrote them down in a previous post.

This is just sad. You spend all this time bloviating about how she's not a NOC, and you're too lazy to mention why.

[Berzerker]

Spencer

While I disagree that Ms. Plame had 'covert' standing within the CIA, I agree that the whole thing stinks. OTOH, where is the evidence that the vice president 'outed her' (or ordered it done)? It is not illegal in any way for the VP to mention or discuss that Ms. Plame works for the CIA with his top aide.

Its illegal to discuss Ms Plame with reporters and according to Libby's notes, it was the VP who told him about Plame and to deal with Wilson. And only a fool would think the Prez was kept out of the loop on this.

choosing which info/intel to accept and which to reject is not lying, it is analysis. Poor analysis is not a reason for impeachment.

Congress can impeach a president for incompetence, and they were choosing intel, even bogus intel, to support a pre-determined policy - that is lying. I saw how they smeared critics, Spence. And the lying hasn't stopped, it just keeps pouring out of the WH.

Ozzy - I think the law expires after 5 years, not 10. But I dont think we can provide any citation since her most recent covert work would still be classified info. But this would not have gotten this far in the process if it wasn't illegal to out her identity. I haven't heard 1 ex-CIA/CIA agent come out and defend what the WH did, but I have seen several express their disgust with the WH.

Tonight on Hardball w/Chris Mathews (now thats a news show, O'Reilly is off attacking George Soros and other lefties while the WH is going up in flames) it was reported that FBI agents recently went to Plames' neighbors to ask if they knew who she was before her outing and none knew she was CIA. That shows the CIA was still making an effort to conceal her identity which is part of the law.

Not that Congress will do anything, but it is very important to our image throughout the world that we uphold our laws and impeach Bush and Cheney.

Ty Mr Harley

[Dinner]

There won't be an impeachment even if the evidence says he was involved in a felony (big if). The Republicans in Congress would never vote for it.

In any event I guess the reports in WaPo and other places that the indictments would come today were wrong. I guess we'll have to wait until Friday to see who will get indicted for this felony.

[Berzerker]

Ann Coulter on the leaking of Plame's identity -
"Everyone in Washington knew she was in the CIA"

Her neighbors didn't even know she was CIA.

At some point after hundreds of "falsehoods" it is no longer logical to believe these people are honest. They've gone well beyond even my expectations and I'm very cynical of politics.