This is a great 'I told you so' or 'we got ya' post. Wonder how many lefties heads exploded and how many reported to their shrink for treatment.

5) Novak then calls the CIA to confirm that Valerie Plame works for them, and the CIA's spokesman confirms it.

This also shows quite nicely that Plame wasn't covert in any fashion, since the CIA would never, ever "confirm" that publicly.

It'll pay to go over to LGF and read the comments. The exploding head moonbats are totally freaked out. Lying to each other and anyone else that will listen to them. I knew it would be a real comedy when the truth came out.
Joe Wilson's lie that the Vice President sent him to Africa was the first lie he told and like a snowball on a hill it got bigger and picked up more dirt on the way down. Then his lies about what he found in Niger didn't help him any. Kind of hard to tell different people different stories when all of the people know and talk to each other. You'll get caught in the lies every time. LMAO

"Skippy" is thought to be Richard Armitage by most of those deeply familiar with the Plame investigation.

Yup, you're no expert.

Your sum begins on a false note. I know you'd like to believe that it was a personal trip, but there's nothing like proof of that, and to even infer it from your steps is a long stretch. Someone said it--so it must be true? What about the may who say it's not true. Including the CIA spokesman who Novak today named as his "confirming source"?

Harlow, the former CIA spokesman, said in an interview yesterday that he testified last year before a grand jury about conversations he had with Novak at least three days before the column was published. He said he warned Novak, in the strongest terms he was permitted to use without revealing classified information, that Wilson's wife had not authorized the mission and that if he did write about it, her name should not be revealed.

Harlow said that after Novak's call, he checked Plame's status and confirmed that she was an undercover operative. He said he called Novak back to repeat that the story Novak had related to him was wrong and that Plame's name should not be used. But he did not tell Novak directly that she was undercover because that was classified.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/26/AR2005072602069_2.html

And Cirby, don't write dumb things and I won't say you're dumb. CIA and other government officials confirm classified information to journalists on a regualr basis (remember the NSA story that the NYTimes sat on for a year before publishing?) The CIA has confirmed that she was a covert operative. Do facts mean anything to you?

Libby's crime is likely to be he forgot what he said years ago. You try that and see how good your recall is two years out.

My question why is it when the prosecutors prosecutor learned the truth he didn't tell the public and stop the whole sham, instead he just went on merrily lying and pretending until all his moonbat flock blew their heads off. Could have saved many a bad life if he had just fessed up and told the truth early.

Honest truth seeker my a$$.

And Cirby, don't write dumb things and I won't say you're dumb. And Cirby, don't write dumb things and I won't say you're dumb. CIA and other government officials confirm classified information to journalists on a regualr basis

...but official CIA spokesmen (the description of Harlow) don't, without checking first to see what can be released. Harlow claims to have confirmed her identity, then found out that she was covert (he probably found out that she "had been" covert, but wasn't at that time).

As has been pointed out in many places, Plame was about as "covert" as Natasha Nogoodnik at that time.

There are three kinds of men: The ones that
learn by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have
to pee on the electric fence and find out for themselves. Will Rogers

He must have known a lot of left wingers because the continually 'piss' on the electric fence.

Why is it so common in people towing this lien to throw out such comments with no backup? s has been pointed out in many places...

What places, Cirby? Blogs that say what you want to hear? Why are you so quick to completely dismiss something it would seem a true American conservative would hold in high esteem--the CIA? The CIA says she was:

But special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald found that Plame had indeed done "covert work overseas" on counterproliferation matters in the past five years, and the CIA "was making specific efforts to conceal" her identity, according to newly released portions of a judge's opinion. (A CIA spokesman at the time is quoted as saying Plame was "unlikely" to take further trips overseas, though.)

Even given that it may be "unlikely" that she would go overseas again, a covert operative's cover is obviously still something sensitive. Again, from my comment above:

Harlow said that after Novak's call, he checked Plame's status and confirmed that she was an undercover operative. He said he called Novak back to repeat that the story Novak had related to him was wrong and that Plame's name should not be used.

This was in 2003. Before this was a story. Before Harlow could be playing one side or another.

You've got to look at facts and think.

"You've got to look at facts and think."

Actually, you have to look at what people say and think, when their "facts" aren't supported by their actions.

The facts say that Plame wasn't covert, except maybe on some piece of paper nobody cared about, and that in the real world, too many people knew she was a formerly-covert CIA operative with a blown cover.

Why in the world would so many people know the name of some analyst who prepared reports that they didn't even read directly? She wasn't that important, she wasn't that connected (except as the wife of a political operative), and she certainly wasn't what any rational person would consider "covert."

All of the comments we see by other folks seem to fall in the same "cover my own ass" category, and are no more to be trusted than Wilson's public lies about what he found on his little junket.

Damn Skippy.

First time I've not only NOT been annoyed at one of your postings, astigafa, but got me to laugh. Very well said.

J.

Thom...your link confirms that
MSNBC says that someone says that Fitzgerald says (note he is not directly quoted) that an (unnamed) CIA person says that Plame had done covert work overseas in the previous 5 years.

That's a lot of "says".

Of course if Fitzgerald actually BELIEVED that she could have considered "covert" under ANY wild stretch of the term, then he would have proceeded to hang someone.

Didn't happen.

She wasn't.

Well done Jay

P

Cirby, "some piece of paper nobody cared about"? Some piece of paper at Langley? Ah yeah, screw that.

And what facts support your side? You haven't presented any.

Does it matter to you that someone revealed the identity of a covert operative, regardless of what her status was? That is a crime, and you're supposed to be par of the "Law and Order" party. And what "rational person" gets to decide how covert she is? You? Robert Novak? Does the CIA get a say, or should they just shut up and listen to you?

Did you use the word "junket" a lot before this story? It's one way to find out if you're a stenographer for someone else's thoughts, recognizing when you're language has been transplanted.

did it hurt y as much as it did me?

Justrand

Your misunderstanding of the law is not a good platform. Simple covert status isn't enough, it's knowingly outing a covert agent, and the story goes on to say that Fitzgerald didn't feel he could prove that Libby knew.

And the judge's opinion is public opinion. Do I have to do all the work here?

"And what 'rational person' gets to decide how covert she is?"

If so many indirectly-connected people knew who she was and what she did, how in the hell can you call that "covert?"

Justrand understands the law! Justrand understands that the law is quaint, and needs to be ignored when there are villains whose faces need a good shootin'.

I have to agree with Thom, cirby, that...

"The facts say that Plame wasn't covert, except maybe on some piece of paper nobody cared about, and that in the real world, too many people knew she was a formerly-covert CIA operative with a blown cover."

...isn't good enough. "Pieces of paper" oftentimes have legal relevance independent of what people think about them. See: Bush Jr. v. Constitution of United States of America

So Matt, is that why all of those people are going to jail over Plamegate?

And if it is still bad to publish the fact that Plame was Mrs. Wilson, despite the fact that anyone who cared knew, why isn't it bad that the NY Times published the details about terrorist finance monitoring?

The reward is still out for the first person who can name one thing, anything, Joseph Wilson found on his 2002 trip to Niger that proved "false" President Bush's 2003 State of the Union statement, "The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."

So Thom, why hasn't Novak been indicted?

Everything you're throwing out there indicates that he should have, but Fitz didn't do it.

Hmmm, let's see: According to Joe Wilson's Senate Intelligence Commitee report, an Iraqi delgation traveled to Niger in 1999 and Niger officials believed they were there seeking uranium. So that qualifies as "recently sought". Whether the quantities were "significant" or not is, of course, a largely moot point. The point being that Iraq was seeking them period.

Second, it also indicates what little credence the Bush Administration gave to Wilson's report, which had long since been filed after his return in early 2002, and instead chose to go with British intel's report. Maybe Joe had too much tea in Niger, who knows.

Can I have my $5 now?

ZZZZZZZZFFZZZZZZZZhafpejfw k

Sorry, fell asleep at the keyboard.

This whole Plame afair was "sound and fury, signifying nothing."

ANd it was definitely nothing especially compared to what the New York Slimes has pulled in recent months.

I have always preferred Jif to Skippy (or Peter Pan) anyways.

Lets compare damage done to US security:

Plame "leak" vs SWIFT leak.

No need for me to post any argument here, as most readers have decided long ago and have no interest in reading the other side's arguments. However, the marginalization of two arrogant and self-serving politically manipulative intelligence officers vs the sabotage of an effective intelligence tool seems hardly worth comparison EXCEPT for the level of vitriol spewed by the NYT and certain Kosa Nostra bloggers against the former leak and minimalizing the latter.

The whole problem with the theory that Plame was outed as "punishment" to Wilson is that it had precisely the opposite effect. Wilson was just some former diplomat looking for a gig before he was "punished". Now he's an icon in some quarters with a book deal and probably a lucrative speaker circuit.

IOW, how exactly was outing Plame supposed to hurt Wilson?? That's always been the part of the story that made no sense. Remember, in order to believe the malicious intent approach, the leakers had to both know Plame's status and leak it in an unauthorized manner. Then we have to believe that said leakers also miscalculated on the impact of such a leak even after going to such lengths to have it disclosed. So how does the knowledge that Wilson's wife was a covert agent at some point in her life HURT Wilson in any way? Doesn't it lend a bit more credibility to his story in Niger (wife works on WMDs at CIA, so Wilson knows yellowcake or something along those lines), at least until you find out that Plame had something to do with him getting the Niger gig??

This topic has been beaten to death at Tom Maguire's place, but there's always usually a holdout who still believes Wilson was somehow harmed by the disclosure. How??

Thom --- "I want my Fitzmas and I want it NOW!"

"And what facts support your side? You haven't presented any."

Really?? So Robert Novak's own words aren't facts? No one indicted for outing Plame isn't a fact that supports our side? You are delusional my friend.

"Does it matter to you that someone revealed the identity of a covert operative, regardless of what her status was?"

I suggest you go back and read the transcript of Fitzgerald's press conference last October when he said that he did not know whether Plame was a covert agent or not when her name was revealed. So the FACT is that even the Prosecutor, with the knowledge of all the testimony before him, could not determine this. At that point this case was over because there was no crime regarding the original issue. That is the FACT.

So Joe Wilson frisched himself : )

Man that verb couldn't have been created at a better time...

Wait, the Keatons' idiot neighbor told Novak that Plame was CIA?

It is troubling that all the Thoms of the world think nothing of a CIA wife sending her hubby on a trip he was ill-qualified for (ref. what happened later, including op-eds in NYT), and apparently was pushing her own agenda that there were no WMD to be found anywhere near Iraq.

Isn't it more than a little interesting that her vested interest was in proving her theory of no WMD correct? And having her hubby go prove it was a safe bet, eh?

Losing the point with all this talk of her "status" as a field agent (clearly not--correctly stated above by admission of Fitz) is short-sighted, and really, indicative of the political motivations of those obsessed with the topic.

Most clear-thinkers know what the "game" was with Mr. and Mrs. Plame.

Columnist Robert Novak revealed that he discovered Valerie Plame's identity from her husband's -- Joe Wilson's -- entry in "Who's Who in American," in which he mentions her position with the CIA.

Does this not mean that Wilson should be charged
with the crime of exposing a covert agent?

Jay, small note.

Unless I'm off base, I think your 4 and 5 are sorta a bit out of order. You wrote:

---
4) At this point, Novak consulted Joseph Wilson's entry in Who's Who to determine the wife's name -- up until now not stated by anyone -- and published his infamous column.

5) Novak then calls the CIA to confirm that Valerie Plame works for them, and the CIA's spokesman confirms it.
---

Should be soemthing like:

4) At this point, Novak consulted Joseph Wilson's entry in Who's Who to determine the wife's name -- up until now not stated by anyone.

5) Novak then calls the CIA to confirm that Valerie Plame works for them, and the CIA's spokesman confirms it.

5a) Novak publishes his infamous column.

--

same idea just a typo kinda thing.