Her name was never a secret, nor was it supposed to be. The secret was that she was an undercover agent.

She was an undercover agent? Bob, you just blew her cover!

No one knows whether she was an undercover agent, a covert operative, a clandestine operative, or any of a variety of things the CIA does. Probably none of the people who might be indicted, or the reporters involved, know either; or at least they didn't when all of this supposedly happened.

Denial isn't just a river in Egypt, jc.

But, for purposes of discussion, let's posit that she had actually been undercover. How do any of Kevin's links "out" her? Being undercover doesn't mean living under a rock and not letting human beings know of your existence--it just means they can't know your real job.

Wizbang is for insomniacs.

My point is that we shouldn't speculate on what she did for the CIA. All we have is a letter from "Larry C. Johnson" to congress identifying her as a NOC.

Knowing that she works for the CIA is one thing, but if she is a NOC and he told the world about it I hope they indict "Larry C. Johnson" too.

(Yeah, Wizbang is great for insomniacs, even on the west coast. There's no other blog that I bother to check past midnight.)

If she was undercover, Kevin's links are irrelevant. And if she wasn't undercover then why have any investigation to begin with? Either way, hopefully we'll find out tomorrow.

I am sure she was also listed in the phone book too, what is your point?

shoelover

I can't believe this keeps getting brought up. And "all we have" isn't just a letter from Larry Johnson, we also have a request from the CIA to the Justice Department to investigate the outing of a covert agent. But hey, who's the CIA to know her status? I think the real experts on who's covert and who's not are right wing bloggers.

Hmm. Nowhere in the info you provided did I see Mrs Wilson/Ms Plame identified as an employee of the CIA or any other government agency prior to the Novak column.

The fact that she existed, was married and a mother, and employed by Brewster Jennings was not a secret.

The fact that she was employed by the CIA was.

Note: you had better get over to Wikipedia and correct this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonofficial_cover

Well Valerie Plame's identity wasn't a secret to me. I knew it in 1996 because I met her and a bunch of her CIA coworkers. But that's not what is interesting to me.
In the midst of all of this Karl Rove\Valerie Plame controversy I have heard Valerie Plame described as being involved in "WMD counter-proliferation". That's not entirely true however. She and her coworkers were also engaged in spying on Americans inside America.
I know. She called me in spring of 2003 pretending to be with Brewster-Jennings. Following that I got a call from "Gail Heights" at University Services trying to get information. As many of you may
remember, Gail Heights was the alias used by Gao Zhan the Chinese scholar who was convicted of exporting microprocessors to Communist
China. This was just one of many attempts by Valerie Plame and her colleagues to get inside my life.
For a lot more information, see my website at:
http://www.tomchristianonline.com/

Tom Christian
Weston, FL

Chris falls back on that oh so tired mantra that there has to have been a crime because there is an investigation. Had she worked overseas in the preceeding five years? Not from what I have seen. Was the CIA actively attempting to conceal her identity? Not from what I have seen. Did the alleged leaker know that she was allegedly an operative, not just an employee? Not from what I have seen.

Tom, adjust your AFDB to block both incoming mind control rays and outgoing blog whoring spam.

Nothing in your post shows that Plame was publicly known to be a covert CIA operative, as others have noted above.

The link between Plame and the CIA was first published by Novak, with Cheney's advice and encouragement. Novak knew when he killed a career and perhaps some of her operatives in July that he was publishing information that should not be made public. He would be talking out of both sides of his mouth in prison now if he had not quickly decided to cooperate with the Special Prosecutor. Smart move for a lead-headed dumb-ass.

Rove is in do-do over his head now, and that makes it hard for him to talk. So, Big George is trying to make his own decisions. Not good. His first big decision was finding someone qualified to fill O'Connor's "vacancy" and he blew that big time. Miers has withdrawn herself from consideration, and Big George has quietly called in Dan Quayle - his half brother - for spelling and public speaking advice.

This administration is done. Stick a fork in it.

I suspect that none of this is news to you. If it is, you've been out to lunch way too long.

The good news is that the Dems have nothing going for them, and won't have anything going for them for at least another century. Reagan killed that party when he busted unions.

Instead of trying to prop up an administration with no spine, it might be better to start looking ahead to '08. The trick is to find someone with an IQ larger than his shoe size, and who won't turn out to be like "stink on The Ugly" after the third day.

Smile:

Your, er, um, analysis is not only factually wrong/incorrect it also contains so much rhetorical 'do-do'—to borrow a phrase from you.

Novak did not publish Plame's name with Cheney's encourgement and advice; it was, perhaps/allegedly, Scooter Libby who leaked her name, not Cheney himself. And yes, that's a very important distinction to make because Cheney does not appear to be directly or even indirectly linked (other than to Libby working in his office) to any leak of Plame's name.

As to your other analysis, it's all so much "look at me, aren't I clever?!" speculative nonsense and gibberish. If you're paying any kind of attention, which apparently you're not, you'd know that the GOP silent frontrunner for '08 is Condi. And that means Hillary The Horrible and the DNC is in deeper 'do-do' than you could ever possibly imagine. Look at it this way: Think your loss was bad in '04? Just wait until '08 if Condi's on the ticket...

JD

Please quote the part of my post where I said there has to be a crime because there's an investigation. I said nothing of the kind. What I did say was that it's ridiculous to ask Fitzgerald to report on what crimes were committed before he conducts his investigation. The two points aren't even in the same ballpark. And what's all this "Not from what I have seen"? Please enlighten us with what you have seen, other than a bunch of speculation on Internet blogs. Plame didn't serve overseas in the last five years? Where was she, exactly? Let's say, oh, March of 1999. Where was she then? I assume you know, from what you've seen.

And how can you say the leaker didn't know she was covert, when you don't even know who the leaker is?

I can't say she was covert, because I don't have access to your many top secret sources. I do know that the CIA declared her as covert when they filed their complaint. The only contradiction to that comes from a bunch of bloggers who say "Not from what I have seen" as if they have any way of knowing. Oh, and one former CIA guy who was gone from the agency for TEN YEARS before the time period in question. You inow how when you leave a job, and still stay in touch with people, after a while your connection to the job becomes more and more tenuous? People mention Phil and Andrea, and then say "Oh, they started after you left." After 10 years, I don't care how many friends this guy has, he's not in a better position than the CIA to determine Valerie Plame's status.

Chris

"And "all we have" isn't just a letter from Larry Johnson, we also have a request from the CIA to the Justice Department to investigate the outing of a covert agent. But hey, who's the CIA to know her status?"

Apparently I took this quote the wrong way. It seems to imply that because the CIA requested an investigation, there had to have been a crime committed, as they are the ones that get to determine her status. If I took your posting in the wrong manner, my apologies.

However, it is absolutely not my burden of proof to show the negative of the requirements of the statute. It is the duty of those that claim that a covert agent was outed to do so. And in order to do so, amongst other things, they have to show that the CIA was actively attempting to conceal her identity, that she had served in a covert capacity overseas in the last five years, and they have to show that the person alleged to do the leaking knew that she was a covert agent prior to the alleged leaking, amongst other things.

If Fitzgerald proves that there was a violation in regards to this alleged outing, than the individual(s) should be punished according to the law. Period.

You know whats really funny? Just below the headline is the statement:

"Prior to Robert Novak's July 14, 2003 article that revealed Valerie Wilson Plame's name and employment at the CIA here association with Joe Wilson was pretty easy to find on the Internet."

I don't notice anything in the clipping that says "Wife: Valerie Plame works as a NOC at the CIA on WMD counter proliferation issues."

It simply states her name. This is about the poorest line of reasoning I have EVER seen. This Grand Jury hasn't been going on because people at the White House said "Joe Wilson's wifes name is Valerie Plame", but rather that they disclosed that she worked at the CIA. NOTHING ABOVE REVEALS THAT!

Are you people really that stupid?

This is, quite frankly even one level (at least) stupider than the lie you STILL tell that Joe Wilson said "Dick Cheney sent me to Niger". All you have to do is read the piece from the Times to see that what he actually said was "the CIA told me that someone in Cheney's office wanted answers on this issue". Not even REMOTELY the same thing. Not even close.

And then theres the whole tack you take that him getting sent in the first place was some sort of nepotism. Po-lease! Like Niger is the "garden spot" of the world. Who in the hell would WANT to go to Niger. It isn't exactly a resort you know.

Nepotism? Really? It's nothing at all like picking some freak from the "International Arabian Horse Association" to be head of FEMA because he happened to be Joe Allbaugh's college roommate. Never mind he had ZERO emergency management experience. That worked out just great. At least Wolson had the requisite experience for the trip.

You people would all do the nation a service if you followed in the footsteps of the other religious freak Jim Jones, and start "drinking the Kool Aid" (you know, the OTHER Kool Aid).

How can you possibly believe Ms. Plame was still covert after checking out Kevin’s link? And if she wasn't covert "NO CRIME".

comprimises of her identity

I don't give a good God damn if she was "covert" or "not covert". The fact that she worked for the CIA was Classified information. Aside from putting her life in jeopardy, from some sort of retribution attack/killing, it also put the lives of EVERYONE who worked past or present for Brewster Jennings, the CIA front company that NOBODY denies that she started. It also places at grave risk the lives of foreign CIA assets that worked with or had ANY dealings with Brewster Jennings.

This whole affair was a grave blow to national security, as it demonstartes to foreign nationals who may be inclined to work with our intelligence services (at risk of their life), that there is no guarantee that their identity (and thus their LIFE) will be protected in any way.

The ONLY way to solve that problem, is to hold the people responsible for this accounatable be the Democrats OR Republicans. They should be (VERY) publicly executed if convicted. Treason in a time of war is after all a death penalty offense.

Tom Christian, after skimming over your tinfoil-hatistry, I'm left wondering how you managed to catch so many of these spies signing their names at your local public library.

Note ... Carl does not care about those pesky little things called facts. I am sure that he is willing to point out exactly what qualifications Ambassador Wilson had in regards to nuclear materials. I am sure Carl is going to point out the statute and laws that indicate that her mere employment by the CIA was classified. As far as Valerie Plame and Brewster Jennings goes, the minute they started donating funds to political campaigns, they ceased being this hidden enclave of spooks, IMHO.

JD, how does donating funds to politicians make them any less undercover? For all you know, maybe it was part of their cover. Political donations are public record, after all.

And are you saying that, since her CIA front company donated funds to Democrats, Plame deserved to get outed?

Isn't it illegal for the CIA to attempt to influence the outcome of a domestic election ?

How can you possibly believe Ms. Plame was still covert after checking out Kevin’s link? And if she wasn't covert "NO CRIME".

Possibly because I'm skeptical of the source and the reporting. The WaTimes reports:

Mrs. Plame's identity as an undercover CIA officer was first disclosed to Russia in the mid-1990s by a Moscow spy, said officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity....

In a second compromise, officials said a more recent inadvertent disclosure resulted in references to Mrs. Plame in confidential documents sent by the CIA to the U.S. Interests Section of the Swiss Embassy in Havana.

Who? What officials? Whom is the WaTimes talking to? Have we not learned to be skeptical about anonymous officials? Especially when they apparently equivocate thusly:

A second official, however, said the compromises before the news column were not publicized and thus should not affect the investigation of the Plame matter.

Meaning if these "outings" even happened, which remains to be seen, they were not made in public and are probably only known inside the intelligence community, presumably by a small number of people.

In any case, the alleged crime is real if in fact her employment at the CIA was classified (and the "outer" knew that). What the WaTimes, the WaPost, or Santa Claus says about her being outed before makes no difference. They don't get to classify or declassify data or identities. As to whether anyone will be charged with this crime, well, that remains to be seen (tomorrow, according to anonymous sources ;).

For JD:
Classified status is not a matter of law. It is a matter of govt standards. I know folks like you prefer to see EVERYTHING as a black and white issue, but that simply doesn't cut it.

It is a fact that Plame's status at the CIA WAS classified info.

Or maybe you are willing to deny the right's contention that Cheney telling Libby what she did and where she worked was NOT a violation because (get ready) they both had THE CLEARANCES TO KNOW. If her identity wasn't classified, they why would they need clearances to discuss this?

Maybe you are also denying the existence of the memo addressed in this article (and MANY others)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/20/AR2005072002517_pf.html

As for Wilson's qualifications, you don't need to be a genius to figure out that the guy, according to your OWN evidentiary article above, had been an ambassador to multiple African countries. Why exactly would he need to be an expert in WMD to find out if there was a sale (or attempted sale) of yellowcake from Niger to Iraq. What he needed to have to get the job done was diplomatic contacts in Africa, and he had plenty. You don't need to be a dairy scientist to find out if I bought milk at the store. You just need to look in the fridge. So you're hanging with Brownie-qualified, Wilson-not qualified??? That dog won't hunt son.

As for your "humble opinion" on Brewster Jennings donation to political candidates, you are wrong. Making a donation to a political candidate that you don't support is NOT grounds to blow the cover of a CIA brass plate company. Not in this world or any other.

Stop putting partisan politics over national security.

WOW!

JD grasping not at straws, but the last, lonely straw:

"Isn't it illegal for the CIA to attempt to influence the outcome of a domestic election ?"

Ha, ha, ha, ha. Now THATS funny. Now I know I'm witnessing the

GOP-ocalypse.

Carl : You continue to miss the point, but that does not surprise me.

How about you answer the following ...

1. Was the CIA actively attempting to conceal her identity ?

2. Had she been assigned to an overseas covert assignment in the last 5 years ?

3. If we accept your premise that she was a covert operative, did they person that is alleged to have leaked this information know that she was covert ?

Outside of that, your argument is nothing other than you wishing to convict somebody of a crime based on your own standards, not the law as written.

Are you telling me it is legal for the CIA to attempt to actively manipulate domestic elections?

Does Fitzgerald have any family members who work for the CIA or FBI or some other sensitive assignment that could be used as leverage?

(Okay, just kidding)

JD sez: Chris falls back on that oh so tired mantra that there has to have been a crime because there is an investigation. Had she worked overseas in the preceeding five years? Not from what I have seen. Was the CIA actively attempting to conceal her identity? Not from what I have seen. Did the alleged leaker know that she was allegedly an operative, not just an employee? Not from what I have seen.

A more churlish wag would suggest that you might be best served pulling your head from dark orifices and then reporting on whether your perceptual abilities improve somewhat. I'll content myself with saying that I can be quite understandably excused for not caliong you up first thing the next time I want to know about the internal practises of clandestine government organisations. You have provided no reason to think that -- even if such information did exist -- you would be privy to it.

But for those that prefer indirect inferences from known evidence, I'd just refresh their memory as to the fact that the CIA did, for some reason or another, make a referral.

Cheers,

JD sez: And in order to do so, amongst other things, they have to show that the CIA was actively attempting to conceal her identity, that she had served in a covert capacity overseas in the last five years...

And they're going to do this so that you know about it??? Hate to say it, but if they're any good at "actively attempting to conceal her identity", you (except for some unfortunate acts of the maladministration to smear Joe Wilson) wouldn't know bupkis about it.... Let me know when you figger that part out.

Cheers,

JD

The reason the burden is on defenders of the White House to prove that Plame wasn't covert is because they're saying she wasn't covert. All I have to go on is the fact that the CIA pressed for an investigation because she was covert. I never claim that she was covert, I only respond to those who use flimsy shreds of evidence to claim that she wasn't. I'm not sure how anyone, including Victoria Toensing, can claim to know what she did in the last five years. People are claiming she wasn't covert with no knowledge on which to base that claim. It becomes increasingly clear that all these people have to go on is the fact that her name was known, which totally misses the point.

I don't think the criteria for covert status are as clear as many people are claiming. This is largely the fault of Toensing, who goes on talk shows and deliberately (I believe) makes misleading statements. She was one of the staffers who drafted the law, but she wasn't an elected official, she's a die hard Republican partisan. Just because she says the law means something, doesn't make it so.

For example, she likes to make it seem that one can only be a covert agent if one has lived outside the US in the last five years. But actually, the statute defines a covert agent as a person "who is serving outside the United States or has within the last five years served outside the United States." If Plame regularly traveled outside the US as to engage in covert activities, it can reasonably be argued that she served outside the US. I believe the purpose of this clause is to ensure that the outed agent was working outside the US, which is the only place they're allowed to operate. An example I've used before is a US-based professor who travels regularly to academic conferences overseas while also meeting contacts and gathering information for the CIA. Does the fact that he still resides in the US mean he's not a covert agent?

If it turns out that she was indeed a NOC: fine, indict Karl Rove and Scooter Libby, if that's what the law is.

But also indict Larry Johnson, everyone in the media, and everyone in this blog thread who said she was a NOC and WASN'T SPECULATING. Arne, Carl, Chris, and others: If you actually know the facts about the nature of her employment at the CIA beyond what Novak revealed I'm sure Fitzgerald would like to question you.

jc

Huh?