<p>Question for you fringe-ers out there: Did Rove orchestrate the Renquist resignation to take the heat off of himself in the Plame case? Or did he orchestrate the Plame case, in anticipation of being able to distract the press while he arranged for Bush to appoint two new justices??</p>
<p>Am I a fringe-er?? Funny I thing (living in Blue NY) that I’m mainstream!Answers…Neither…he very often just uses what arrives to manipulate it to his best advantage. Sometimes he plans ahead. Like planning Iraq the minute Bush got his throne.</p>
<p>OK, that answers my question :)</p>
<p>
So, I guess instead we are supposed to trust what someone who maliciously misquotes what Rove’s attorney says? Yup, I guess that is par for the course.</p>
<p>Momrath,</p>
<p>We don’t know whether anyone has pleaded the 5th before the grand jury; grand jury testimony is not supposed to be made public.</p>
<p>Judith Miller hasn’t been charged with a crime, or accused of one as far as I know. She’s being held for contempt of court for refusing to answer questions about her conversations with a source. If answering a specific question would tend to incriminate her, she could plead the 5th, at which point the prosecutor could decide offer her immunity, and require her to testify anyway.</p>
<p>“It should be a crime to reveal the identity of a covert CIA agent, and there was no compelling national interest in getting that information out.”</p>
<p>It is a crime, of course. What’s not a crime is to reveal that someone used to be a covert CIA agent. The law specifics that it only applies to agents serving outside the US or who have served outside the US in the last 5 years. The presumption is that there are no covert agents within the US – it’s against the law for the CIA to operate within domestically – and that any operative back in the States for 5 or more years isn’t going back in the field.</p>
<p>In Ms. Plame’s case, last year Vanity Fair reported that she returned to Washington, DC in 1997 when the CIA suspected her name had been given to Russia by convicted spy Aldrich Ames in 1994. So to be fair about this, when Novak mentioned Plame in his column in 2003, 6 years had past since she got a desk job because her cover had already been blown. </p>
<p>The revelation couldn’t have had much effect on her career as a spy, because those two facts (plus the non-trival fact she had two children under the age of 5) meant she was never going back into the field again anyway.</p>
<p>Thanks Greybeard. I was with you right up to the last sentence. "The prosecutor could offer her immunity AND require her to testify. " If you could bear with my tedious and thickheaded questioning a bit longer I’d like to ask for further clarification. If she were to plead the fifth and if she were to be offered immunity would she still go to jain for refusing to testify?</p>
<p>This case has really fascinated me because it seems that the whistleblowers/revealers, left/right, prosecutors/victims are all jumbled together; like Black Sambo’s tigers, they are turning to butter.</p>
<p>If she were to plead the 5th, and the prosecutor offered her immunity, she could be held in contempt of court for refusing to testify, and jailed until either she agreed to testify, or until the grand jury is dismissed.</p>
<p>Heres the two parts of the criminal statute that seems to most concern the special prosecutor:</p>
<p>50 USC Sec. 428</p>
<p>(a) Disclosure of information by persons having or having had access to classified information that identifies covert agent</p>
<p>Whoever, having or having had authorized access to classified information that identifies a covert agent, intentionally discloses any information identifying such covert agent to any individual not authorized to receive classified information, knowing that the information disclosed so identifies such covert agent and that the United States is taking affirmative measures to conceal such covert agent’s intelligence relationship to the United States, shall be fined under Title 18 or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.</p>
<p>(b) Disclosure of information by persons who learn identity of covert agents as result of having access to classified information</p>
<p>Whoever, as a result of having authorized access to classified information, learns the identity of a covert agent and intentionally discloses any information identifying such covert agent to any individual not authorized to receive classified information, knowing that the information disclosed so identifies such covert agent and that the United States is taking affirmative measures to conceal such covert agent’s intelligence relationship to the United States, shall be fined under Title 18 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.</p>
<p>Here are some relevant definitions from the statute:</p>
<p>The term disclose means to communicate, provide, impart, transmit, transfer, convey, publish, or otherwise make available.</p>
<p>The term covert agent means–</p>
<p>(A) a present or retired officer or employee of an intelligence agency or a present or retired member of the Armed Forces assigned to duty with an intelligence agency–</p>
<p>(i) whose identity as such an officer, employee, or member is classified information, and</p>
<p>(ii) who is serving outside the United States or has within the last five years served outside the United States </p>
<p>Now lets look at what Rove said and did, according to Newsweek:</p>
<p>It was 11:07 on a Friday morning, July 11, 2003, and Time magazine correspondent Matt Cooper was tapping out an e-mail to his bureau chief, Michael Duffy. Subject: Rove/P&C," (for personal and confidential), Cooper began. “Spoke to Rove on double super secret background for about two mins before he went on vacation…” Cooper proceeded to spell out some guidance on a story that was beginning to roil Washington. He finished, “please don’t source this to rove or even WH [White House]” and suggested another reporter check with the CIA.</p>
<p> Rove’s words on the Plame case have always been carefully chosen. I didn’t know her name. I didn’t leak her name, Rove told CNN last year when asked if he had anything to do with the Plame leak. Rove has never publicly acknowledged talking to any reporter about former ambassador Joseph Wilson and his wife. But last week, his lawyer, Robert Luskin, confirmed to NEWSWEEK that Rove didand that Rove was the secret source who, at the request of both Cooper’s lawyer and the prosecutor, gave Cooper permission to testify.</p>
<p> Cooper wrote that Rove offered him a big warning not to get too far out on Wilson. Rove told Cooper that Wilson’s trip had not been authorized by DCIACIA Director George Tenetor Vice President Dick Cheney. Rather, it was, KR said, wilson’s wife, who apparently works at the agency on wmd [weapons of mass destruction] issues who authorized the trip.</p>
<p>Several observations:</p>
<ol>
<li> You can identify someone without using their name. The President of the United States is a clear identification. Saying that wilsons wife works at the agency on wmd was a clear way of making Valerie Plames identity available.</li>
<li> Whether Valerie Plame was a covert agent under the statute depends on a couple of things: (a) was her identity classified information? And (b) had she served outside the United States within the previous five years? (Given the nature of her work, its highly likely that she would have done some of it overseas in the past five years. Thats the simplest explanation for why we have a special prosecutor looking into this case.)</li>
<li> Note that Karl Rove could have violated the statute without knowing that she was a covert agent. He had to have (a) learned her identity through classified information (which seems likely), (b) disclosed it to persons not authorized to receive the information (such as Matt Cooper), and (c) he had to have known that the United States was taking affirmative measures to conceal such covert agent’s intelligence relationship to the United States. Its clear that the United States was in fact taking affirmative measures to conceal Ms. Plames intelligence relationship to the United States; they had provided her with a cover employer, Brewster-Jennings & Associates, which had a Dunn & Bradstreet entry.</li>
<li> The Model Penal Code says that when the existence of a particular fact is an element of an offense, such knowledge is established if a person is aware of a high probability of its existence, unless he actually believes that it does not exist. Would a reasonable person believe that there was a high probability that the US would take affirmative measures to conceal the intelligence relationship of a person working with the CIA on weapons of mass destruction?</li>
<li> So, did Karl Rove know that the US was taking affirmative measures to conceal Ms. Plames intelligence relationship to the US? To find out what he knew and when he knew it, it would be useful to talk to the people to whom he revealed the information about her CIA connection. Telling a reporter that the information was on double super secret background may be circumstantial evidence that he did know that there were affirmative measures to conceal the relationship.<br></li>
<li> Another line of inquiry: would it constitute obstruction of justice to refuse to release reporters from a promise of confidentiality if the act of giving the reporters the information in question is being investigated as a possible crime?</li>
</ol>
<p>“having or having had authorized access to classified information”</p>
<p>The above would seem to rule out any journalist from prosecution. It should also be easy to determine the number of administration off8icials who had “authorized access” to Plame’s status. Of course if they had unauthorized access to the info and disclosed it… Doesn’t seem to be covered does it?</p>
<p>It is difficult to imagine how Rove would have a “need to know” Plame’s status. It is therefore difficult to imagine how he would habe “authorized access” to that info. Fitzgerald if he is doing anything is trying ti build an obstruction case. That is likely to be a tough case to make. If you doubt it just refer to any of the Clinton scandals. On the other hand what does no work in the state may work in Public opinion.</p>
<p>If Rove isn’t authorized to receive classified information (which seems doubtful, given his role in this administration), then the transmission of the information regarding Valerie Plame to Rove may have been a violation of the same statute. </p>
<p>If Rove was given the into with a suggestion that he leak it to the press, that could constitute a criminal conspiracy.</p>
<p>I haven’t seen that there was any implication of an obstruction of justice in the Lewinsky scandal. There was no indication Clinton asked anyone to lie for him, or to refuse to provide testimony that they were legally required to give.</p>
<p>There have been plenty of other convictions for obstruction of justice. Watergate was replete with them. Martha Stewart was convicted for obstruction of justice, for a more recent example.</p>
<p>Greybeard, would Rove be a person of interest to Fitzgerald if he did not leak Plame’s identity but choregoraphed activities, of others, including a leaker, aimed at discrediting Wilson, and then tried to cover up the extent of the activity afterwards?</p>
<p>If Fitzgerald suspected that the cover-up was aimed at thwarting the prosecution of what was believed to be a crime, then under that scenario, TheDad, I imagine that Rove would be a person of interest to Fitzgerald.</p>
<p>I just spotted something very interesting in a transcript of an interview Condi Rice gave to Wolf Blitzer two days after Karl Rove’s conversation with Matt Cooper"</p>
<p>BLITZER: But 11 months earlier, you, the Bush administration, had sent Joe Wilson, a former U.S. ambassador to Niger, to find out whether it was true. He came back, reported to the CIA, reported to the State Department, it wasn’t true, it was bogus. The whole issue was bogus. And supposedly you never got word of his report. </p>
<p>RICE: Well, first of all, I didn’t know Joe Wilson was going to Niger. And if you look at Tenet’s statement, it says that counterproliferation experts on their own initiative sent Joe Wilson, so I don’t know … </p>
<p>BLITZER: Who sent him? </p>
<p>RICE: Well, it was certainly not a level that had anything to do with the White House, and I do not believe at a level that had anything to do with the leadership of the CIA. </p>
<p>BLITZER: Supposedly, it came at the request of the vice president. </p>
<p>RICE: No, this is simply not true, and this is something that’s been perpetuated that we simply have to straighten out. </p>
<p>The vice president did not ask that Joe Wilson go to Niger. The vice president did not know. I don’t think he knew who Joe Wilson was, and he certainly didn’t know that he was going. </p>
<p>The first that I heard of Joe Wilson’s mission was when I was doing a Sunday talk show and heard about it."</p>
<p>So, Condi quotes Tenent’s statement concerning “counter-proliferation experts” at the CIA. </p>
<p>It sounds like she knew about the Valerie Plame-Joe Wilson connection, but wasn’t revealing it specifically.</p>
<p>Neither was Tenet. Here’s a quote from his statement on July 11 (the same day Karl Rove was speaking to a reporter on “double-secret deep background”:</p>
<p>"For perspective, a little history is in order.</p>
<p>"There was fragmentary intelligence gathered in late 2001 and early 2002 on the allegations of Saddam’s efforts to obtain additional raw uranium from Africa, beyond the 550 metric tons already in Iraq. In an effort to inquire about certain reports involving Niger, CIA’s counter-proliferation experts, on their own initiative, asked an individual with ties to the region to make a visit to see what he could learn. He reported back to us that one of the former Nigerien officials he met stated that he was unaware of any contract being signed between Niger and rogue states for the sale of uranium during his tenure in office. "</p>
<p>Notice how careful Tenet is being to avoid identifying Valerie Plame. (That same day, US Embassies around the world released this statement under a headline that read “CIA Director Tenet Accepts Blame for Iraq Passage in Bush Speech -
Director releases statement explaining CIA’s role in clearance process.”</p>
<p>In the same time frame, six reporters were receiving calls, including Robert Novak, Judith Miller, and Matt Cooper.</p>
<p>So Condi Rice and George Tenet are aware of the status of Joe Wilson’s wife, but are carefully avoiding drawing the connection directly. Meanwhile, Karl Rove is calling reporters, and connecting the dots for them on “double secret deep background.” </p>
<p>I agree with Tenet here - for perspective, a little history is in order.</p>
<ol>
<li>At the time Condi was talking to Wolf Blitzer, George Tenet was falling on his sword, and Karl Rove was talking to reporters on deep background, the Yellow Cake story (remember "‘the sixteen words’ in the State of the Union address?) was threatening to spin out of control. Two members of the Bush administration (which is really known for studying their talking points and staying on message), were hinting publicly at Joe Wilson’s connection to the CIA, but only vaguely. Why weren’t they drawing the connection explicitly? Probably because the Director of the CIA and the National Security Advisor knew that the US government was making affirmative efforts to conceal Valerie Plame’s connection to US intelligence.</li>
</ol>
<p>That makes the statement in Cooper’s email to his editor to “please don’t source this to rove, or even to WH” sound more than a little sinister to me. </p>
<p>Does anyone doubt that Karl Rove was involved in the administration’s discussion of what would be revealed, and by whom?</p>
<p>And not only Rove. I’m starting to wonder whether Fitzgerald may be echoing Howard Baker’s famous query: “What did the President know, and when did he know it?”</p>
<p>“(Given the nature of her work, its highly likely that she would have done some of it overseas in the past five years. Thats the simplest explanation for why we have a special prosecutor looking into this case.)”</p>
<p>Greybeard, see my post above. Vanity Fair reports that Plame returned to Washington in 1997 when the CIA was concerned that Aldrich Ames had given her name to the Russians. In the mean time she married Wilson and had two small children. Much less likely that she was covert outside the country under those circumstances.</p>
<p>The reason there’s a special prosecutor is that there was so much uproar over the case and how the Justice Department couldn’t handle it objectively, it was politically necessary to name one.</p>
<p>Here’s what the Washington Post says about this.<br>
[Rove</a> Told Reporter of Plame’s Role But Didn’t Name Her, Attorney Says](<a href=“http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/10/AR2005071001000.html]Rove”>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/10/AR2005071001000.html)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>“In the meantime she married Wilson and had two small children. Much less likely she was covert outside the country under those circumstances.”</p>
<p>The question is whether she had served abroad within five years of when she was identified. Sure she was the mother of two small children, but they’re twins, and they were only three years old when she was ID’d in Novak’s column. </p>
<p>BLITZER: Supposedly, it came at the request of the vice president. </p>
<p>RICE: No, this is simply not true, and this is something that’s been perpetuated that we simply have to straighten out. </p>
<p>I think Rove was trying to “straighten out” the same misperception. That would explain why six reporters received phone calls identifying Valery Plame (not by name, but identifying her nevertheless).</p>
<p>So Rove’s lawyer says “Rove wasn’t trying to push the information into the public realm.” He just happened to have disclosed information identifying her to Cooper, and apparently to five other reporters, including Robert Novak and Judith Miller. </p>
<p>“Luskin said Cooper raised the question.” What question, precisely?</p>
<p>“Under cloak of secrecy”? I didn’t see a statement in Cooper’s email saying “don’t run the story.” I saw a statement saying “please don’t source this to rove or even WH.”</p>
<p>If he didn’t want the story in the public realm, why was he talking to half a dozen reporters about it? </p>
<p>The only thing I see as being shrouded under a “cloak of secrecy” was Rove’s identity, not Plame’s.</p>
<p>Besides, it doesn’t matter in terms of the statute whether Rove wanted the reporters to report on the info he was giving to them. It’s a crime to knowingly reveal the identity of a covert agent to anyone who isn’t entitled to know it.</p>
<p>New York Times, October 2, 2003 </p>
<p>"Cover Story Kept Work for C.I.A. a Secret
By DOUGLAS JEHL and DAVID STOUT </p>
<p>"WASHINGTON, Oct. 1 Valerie Plame was among the small subset of Central Intelligence Agency officers who could not disguise their profession by telling friends that they worked for the United States government. </p>
<p>"That cover story, standard for American operatives who pretend to be diplomats or other federal employees, was not an option for Ms. Plame, people who knew her said on Wednesday. As a covert operative who specialized in nonconventional weapons AND SOMETIMES WORKED ABROAD [emphasis added], she passed herself off as a private energy expert, what the agency calls nonofficial cover. </p>
<p>"But that changed over the summer, when her identity as a C.I.A. officer was reported in a syndicated column by Robert Novak. </p>
<p>"Ms. Plame’s husband, Joseph C. Wilson IV, a retired ambassador, has accused the White House of releasing her name as a way of discrediting Mr. Wilson after he had questioned intelligence reports that Iraq was buying uranium from Niger. </p>
<p>"Mr. Wilson, who is 53 and was married twice before, met Ms. Plame, 40, in early 1997 at a party in Washington, he said on Wednesday in an interview in his office. A telephone message left at their house here was unanswered, and Mr. Wilson said his wife had instructed him to say that she would 'chew off her right arm off before she talked to anybody from the press. </p>
<p>"Mr. Wilson proudly showed off photographs of Ms. Plame, calling her a real-life Jennifer Garner, the actress who plays a spy on “Alias” on ABC-TV and whom the C.I.A. has enlisted as a spokeswoman to appeal to recruits. </p>
<p>“Mr. Wilson would not allow publication of the photographs and asked visitors to protect the privacy of their 3-year-old twins…”</p>
<p>
The thing is that, according to their own accounts, the reporters (Novak and Cooper) called Rove. So, it’s not like he was out there actively planting information.</p>
<p>He just didn’t have to say anything, now did he? Oh yeah, like maybe it was an accident the 1st time, or maybe even the 2nd, but the 3rd, 4th, and possibly the 5th and 6th time?</p>
<p>If I named someone I shouldn’t have named, it would be like, OPPS< better not do THAT again.</p>
<p>You guys are hilarious with your Watergate/Rove-is-an-evil-genius-traitor mentality.</p>