The Valerie Plame leak story has erupted this past week as Time magazine made the decision to turn over Matt Cooper’s emails and have him testify to the grand jury rather than go to jail to protect his sources. The information he’s provided about his conversations with Karl Rove and Lewis Libby make the case cut and dry in terms of whether or not the leaks occurred and who was responsible. While the White House has maintained in the past that Rove had nothing to do with the leak, this new information has sent the Republican National Committee into hyper-drive. As such, an enormous amount of irrelevant information has been put out in recent days in an effort to make things as confusing as possible. I’m going to simplify it for you. Whether or not Rove and Libby broke the law depends on only one thing, and that’s whether Plame’s status in the CIA was classified at the time her identity was leaked. Nothing else matters.
Before the government grants someone status to handle classified information, the person must first sign a Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement. From the low level analyst on up to the President himself, the agreement is signed in order to ensure that classified information is distributed on a ‘need to know’ basis. The document reads:
‘I hereby agree that I will never divulge classified information to anyone unless: (a) I have officially verified that the recipient has been properly authorized by the United States Government to receive; or (b) I have been given prior written notice of authorization from the US Government Department or Agency…responsible for the classification of the information…I understand that if I am uncertain about the classification status of information, I am required to confirm from an authorized official that the information is unclassified before I may disclose it…’
‘I have been advised that any breach of this Agreement may result in the termination of any security clearances I hold; removal from any position of special confidence and trust requiring such clearances; or the termination of my employment…unlawful disclosure of classified information by me may constitute a violation…of US criminal laws, including the provisions of Sections 641, 793, 794, 798, *952 and 1924 (etc)’
Unlike almost all other criminal investigations, a breach of this agreement is a case in which motive has absolutely no bearing in determining innocence or guilt. The very wording of the agreement makes it so the person agreeing to it has no legal recourse should they violate its terms. Motive though, is what the media makes its money on, and it’s the explosion of commentary concerning motive that has allowed many to perceive an incomprehensible level of complexity where none actually exists. Yellow cake, Plame’s status being covert or not, testimony having supported the administration’s claims concerning the intelligence and whether Rove or Libby ‘knowingly’ committed a crime are all matters that have resulted in higher ratings and publication sales. But in terms of whether or not a crime was committed, none of it matters.
Now that the leakers have been identified, the only fact that truly matters at this point is whether or not Plame’s identity was considered classified information at the time. This is where the right-wing has found success in confusing the matter. By tying in her status as covert or not covert with whether or not the information provided was classified, a misunderstanding now exists that the two distinctions are one in the same. Fact of the matter is, one has nothing to do with the other. The government has the right to classify information as it sees fit. Case in point, the meeting minutes from Dick Cheney’s energy task force were sought in a lawsuit by the Sierra Club, who argued that because individuals not working for the government participated, the public had a right to know what took place. The courts ruled in favor of the government. To give you an idea of how often the government uses this authority, in 2004 alone the Information Security Oversight Office reported that over 15 million classification decisions were made.
The most obvious evidence of the fact that Plame’s identity and status were classified by the CIA, is the fact that an investigation is taking place at all. If the opposite were true, the Justice Department wouldn’t have had a reason to investigate anything in the first place. Obviously the leak was in and of itself illegal, and until just recently the most difficult aspect of the investigation remained a mystery to the public. Now that it’s clear who was responsible, the White House and RNC are focused on damage control. Subsequent indictments and convictions are out of their hands at this point, but the war of information and pubic opinion will of course continue on for years to come. Evidence that Republicans understand this quite well is summed up perfectly by Fox News in a segway last night that asked the question of whether or not Rove is a hero. Whatever the outcome, it’s clear that the strategy now is to complicate the whole thing as much as possible, then celebrate whoever goes down as martyrs.
Because it’s the Democrats who are responsible for all this, right? Well that’s the one side issue I will address in this piece, as somehow amidst all that’s gone on here, Republicans have somehow been able to rationalize the villains in all of this to be the folks across the aisle. Truth be told, a stunning amount of irony exists here as Republicans are really defending themselves from the CIA and the country’s laws that govern the handling of classified information. ‘Intelligence’ being the most contentious word of the past four years in terms of 9/11 and the Iraq War, the Bush administration has somehow managed to land themselves in court for what is surely a minuscule example of abuse compared with what else has been done. The fact is, if Rove and Libby never smear Wilson, the brunt of the administration’s sins never result in the destruction a single person not wearing a military uniform. Fate has a way though, of teaching all of us incredible lessons with the smallest details we choose to ignore.
I digress though, as the point I hope to put forth in all of this is that when it comes to our government and the media, our brains are always in the cross hairs. Something I’ve learned this past year is that when they tell you it’s simple, it’s most likely very complex. And when they tell you it’s complex, chances are it’s simple. This scandal we’re experiencing first hand today is a perfect example. Plame’s information was classified, Rove and Libby leaked it to the media. That’s all you need to know.
I guess the fact that Porter Goss works for the CIA is classified as well. We’re gonna all go to jail, now. Can you “leak” something that is generally known?
Hilail Gildin writes: “Andrea Mitchell was asked, on MSNBC, whether it was generally known to news people, before the hullabaloo, that Ms. Plame worked for the CIA. She answered, somewhat reluctantly, that it was. In the light of this, I don’t understand the ensuing fuss.”
How do you define ‘generally known’? Before Novak’s article was published there wasn’t a single word written within the blogsphere on Plame. Wilson’s editorial came out and Novak was the first journalist, blogger or talking head to point this out.
All due respect to Andrea Mitchell – so what?
What righties are failing to grasp here is that whether or not a journalist knew Plame was in the CIA, if the information was classified, the agreement requires Rove or any government offical with a security clearance to make sure they’re cleared to say it before they do.
This eye-rolling answer of, ‘well is it illegal to write about Porter Goss’ is extremely dismissive of something that within the intelligence community is fundamental. When I signed my agreement upon receiving clearance in the military, it was said several times that if I were to leak information it would be 10 years in prison and a $10K fine.
“Something I’ve learned this past year is that when they tell you it’s simple, it’s most likely very complex. And when they tell you it’s complex, chances are it’s simple.”
And, with all due respect, when they tell you something is “obvious,” it usually means they can’t connect the dots factually or logically to prove their point.
I can appreciate your political opinion — in the latter half of your piece, but I’ve re-read the beginning several times, and cannot see where you’ve laid the predicate for your conclusion that Rove committed a “crime.” Frankly, it appears all you’ve done is taken a significant leap from the possibility that Rove may have breached the Classified Information Non-Disclosure Agreement to his having committed an “obvious” crime. To the contrary, the excerpt of the Agreement you chose to quote states: “unlawful disclosure of classified information by me MAY constitute a violation…of US criminal laws…” Now, if the nation’s laws make breach of the Agreement a criminal offense, your premise may stand. But you don’t quote any source for that — you simply imply it and move on.
I have never been privy to an application of this Agreement that was taken lightly when breached. There are several instances from the past few years where soldiers have been prosecuted for violating it. Perhaps I’m assuming there will be a conviction – but the fact that a crime was committed is quite clear. Just like when a defendant is facing drug charges or some other charge, there are minimum penalties and maximum penalties associated with the crime.
If Plame’s status was classified information, which it must have been – otherwise there would be nothing to investigate – the disclosure of that information, and more importantly not an accidental disclosure but in an effort to do harm to Plame and the CIA…it’s a hell of a lot more malicious than sending classified files to your home computer and being caught with them, and a soldier who does that gets jail time.
The government takes this sort of thing very seriously. The Agreement lists all the things that ‘could’ happen, but precident is there to warrant some of those criminal charges listed.
Again, without defending Rove’s actions — whatever they were or were not — on the issue of whether they were “right” or “wrong” or “malicious” or “serious,” etc., I think your leap is a troubling one.
It seems your argument is that someone — in your estimation, Rove — MUST HAVE committed a crime, because otherwise there would be no investigation?
Almost every criminal case, including almost every one that results in an acquittal, begins with an investigation. To put the shoe on the other political/ideological foot purely for the sake of argument, were the Clintons “guilty” of any criminal activity in connection with the Whitewater real estate deals because there was an investigation? Of course not.
I completely dig your point of view, but whereas the investigations into the Clintons were difficult and layered…this case here is very simple. A leak of classified information – it can even be a confirmation of said information in response to a question. Already there is testimony that puts Rove on the bad side of the law when it comes to testimony concerning his conversation with Novak and also his conversation with Cooper.
Precident in terms of non-military government leakers has been set with the following case prosecuted by Ashcroft….just for an idea of how serious the government has been in prosecuting breaches of this specific Agreement during Bush’s presidency…Ashcroft DoJ invoked in a “relatively minor leak case that it vigorously prosecuted, though it involved information that was not nearly as sensitive as that which Rove provided Matt Cooper”:
I am referring to the prosecution and conviction of Jonathan Randel. Randel was a Drug Enforcement Agency analyst, a PhD in history, working in the Atlanta office of the DEA. Randel was convinced that British Lord Michael Ashcroft (a major contributor to Britain’s Conservative Party, as well as American conservative causes) was being ignored by DEA, and its investigation of money laundering. (Lord Ashcroft is based in South Florida and the off-shore tax haven of Belize.)
http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/07/15/dean.rove/
A leak of classified information – it can even be a confirmation of said information in response to a question.
RIGHT THERE—How can you leak information to someone who already knows the information? That would be like me leaking the information to you that your wife just gave birth to twins. Suppose I just confirm to you on your blog that info and not even tell you, I just confirm what you already know.
As stated above and in other reports, other reporters and people already knew about Plame, probably because of Plame’s follies herself. Either way, classified knowledge is functionally declassified once non-classified people know of it. That’s why this Rove connection is such a joke, liberals are strecting so far to try to get Rove and it’s getting embarrassing.
Democrats need to beat the conservatives at the polls with honor rather than this ridiculous witch hunt.
Here is something to chew on:
It is contained in Section 422 (of Title 50, U.S. Code), and it provides that an accused leaker is in the clear if, sometime before the leak, “the United States ha[s] publicly acknowledged or revealed” the covert agent’s “intelligence relationship to the United States[.]”
And here is a link to corroborate(sp?)
http://washingtontimes.com/national/20040722-115439-4033r.htm
And to Herman, I’m sorry but I now think Michael was right, no crime was committed.
I think we have all been caught up in another version of the run-away bride story where the networks go from reporting news to manipulating news right on down to making up news. I realize I’ve fallen into the liberal media’s trap of sensationalized story building.
This could have been solved in a couple articles that just tell what happened, why it isn’t a big deal for Rove and Bush and what Wilson and Plame were really up too.
Rove can’t be held criminally liable for talking about public knowledge, no matter the classified status. The law is specific, at least in this regard, so all this is a ratings boost for the networks who know the truth but dole it out in small daily tidbits.
Plame’s cover was blown by the Soviets, the Cubans, the CIA itself, Plame herself, Wilson and Corn. To go after Rove NOW is a huge miscarriage of justice, especially since Plame and Wilson were engaged in nefarious, if not criminal, activity using the ambiguity of the law to cover their tracks.
How is this any different than if Plame were using her CIA contacts and resources to sell drugs or fence stolen goods?
There seem to be a lot of folks who are under the impression that Fitzgerald is as dumb as Bill O’Reilly.
The first question you have to ask yourself, if you believe Valerie Plame was no longer undercover, is why the CIA forwarded a criminal complaint to the Justice Department? Maybe the CIA was just joking around, hey?
There are any number of espionage statutes that Fitzgerald could use to prosecute Rove and Libby. The King of Zembla has a good link to an analysis by John Dean, Leak Laws:
Under the statute that Ashcroft used to prosecute Randal, the admissions by Rove’s lawyer establish that Rove violated the law.
The theory is this – the truth could come down to one of two or three options, and the reporter calls up the official and attempts to trick them into giving them the answer. The Agreement, when adhered to, prevents the reporter from confirming something they ‘think’ but can’t yet ‘confirm’.
Right – With the blogsphere being what it is, if the information was known at the time, it would have appeared somewhere before Novak’s column was published. This logic right here was born from a need for the RNC to make up some ground. And the only way they’re able to make up any kind of ground, anyhow, is to smear and throw around allegations.
In this case, it’s moot, because whether or not a couple of people knew who she was and where she worked prior to Novak’s article coming out – if the CIA considered the information to be classified, it’s their perogative. The White House cannot simply ignore it. Nor can excuses be made once the breach has already taken place…which is what people are attempting to do now.
Dems had NOTHING to do with this. The CIA filed the criminal complaint.
Right – quite simply – all these points are irrelevant. We cannot decide what laws we’re going to follow on a case by case basis. The judges who put Miller and Cooper in a position where they’d either have to go to jail or testify…they cited within their written opinions that a serious security breach had taken place. They decided that in light of such an egregious security breach, the interests of the public were more important than the protection of the sources.
Slate.com had links to these opinions, an article around February. I’ve been trying to get it to post here, but the site has been crapping out today. I will get these and post them.
The simplicity of this case is the thing nobody wants us to know about at this point. The left wants to use what happened as a segway to a discussion on Iraq, and the right just makes up whatever they think might work.
I agree 100% – – the Randall case sets precident in terms of how this investigation should be handled. Fitzgerald might just have a whole lot of bad news for quite a few people…I just hope it happens sooner rather than later.
I just find it hard to believe that the CIA can engage in partisan attacks against the White House and the courts will protect them. I thought all these leak laws were to protect agents in the field, no agents at home working as political operatives.
If for some crazy reason Rove is charged with a crime I will advocate for all Republican leaning CIA agents to begin immediate operations against Democrat elected officials using the power of their cover and CIA resources to take them down.
It is ridiculous that Rove would be charged for telling one guy what hundreds, if not thousands, of people aready know. Even more so now that we know Plame and Wilson conspired to misuse CIA resources and create false reports for the express purpose of hurting George Bush.
Right – Rove’s crime has nothing to do with anything Plame or Wilson did. If they forged documents, then I’m sure the Justice Department can put a case together…unless that is, this is just something the RNC made up.
Smearing Plame/Wilson is vintage Rove. Rove is a cornered animal and will do about anything at this point.
If at some point Bush has to fire Rove, I wonder if Rove will bite the hand that has been feeding him for all these years. My guess is that you will see the RNC do about anything to avoid that situation.
Right – Rove’s crime has nothing to do with anything Plame or Wilson did. If they forged documents, then I’m sure the Justice Department can put a case together…unless that is, this is just something the RNC made up.
This is a direct result of Plame/Wilson dirty dealings, they told people that Cheney or Bush sent him and Rove said no he didn’t. Wilson said his wife had nothing to do with his trip and McClellan said yes she did. Wilson said it wasn’t a DNC plot to dicredit Bush, which it was.
You can’t use your CIA cover and resources to commit fraud, no judge will say “sure you were acting against the interests of America but I think the law will help you get away with your crime.
Is there any law that protects CIA agents who engage in activities that misappropriate taxpayer dollars and create false documents for partisan politics? Rove is the whistle blower here and Plame/Wilson are the co-conspirators. I wonder how far up the DNC chain of command this goes. Did Kerry or Dean know what Plame/Wilson were up to? There’s your investigation!!!
You guys watch the Daily Show any? The analysis by Samantha Bee on the leak investigation was hilarious…
No, I missed it. What happened?
She compared all the players to Sorority sisters, I think she used to the term chatty kathys. Robert Novak as a chatty kathy it was really funny.
Maybe this goes higher than Rove: This is taken from TPMCAFE:
Q Dr. Rice, when did you all find out that the documents were forged?
DR. RICE: Sometime in March, I believe. Is that right?
MR. FLEISCHER: The IAEA reported it.
DR. RICE: The IAEA reported it I believe in March. But I will tell you that, for instance, on Ambassador Wilson’s going out to Niger, I learned of that when I was sitting on whatever TV show it was, because that mission was not known to anybody in the White House. And you should ask the Agency at what level it was known in the Agency.
Q When was that TV show, when you learned about it?
DR. RICE: A month ago, about a month ago.
Q Can I ask you about something else?
DR. RICE: Yes. Are you sure you’re through with this?
Hands down, my favorite thing to watch on TV. HBO aside, The Daily Show is the only thing I have to see every night. The writing is brilliant. The Bee bit was classic. Did you catch the timeline bit from last week? The monkey washing a cat…
I’ve got a Daily Show article in me…several most likely, but just like writing down the setlists at shows, I’m always afraid to ruin it.
That’s the subliminal idea behind my last article on this whole thing. Everyone is focusing on Rove’s error in judgement, but Fitzgerald has that portion of it in the bag already. Keep your eyes on the memo that was circulated following Wilson’s editorial…the one that was viewed on Air Force One. It’s the kind of thing that indicates what the strategy was from day one concerning the Iraq War.
Lies were told – and with this case involving the administration weakening the CIA for political purposes, investigation into whether or not the intelligence community was diminished for political reasons in other instances is a justified place for the investigation to go.
Judith Miller has never been someone I’ve liked…in fact, a few years back I downright loathed her. If you look back at the history – she’d publish an article (alluminum tubes come to mind) that was quickly proven false, but millions of Americans would always hear more about the false information than the fact that it was false.
The government cannot be allowed to cherrypick intelligence, nor can they be allowed to force employees within the agencies to fall on their swords for the sake of ‘fixing facts’.
This thing is going to be huge – and when it breaks, everyone will realize how much of a ‘slam dunk’ Rove and Libby’s indictments were to issue.
Oh, no…that one has Limbaugh written all over it. Right, that guy is a lunatic…a thrice divorced drug addit who talks about ‘family values’.
I don’t know for sure, but I’d bet a dollar to a doughnut that Limbaugh said this very same thing. Don’t tell me, he took random sentences from a series of articles out of context to formulate a theory that makes absolutely no sense to anyone but the 90 year old in Florida who can’t remember the names of his/her own children.
Right – you have proof that the DNC was behind it?
Right – you have proof that the DNC was behind it?
Other than Plame’s ties and donations to the DNC and Wilsons DNC insider status as well as donations and endorsement of DNC cnadidates?
At this point it looks like this has gone the way of the National Guard Memo and the Downing Street memo. I know the investigation is still going, at least I think it is still going, but so much time has gone by.
Wait, so the fact that they supported Kerry is proof that there’s a conspiracy? Grasping at straws with this one.
A prosecutor is on this one Right, it’s not over when the media says it’s over. Cooper just testified – him and Miller appealed their contempt of court conviction all the way to the Supreme Court. That took time.
No, indictments are on the way Right, just stay tuned.
Wait, so the fact that they supported Kerry is proof that there’s a conspiracy? Grasping at straws with this one.
The fact that they are staunch supporters of the DNC dogma and the fact that they engaged in a previously secret plot to attack the administration using CIA resources and taxpayer dollars to create a now debunked report designed to harm Bush.
This is what the Constitution is supposed to protect us from, government and political factions taking over the government though fraud.
No, indictments are on the way Right, just stay tuned.
What would you say to the position that Rove is a whistle blower who, either inadvertantly or on purpose, uncovered a conspiracy to harm Bush politically?
Plame wasn’t under orders from the CIA to help her husband tear down Bush. Actually, what was Plame supposed to be doing on CIA time when she was engaged in this “other project?”
Is being a CIA undercover agent also a license to commit crime or work against the government you are employed to protect and serve?
If I am an undercover CIA agent am I above the law and rules of ethics regarding my own country? Am I free to attempt to overthrow the President and maintain my covert status if it doesn’t work?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/theblog/archive/lawrence-odonnell/the-roveluskin-leaks_4551.html
I’m not much of an O’Donnell fan from watching him on McLaughlin Group but this is what I would expect from him. It’s a well written opnion piece that assumes the prosecutor will even go forward with a case.
It even has the air of a pre-excuse for Rove going free and clear, that since Rove has been in damage control mode if he gets off this will be why.
It’s still going to come down to the basic facts of who knew what and when, was she undercover, was she engaged in unlawful activity and all that. I personally think Rove is free and clear but we’ll have to see what cards the prosecutor has in his hand.
The main point I agreed with him on was that the judge did in fact reference a ‘plot against Wilson’. I posted a link to the Federal Appeals Court Opinion – I believe it was three judges who ruled on the Miller-Cooper case. Now, they’ve seen all the evidence to that point, and they were convinced of there being a plot to smear Wilson that started this whole thing.
I held off on this for a while as there weren’t enough facts out there to put something together on it, but to hear Rove’s version as relayed by his attourney, then to know what Cooper told the grand jury…to me, at that point it was obvious that indictments would be coming down.
Just last week I was able to read that opinion, and the judges regard the ‘plot against Wilson’ as a matter of fact…no question about the fact that there was a coordinated effort.
Just last week I was able to read that opinion, and the judges regard the ‘plot against Wilson’ as a matter of fact…no question about the fact that there was a coordinated effort.
Are any of these the judges who will be hearing the case, should one even be brought against Rove? Which plot is more damaging to the public, Plame/Wilson against Bush or Rove against Wilson?