Let's talk about The Architect for a moment...
For anyone who didn't already know that Karl Rove was the infamous source for the outing of Valerie Plame, now it is official. Because Rove didn't mention her by name, but referred to her as former Ambassador Wilson's wife, he is probably not criminally responsible. And, although some believe (myself included) that the leak was orchestrated to intimidate Wilson, and any other would-be administration critics, there is no evidence to back that up, yet. But, it really doesn't matter what the intention was. Whether it was deliberate, or just incompetence is irrelevant. Rove is the one who pointed the reporters to her, saying that she was an operative who works on WMD issues. In July of last year, the White House spokesman had this to say about the leak: "If anyone in this administration was involved in [the leak], they would no longer be in this administration.." Let's see if Bush follows through on his "pledge" to the American people.
posted by Carolyn P @ 7/12/2005 11:04:00 AM
3 comments
3 Comments:
For another perspective, this editorial was in Today's Wall Street Journal.
Since it is a subscription site, I posted it below:
Karl Rove, Whistleblower
July 13, 2005; Page A14
Democrats and most of the Beltway press corps are baying for Karl Rove's head over his role in exposing a case of CIA nepotism involving Joe Wilson and his wife, Valerie Plame. On the contrary, we'd say the White House political guru deserves a prize -- perhaps the next iteration of the "Truth-Telling" award that The Nation magazine bestowed upon Mr. Wilson before the Senate Intelligence Committee exposed him as a fraud.
For Mr. Rove is turning out to be the real "whistleblower" in this whole sorry pseudo-scandal. He's the one who warned Time's Matthew Cooper and other reporters to be wary of Mr. Wilson's credibility. He's the one who told the press the truth that Mr. Wilson had been recommended for the CIA consulting gig by his wife, not by Vice President Dick Cheney as Mr. Wilson was asserting on the airwaves. In short, Mr. Rove provided important background so Americans could understand that Mr. Wilson wasn't a whistleblower but was a partisan trying to discredit the Iraq War in an election campaign. Thank you, Mr. Rove.
Media chants aside, there's no evidence that Mr. Rove broke any laws in telling reporters that Ms. Plame may have played a role in her husband's selection for a 2002 mission to investigate reports that Iraq was seeking uranium ore in Niger. To be prosecuted under the 1982 Intelligence Identities Protection Act, Mr. Rove would had to have deliberately and maliciously exposed Ms. Plame knowing that she was an undercover agent and using information he'd obtained in an official capacity. But it appears Mr. Rove didn't even know Ms. Plame's name and had only heard about her work at Langley from other journalists.
On the "no underlying crime" point, moreover, no less than the New York Times and Washington Post now agree. So do the 36 major news organizations that filed a legal brief in March aimed at keeping Mr. Cooper and the New York Times's Judith Miller out of jail.
"While an investigation of the leak was justified, it is far from clear -- at least on the public record -- that a crime took place," the Post noted the other day. Granted the media have come a bit late to this understanding, and then only to protect their own, but the logic of their argument is that Mr. Rove did nothing wrong either.
The same can't be said for Mr. Wilson, who first "outed" himself as a CIA consultant in a melodramatic New York Times op-ed in July 2003. At the time he claimed to have thoroughly debunked the Iraq-Niger yellowcake uranium connection that President Bush had mentioned in his now famous "16 words" on the subject in that year's State of the Union address.
Mr. Wilson also vehemently denied it when columnist Robert Novak first reported that his wife had played a role in selecting him for the Niger mission. He promptly signed up as adviser to the Kerry campaign and was feted almost everywhere in the media, including repeat appearances on NBC's "Meet the Press" and a photo spread (with Valerie) in Vanity Fair.
But his day in the political sun was short-lived. The bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee report last July cited the note that Ms. Plame had sent recommending her husband for the Niger mission. "Interviews and documents provided to the Committee indicate that his wife, a CPD [Counterproliferation Division] employee, suggested his name for the trip," said the report.
The same bipartisan report also pointed out that the forged documents Mr. Wilson claimed to have discredited hadn't even entered intelligence channels until eight months after his trip. And it said the CIA interpreted the information he provided in his debrief as mildly supportive of the suspicion that Iraq had been seeking uranium in Niger.
About the same time, another inquiry headed by Britain's Lord Butler delivered its own verdict on the 16 words: "We conclude also that the statement in President Bush's State of the Union Address of 28 January 2003 that 'The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa' was well-founded."
In short, Joe Wilson hadn't told the truth about what he'd discovered in Africa, how he'd discovered it, what he'd told the CIA about it, or even why he was sent on the mission. The media and the Kerry campaign promptly abandoned him, though the former never did give as much prominence to his debunking as they did to his original accusations. But if anyone can remember another public figure so entirely and thoroughly discredited, let us know.
If there's any scandal at all here, it is that this entire episode has been allowed to waste so much government time and media attention, not to mention inspire a "special counsel" probe. The Bush administration is also guilty on this count, since it went along with the appointment of prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald in an election year in order to punt the issue down the road. But now Mr. Fitzgerald has become an unguided missile, holding reporters in contempt for not disclosing their sources even as it becomes clearer all the time that no underlying crime was at issue.
As for the press corps, rather than calling for Mr. Rove to be fired, they ought to be grateful to him for telling the truth.
As I mentioned in my previous post, it is irrelevant what Rove's motivation was. He should have found out what Plame's position was, and whether or not exposing her identity (with or without using her name) would be an issue, which it was. And, the reason the “liberal media”, and the rest of America is interested in this is because the White House denied it. If this was all so above-board, why didn't Rove just come forward in the first place when this investigation began 2 years ago? Why did Scott McClellen call Rove's involvement "ridiculous"? I think the White House misleading the American people is press-worthy.
Also, this columnist is so busy discrediting Wilson, he/she forgets to mention that the Iraqi uranium threat that the President tried to use to justify the war was bogus, regardless of whether Wilson was the one who figured it out or not.
And, finally, the White House committed to fire the whistleblower/leaker. It appears that is turning out to be another falsehood.
Bottom-line: they can dress it up however they want to, but the White House and Karl Rove denied their involvement, and it turns out they were involved. Maybe The Wall Street Journal doesn’t have a problem with that, but I do.
I've been having a hard time with this case because I have a strong personal dislike for Karl Rove that I fear is coloring my view on the issue. However, I was reading an interesting article in the Post this afternoon about the liklihood that Rove could or will be found guilty of violating the Intelligence Identities Protection Act. According the author of the Act, it is unlikely that Rove could be found guilty because a violation requires evidence of an intent to harm national security--which is extremely difficult to prove. What concerns me more, though, is the possibility of a White House directed cover-up conspiracy. I know the words "cover-up" and "conspiracy" are thrown around quite a bit by both parties when not in power, but I can't remember an administration as arrogant and condescending towards the American people as the current. I wouldn't put it past Karl Rove to have at first leaked Plame's status in retribution for Wilson's report, and then to have denied any wrongdoing. In fact, I bet he actually believes he didn't do anything wrong. That's where the arrogance comes into play. And, if the White House is trying to sweep this under the rug, it's because they appear to think so little of the American public that they believe we'll actually buy this stuff wholesale. My hope is that if a law was broken, the truth will come out and the offender will be punished. If not, fine. Then let's move on. But, let's also stow the condescension and stop treating the American people like a bunch of gullible kindergarteners.
Post a Comment
<< Home