Another Reason To Question The Tenet Regime At Langley

NBC has received a declassified report from the CIA which states that the agency considered Valerie Plame a “covert agent” at the time her identity was revealed to Robert Novak and other journalists in July 2003. The CIA declassified her status in order to pursue the criminal investigation into the leak, according to other documents from Patrick Fitzgerald’s independent counsel probe:

An unclassified summary of outed CIA officer Valerie Plame’s employment history at the spy agency, disclosed for the first time today in a court filing by Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald, indicates that Plame was “covert” when her name became public in July 2003.
The summary is part of an attachment to Fitzgerald’s memorandum to the court supporting his recommendation that I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, Vice President Cheney’s former top aide, spend 2-1/2 to 3 years in prison for obstructing the CIA leak investigation. …
The unclassified summary of Plame’s employment with the CIA at the time that syndicated columnist Robert Novak published her name on July 14, 2003 says, “Ms. Wilson was a covert CIA employee for who the CIA was taking affirmative measures to conceal her intelligence relationship to the United States.”

They were? Plame drove into the office in Langley. She traveled abroad under her own name. She helped arrange for her husband to do some fact-checking on a sensitive intelligence matter. Her husband, former Ambassador Joe Wilson, then came home and leaked his observations to two nationally-known journalists, and then wrote his own op-ed in the New York Times under his byline.
And her husband managed to list her in Who’s Who, where any journalist could look up the entry — and where Robert Novak did just that.
If that’s keeping an agent covert, it speaks volumes about the agency’s competence during the George Tenet years.
So now we have confirmation that Plame did get her cover blown. I suppose the only reason that Fitzgerald didn’t bother to indict Richard Armitage for the crime was that it would have meant explaining how the CIA tried to hide its NOC asset in plain sight.

68 thoughts on “Another Reason To Question The Tenet Regime At Langley”

  1. So now we learn that Valerie Plame was covert when “Scooter” Libby didn’t out her.

  2. Total backpedaling BS! Pretty interesting how Armitage isn’t indicted for the obvious “outing”, but Fitzgerald can spend millions and months trying to sting Vice President Cheney and Karl Rove. I don’t believe this crap for a second, other than the CIA may have never clerically bothered to remove that loser from her previously held status. And before any “lib” pipes up and says “it doesn’t matter: she was STILL covert!” I simply restate: why wasn’t Armitage charged? Fitzgerald KNEW in the first two weeks of the investigation that he was the leaker. This is all Washington career BS.

  3. You forgot the Vanity Fair cover shot and article.
    The CIA, at least in the Beltway manifestation, is a bloated, anti-American bureaucracy that couldn’t manage an effective riot. Time to close that shop completely.

  4. Somebody please shut down the CIA. Net-net that agency most surely does more harm than good.
    If need be shut it down, fire everybody and start from scratch with a new batch.

  5. Ed,
    I’ve said this many times. Look at the Wilson/Plame wedding announcements and stories in D.C newspapers, notably the Post. Joe Wilson’s marriage was socially a big hairy deal. The descriptions of the bride’s background and employment blew Plame’s cover. NFW was she covert after that.

  6. Maybe its late, but I see creative use of English here.
    The statement
    “Ms. Wilson was a covert CIA employee for who the CIA was taking affirmative measures to conceal her intelligence relationship to the United States.”
    Could easily be compatible with:
    “Ms. Wilson was a covert CIA employee [at one time in the past] for who the CIA was taking affirmative measures to conceal her intelligence relationship to the United States.
    The whole article (or report) has the vibe of possible word-crafting or manipulated context for the statements given.

  7. It’s becoming more and more depressing how these “career” civil service bureaucrats are not even able to pretend they are competent. Back in the OSS days those in charge were successful professionals who brought their expertise to the intelligence program. Now we are stuck with losers who were not able to cut it in the private sector and yet have designated themselves as legends in their own minds. Unless we remove civil service lifetime employment guarantees and purge the incompetent from critical government agencies we may have a lot more trouble ahead.
    Lee Smith

  8. Its odd to release this now that the fat lady has sung.
    Perhaps its to offset this: link

    Plame called on to explain varied accounts

    A February 2002 CIA memo released last week as part of a study of pre-Iraq-war intelligence shows that Plame suggested her husband, former State Department official Joseph Wilson, for the Niger trip, Bond said. That “doesn’t square” with Plame’s March testimony in which she said an unnamed CIA colleague raised her husband’s name, Bond told USA TODAY.
    Here are Plame’s three versions of how Wilson was sent to Niger, Bond said:

  9. Why point the finger at everyone but the people who leaked or orchestrated the leak. Who’s Who mentioned her marriage, not her covert CIA status. What’s wrong with hiding someone in plane sight? It apparently worked until she was outed by our own government. Libby obstructed justice and perjured himself. Why is this Tenet’s fault, Captain?
    Why didn’t the president order his staff to disclose matters in a more straightforward manner? It seems seedy, millions wasted, time lost, a cloud over the administration. Badly handled, but not by Tenet, and I am no fan of Tenet for many other reasons.
    This is exactly why so many conservative bloggers end up with the reputation of being party hacks instead of rational thinkers. You don’t know why he didn’t arrest Armitage, but you do know why Libby faces up to three years–he obstructed justice and perjured himself.

  10. Why didn’t Joe Wilson just tell the truth? The White House wouldn’t have had to respond at all.

  11. It’s a legal trick! Libby was NEVER charged with outting Plame! It’s just smoke and mirrors right out of a whore house! (Similar to hearing the the American contestant for the Miss Universe crown got boo’ed in Mexico. Why even get “shocked” at any of this crap, anymore?) Seen one whore house. Seen ’em all.
    And, the elites in the media don’t get it. They have no idea why Americans are upset, let alone upset with Bush. Guy’s a coward.
    The other thing to peel back? Dubya’s dad was the head of the CIA during Nixon’s (or was it Ford’s) turn? Seems no one in the Bush family has any idea on how you hire talent.
    And, the CIA is some ugly mess! (Seems when Casey was “playing” with the Saud’s, he’d give Bandar “super duper secret bank accounts, so the Saud’s could “fund the Contra’s” … And, except for the fact that Bandar leaks like a sieve, why did anyone bother?)
    The one hundred fools in the senate cannot protect us. The stage also moves very fast. (I mean how long did it take for the World Trade Center buildings to fall?) Things that move that fast aren’t going to get protected by leaking Leahy’s; and the “oversight” the senators do as publicity stunts.)
    This is the atmosphere.
    Bush NEVER had the talent for the presidency. Ditto, his dad. Let alone how everything was left to James Baker, to work. So the money could get pumped into pockets. The Bush’s wealth? They’re now the richest family in America. Quite a trick!
    As to Tenet, he was just a Greaseball. But the senators were never really serious about finding talent to run our spy agency. BUT THE OPPOSITE. Remember Deusch? Sorry, about the spelling. But following Anthony Lake, Deusch was supposed to head the CIA. However, Senator Shelby and others “kept dealing blows to the paperwork.” And, finally, Deusch withdrew. (Yup. I’m listening to Tenet’s whine, how. Might as well. These idiots get into positions where they do harms. Just like Condi Rice does, every single day, as well.)
    We’re not coming out of this mess until we demand that the people who get the jobs CAN ACTUALLY DO THEM!
    Poor Libby. A much more decent man that Dubya would have pardoned him. Won’t do it. Prudence is staining the Oval Office carpets.
    While Sandy Bergler-pants, in a democrapic victory, should that happen … gets to go back into go’mint. No prison time, at all. Just like Liberace said. We can watch them all going to the bank with da’ loot.
    Nothing to be proud of in the crap that gets to be appointed judges, either.
    How Fitzgerald can get away with it? That’s our system. The goony birds up on the Supreme-O’s bench “prefer thinking the tryer of fact” has all the goods.” So no second guessing, allowed.
    You want common sense? Then, NEVER hire a lawyer!

  12. Dead Horse Alert

    Well here we go again.
    An unclassified summary of outed CIA officer Valerie Plame’s employment history at the spy agency, disclosed for the first time today in a court filing by Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald, indicates that Plame was &#8220…

  13. CIA Says Plame Was Covert Agent

    Hey everybody, Valarie Plame was indeed a covert CIA agent [via JustOneMinute]. Shows what I knew. It would have been nice if the CIA released the unclassified summary sooner.
    Outing a spy is deplorable. These people put their lives on the line in thei…

  14. It’s complete and utter crap, Capt’t!
    Valierie Plame’s “covert” identity was leaked to the KGB back in the early 90’s by Aldrich Ames.
    The Russians, in turn, passed it on to the Cuban Intelligence Services, and who knows who else!
    The CIA found out about it, and she was useless to them overseas as a NOC anymore, and that is why they made her return to a Desk Job at Langley.
    Additionally, by the CIA’s own admission, they have her travel overseas, to Jordon, among other places, as a WMD “expert”, but only after taking her out of the NOC program, and putting her riding a desk in the CP division.
    She’s a liar, her husband is a liar, and the CIA has been lying all along on this.
    In addition to the “outtings” you and others mention, such as the Vanity Fair article, she also donated money to Al Gore/DNC in HER OWN NAME, and listed a CIA Front company as her Employer!
    Also, Andrea Mitchel, and Tim Russert, among others, also KNEW she was CIA, desptie the fact they continue to lie and or cover up about it!
    The worst part, is the MSM KNOWS this; they included it as part of their “amicus curie” brieft in the Judith MIller case, arguing that Judith Miller shouldn’t be prosecuted and sent to jail, because NO SECRET WAS REVEALED when Novak’s column came out, Why…..”because of the Aldrich Ames” leaks!
    Of course, the the Law Firm responsible for that “amicus curie”, has scrubbed their website of that document, since people have gone back and since tried to look for it!
    Besides, in my past life, I’ve been inside “Langley” a time or three, and I can tell you, the REAL “cvert agents” wouldn’t be caught dead going near the damn place!
    Nope, after the US State Department, the CIA is the most Anti-American institution in the entire United States Government, and the quicker we tear it down, fire all the damn Leftists and Democrats who work there and have ruined it, the better off we will all be!

  15. As careful as they might be, if the cafeteria staff at CIA Headquarters knows you by sight, as a regular, then you’re not a real covert CIA agent. Some outdated paperwork might say that you are, but you’re not.

  16. bluespapa:
    You said: “You don’t know why he didn’t arrest Armitage, but you do know why Libby faces up to three years–he obstructed justice and perjured himself.”
    I maintain: Fitzgerald KNEW in the first two weeks of the investigation that Richard Armitage was the guilty party! Rather than wrap it up and charge Armitage, he followed his agenda of attacking the administration and interviewed and re-interviewed and re-re-interviewed administration officials in hopes of catching them in a process crime. If Valerie Plame’s freakin’ status was so dang important, then why wasn’t Armitage charged? Well, why? Yeah… I thought so!

  17. To be a covert agent one needs to lead a circumspect and dull life, and ensure that one does not come to visibility in the public’s attention through one’s own actions. Spouses have gone decades or even learn of the covert status of their spouse after they pass on, which demonstrates the dedication to the job and the need to protect those who use the shadows to defend the Nation. One is to wait five years after having their status removed before doing anything that would gain attention for oneself and many agents that have had their status removed will not do so, even then, so as to protect those that they have worked with.
    Ambassador Joseph Wilson was highly praised, internationally well known, and a part of the international socialite circles surrounding the foreign affairs community.
    Valerie Plame married Joseph Wilson in 1998.
    Joseph Wilson’s entry into the 1999 Who’s Who identifies his wife as working at the CIA.
    In doing these things and exposing hers to the reflected glare of her husband’s notoriety she and her husband violated all known terms of leading a circumspect life in order to be covert. That is a violation of the National Security laws and regulations which each covert agent signs up to and swears they will abide by under penalty of prosecution.
    If the CIA document is actual and verifiable, then the CIA has committed an act of extreme negligence in safeguarding the covert community and abdicated its role in ensuring that the laws of the land are upheld. Valerie Plame has not been prosecuted for that, nor has Joseph Wilson. And if that document is true then the CIA needs a thorough investigation by Congress and the FBI COINTEL unit, plus similar from the DoD side for those offices working with the CIA and ability of the CIA to safeguard critical National Security information.
    There are a few of us having served in affiliated agencies that are questioning how the Intelligence Community can and should operate in the future. The problems at the CIA are part and parcel of the long term problems currently existing within the IC and trying to address those on a case-by-case basis gets nowhere as those that are given the power to prosecute in the Executive Branch and those with oversight in Congress refuse to do their jobs. The overall Community can be changed to have a high degree of self-policing at the lowest levels and actually work better. To do that requires that actual politicians do their jobs when elected to high office.
    I am for a better and effective and more integrated IC to do this thing known as ‘connect dots’.
    I would encourage those that love National Security leaks to explain why they benefit the Nation by putting individuals and the Nation at risk for purely political and partisan gain. That is not having a government in common that protects the Nation as a whole, but one used to undermine common government and erode trust in it.
    At this point it does not matter if a D or R adorns the name of individual in high office as the culpability stretches through multiple Administrations and Congresses. If those supporting the political elite see no value in having a common government for the People, then the ability of a representative democracy to hold together will be at an end.

  18. The New, Improved Plame Game

    MSNBC is reporting Valerie Plame really was covert when Robert Novack published her name.
    We now know that because Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald has an attachment to his memorandum to the court supporting his recommendation that I. Lewis “Scooter…

  19. Why does Rove still have security clearance and why is he still working at the White House?
    Armitage and Libby are gone. All three were involved in leaking the identity of a covert CIA agent in a political attack (seemingly on the orders of Cheney, which is another story).
    Rove should no longer be working at the White House.
    And reason why Libby was not indicted for outing a CIA agent is because, thanks to the obstruction, Fitzgerald could not determine whether he was intentionally trying to out her or if he was just being negligent.
    Regardless of which is true, Rove did the same thing Libby did and at the very least should lose his security clearance… and should be fired. Rememebr, Bush said at the very beginning of this all that any leakers would be dealt with severely.
    George W. Bush, bringing honor and dignity back to the White House since 2001.

  20. They were? Plame drove into the office in Langley. She traveled abroad under her own name. She helped arrange for her husband to do some fact-checking on a sensitive intelligence matter. Her husband, former Ambassador Joe Wilson, then came home and leaked his observations to two nationally-known journalists, and then wrote his own op-ed in the New York Times under his byline. And her husband managed to list her in Who’s Who, where any journalist could look up the entry — and where Robert Novak did just that.
    So what? None of this gives any indication that she was a CIA agent (well, aside from the fact-checking mission for Wilson, but that was confined to the CIA).
    And your Who’s Who argument is simply ridiculous. Novak could looked any number of places to find out who Wilson was married to. The fact that Plame was married to Wilson in no way insinuated that she worked for the CIA. Novak only knew she did because Armitage and Rove told him so.

  21. Joseph Wilson’s entry into the 1999 Who’s Who identifies his wife as working at the CIA.
    Oh really???

  22. Mistercalm:
    No, the statute demands that Armitage did NOT know he was leaking classified information, and he wasn’t the only leaker, as Novak said he got it confirmed by Rove, but also two reporters claim to have been told by Libby. It seems to have been easier to prove perjury and obstruction than the violation of a WWI era act of national security. You maintain that Armitage is the guilty party, and perhaps so. But your maintaining that doesn’t give us whatever legal thinking Fitzgerald has for his choices, and “poor Libby” as someone here referred to him, perjured himself and obstructed justice.
    Why didn’t the president just tell the truth? It wouldn’t have cost the taxpayer hundreds of billions, not just a few million.

  23. So, Armitage can run his mouth, and since he claims he didn’t know she was a covert CIA agent it’s just “my bad!” and it’s all forgotten. The reason the investigation went forward is pure political attack. Fitzgerald sets out to ascribe ‘motive’ and make that the issue. Armitage = no motive… he’s a “good leaker”… he’s an anti-White House weinie from the State Department, career bureaucrat. This Democrat, rotten to the core, corrupt government is sickening! If you can attest that this investigation was anything other than an orchestrated partisan attack against a Republican administration, then I suppose you can support the Duke Lacrosse investigation as top-notch justice, too.

  24. MisterCalm,
    A covert agent was outed by three members of the White House staff. Now, we don’t know for sure why Fitzgerald didn’t indict on this charge, but he did say at his press conference that the obstruction by Libby clouded his vision of the case (he made the analogy of an umpire having dirt thrown in his face while trying to make a call).
    Much like treason, the charge of outing a covert agent is a hard one to prove, because you have to prove A) they knew she was covert and B) their actions were intentionally trying to “out” her.
    But, disclosing classified information (I’m assuming the identity of a covert CIA agent is classified information) is grounds for losing your security clearance. Libby and Armitage no longer have theirs (I’m assuming Armitage doesn’t since he no longer works at the White House), why does Rove?
    And what are the “severe” actions that Bush promised he’d take against the leakers. Rove is the only one left. Is he going to stand by his word and punish Rove or do nothing?

  25. I don’t get why Fitzgerald saying this is “proof” she was covert. I mean he’s the prosecutor trying to get the max jail time for someone. Of course he’s going to say everything that happened was as bad as possible. It’s what I expect of them. Does this mean if the defense attorney says she wasn’t covert then anybody that wants can publish “Proof Plame not covert”?

  26. Does this mean if the defense attorney says she wasn’t covert then anybody that wants can publish “Proof Plame not covert”?
    I suppose the last refuge of those trying to claim Plame wasn’t covert is to call Fitzgerald a liar.
    As part of his investigation, he presumedly spoke to the CIA about Plame’s status. He found that:
    Ms. Wilson was a covert CIA employee for who the CIA was taking affirmative measures to conceal her intelligence relationship to the United States.

  27. I didn’t say Fitzgerald was a liar, I said he was the prosecutor.(Of course if you equate lawyer with liar I guess you could argue I called him a liar) Of course he’s going to portray everything in the worst light, just as the defense is going to portray everything in the best light. It’s their jobs. I mean if a jury had made the finding or a judge had said this you’d have a point but not the prosecutor. As I’ve said he’s trying to get the max sentence so he’s going to play up everything, even stuff he doesn’t have enough evidence to actual prove. (I know, proof what a novel concept.)

  28. Yeah, but Dave, Fitzgerald clearly says, based on his investigation, that:
    Ms. Wilson was a covert CIA employee for who the CIA was taking affirmative measures to conceal her intelligence relationship to the United States.
    If she wasn’t covert, he would be lying. I suppose the alternative would be he’s grossly incompetent.

  29. Joseph Wilson’s entry into the 1999 Who’s Who identifies his wife as working at the CIA.
    No. It doesn’t. It identifiers her as his wife. CIA agents are allowed to get married.
    I’m not sure why people keep making the claim that the Who’s Who in any way reveals her relationship to the CIA. It doesn’t. You’ll probably find her listed in her high school yearbook, too.

  30. Armitage = no motive… he’s a “good leaker”… he’s an anti-White House weinie from the State Department, career bureaucrat.
    For what it’s worth, Richard Armitage was one of the signers (along with Elliott Abrams, William Bennett, Jeffrey Bergner, John Bolton, Paula Dobriansky, Francis Fukuyama, Robert Kagan, Zalmay Khalilzad, William Kristol, Richard Perle, Peter W. Rodman, Donald Rumsfeld, William Schneider Jr., Vin Weber, Paul Wolfowitz, James Woolsey, and Robert Zoellick) of the PNAC’s 1998 letter to President Clinton urging him to remove Saddam Hussein from power through military means. I suppose it’s possible that Armitage is generally anti-White-House, but I would find it very hard to believe that he was opposed to efforts by the White House and others to spin Iraq intel for purposes of rationalizing military action.

  31. Forget “covert” — Plame’s affiliation with the CIA wasn’t classified on or before Feb 19, 2002. It’s clearly and repeatedly stated in all of the executive orders that implement the classified information system that the burden to identify classified information is the government’s. If the government does not tell it’s employees (contractors, too) that something is classified, then it’s not classified. If the government declassifies something in error, then the government has the burden of notifying all of the employees/contractors who had access to the erroneously-declassified info to add the classification to the info. Furthermore, classified information is only given to employees/contractors if they have a work-related need to know it — classified gossip is unauthorized, even if the gossipers have the appropriate clearances.

    At the meeting on Feb 19, 2002, (1) Plame identified herself as working for the CIA without any indication to any meeting participant that her CIA affiliation was classified; (2) Plame identified the former ambassador that the CIA wanted to send to Niger as her husband, a fact which no one at the meeting had any work-related need to know. At no time over the subsequent 15 months were any meeting participants notified in any way shape or form that the CIA affiliation of the wife of the former ambassador sent to Niger was in any way shape or form classified or sensitive.

    Also, when we talking about the Rule of Law here (as opposed to the Rule of Prosecutorial and Bureaucratic Wishful Thinking), according to Executive Order 13292 Section 1.7(a) (it’s Section 1.8(a) in Executive Order 12958, but the language is identical)

    In no case shall information be classified in order to:

    (1) conceal violations of law, inefficiency, or administrative error;

    (2) prevent embarrassment to a person, organization, or agency;

    (3) restrain competition; or

    (4) prevent or delay the release of information that does not require protection in the interest of national security.

    Plame’s affiliation with the CIA appears to fail tests 1, 2, and 4.

    So we have information which (a) probably isn’t classified because one or more of Section 1.7(a)(1), (2) or (4) apply, which, at least on and after Feb 19, 2002 was treated as unclassified by the government. We have the complete chain of custody of the information (although Fitzgerald worked very diligently to cover up the actual chain of custody, which had nothing to do with any White House employee.) The information went from Valerie Plame’s mouth to a State Dept staffer’s ears on Feb 19, 2002. 15 months later, the DoS staffer wrote the information in a memo. The memo was read by Richard Armitage, who told it to (among others) Robert Novak. Robert Novak published it in the newspaper. This is an absolutely typical example of how unclassified information ends up in public, and why the government requires classified information to be clearly so marked so that it doesn’t end up in public.

    One more oddity: in the Waxman hearings, Waxman quotes a CIA document which claims that Plame’s CIA affiliation was “classified under Executive Order 12958“, not “Executive Order 13292″. Executive Order 12958 was not in effect after March 25, 2003. 12958 was issued on April 17, 1995. If Plame’s CIA affiliation became unclassified at some time between April 18, 1995 and March 25, 2003, then the CIA claim that she was “classified under Executive Order 12958″ is technically true but highly misleading.

    What does appear to be true is that Valerie Plame was performing a non-covert job but her salary was being taken out of a covert account. I suspect that this is not illegal (many of the government’s standard accounting practices are illegal for any other entity and would result in executives going to jail on securities fraud charges.) But the law and the executive orders have their own legal language, and nowhere does it say that “covert” or “classified” are controlled by bookkeeping categories. While in this particular case the irregularities probably don’t rise to the level of illegalities, if you are really seriously making the argument that the accounting categories should trump the statutory and regulatory language, then you are arguing that anything paid for with money embezzeled from a “covert” account is “covert” as well.

    Before the FBI interviewed Scooter Libby for the first time, they already knew how Valerie Plame’s name and CIA affiliation ended up in the newspaper: it was unclassified information, relayed by gossip, started from Valerie Plame to at least one State Dept employee on Feb 19, 2002, from that State Dept employee to other State Dept employees in late-May/early-June 2003, from another State Dept employee to a journalist in late-June, 2003, from the journalist to the wires on July 11, 2003. The FBI knew (or should have known) that Plame was not covert as soon as they traced the custody of information about her CIA affiliation back to it’s clearly unclassified source.

  32. Need to Know – 05/30/2008

    Need to Know is a short roundup of key blog posts that shouldn’t be missed on your cruise through the blogosphere. The number of links in the roundup may vary but if you find it here you can trust that it’s must-read material.
    Tengu House |…

  33. Ok so if the defense it attempts to get reduced sentencing states anything to the effect “From our point of view the evidence is she wasn’t covert” what does that mean? Does it mean it’s proof that she wasn’t covert? (I mean since you seem to suggest if the prosecution says it’s true because of his investigation then it’s “proof” what does it mean if some like the defense takes the contrary point of view with the same evidence?)

  34. …the CIA was taking affirmative measures to conceal her intelligence relationship to the United States.

    Ok, name two affirmative measures that they took.

  35. Cathy,
    In regards to that meeting you refer to:
    Rove and Vice President Cheney’s chief of staff, I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, have been identified as people who discussed Wilson’s wife with Cooper. Prosecutors are trying to determine the origin of their knowledge of Plame, including whether it was from the INR memo or from conversations with reporters.
    The Wall Street Journal reported Tuesday that the memo made it clear that information about Wilson’s wife was sensitive and should not be shared. Yesterday, sources provided greater detail on the memo to The Post.
    The material in the memo about Wilson’s wife was based on notes taken by an INR analyst who attended a Feb. 19, 2002, meeting at the CIA where Wilson’s intelligence-gathering trip to Niger was discussed.
    The memo was drafted June 10, 2003, for Undersecretary of State Marc Grossman, who asked to be brought up to date on INR’s opposition to the White House view that Hussein was trying to buy uranium in Africa.
    The description of Wilson’s wife and her role in the Feb. 19, 2002, meeting at the CIA was considered “a footnote” in a background paragraph in the memo, according to an official who was aware of the process.
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/20/AR2005072002517_pf.html
    According to the WSJ and WaPo, discussions from that meeting made it clear that Plame’s identity was secret and should not be shared.

  36. ajacksonian,
    Plame’s CIA affiliation was public knowledge as of her wedding to Joe Wilson.
    Some of the D.C. area society columns and stories covering the wedding of quasi-celebrity Joe Wilson listed bride Valerie Plame as working for, or having worked for, a company which was a widely known CIA front. Yahoo searches at the time for the name of that company turned up hits saying it was a CIA front.
    There was no way Valerie Plame was covert after those wedding stories.

  37. Tom-Holsinger
    Liars often use familiar patterns, running the same loops, returning to the same lies, believing, unbelievably, that the pattern won’t be noticed.
    So it is with a sigh and a “Why do I bother?” that I now ask you: Do you have anything but thin air to back up any of your claims?
    Now you must scurry, little mouse, to the next station on your little maze.

  38. discussions from that meeting made it clear that Plame’s identity was secret and should not be shared.

    Not true. The paragraph in question was marked “Secret/NoForn”, which is the appropriate classification that should have accompanied a discussion of sending a former ambassador somewhere to investigate something, completely independent of the former ambassador’s marital status. The classification level for an OC or NOC is “TopSecret/Codeword.” That is not to say that if Plame had been covert then the paragraph would have been marked “TS-CW”. No, if Plame had been covert, then she would never have been at the Feb 19 meeting at all. There is no one at the meeting who had any work-related reason to know that the former ambassador with the excellent contacts in Niamy had any relationship with anyone at the CIA. There was no reason why some non-covert CIA person couldn’t have sent the cable, convened the meeting, and introduced Joe Wilson — and, we know for a fact, that it was a non-covert CIA person (Valerie Plame Wilson) who sent the cable, convened the meeting, and introduced Joe Wilson.

  39. The identity of CIA officer Valerie Plame was compromised twice before her name appeared in a news column that triggered a federal illegal-disclosure investigation, U.S. officials say.
    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.

  40. Thom,
    Google me. I have not only a track record of knowing what I’m talking about, but making accurate predictions years in advance. Such as that Fitzgerald would nail Libby for something.
    I certainly don’t have to prove anything to trolls who snipe behind covert names.

  41. I certainly don’t have to prove anything to trolls who snipe behind covert names.
    In other words, the answer is no, you don’t have anything other than thin air to back up your claim that Brewster Jennings was a known CIA front company. Thanks for answering.

  42. Some of the D.C. area society columns and stories covering the wedding of quasi-celebrity Joe Wilson listed bride Valerie Plame as working for, or having worked for, a company which was a widely known CIA front.
    A widely-known front? Isn’t that counter-intuative? If it’s a front, it’s a company that, if you say you work for, should not tip anyone off that you work for the CIA? Correct?
    That company is NOW widely known because Plame had her cover blown. Was it “widely” known to be a front back then?

  43. Cathyf,
    Plame was NOC:
    “Plame worked as an operations officer in the Directorate of Operations and was assigned to the Counterproliferation Division (CPD) in January 2002 at CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia.
    The employment history indicates that while she was assigned to CPD, Plame, “engaged in temporary duty travel overseas on official business.” The report says, “she traveled at least seven times to more than ten times.” When overseas Plame traveled undercover, “sometimes in true name and sometimes in alias — but always using cover — whether official or non-official (NOC) — with no ostensible relationship to the CIA.”
    To echo another poster on here, do you have anything to back up your claims?

  44. What amazes me is that everyone assumes that the “Unclassified Summary” under discussion is an official CIA position.
    The opinion was submitted to the court as an unsourced exhibit attached to a Prosecution memorandum on sentencing. Given the absence of any indentifying information whatsoever on the “document” in question, it is entirely possible that this summary was written by the Prosecution, not the CIA at all. Such ambiguity regarding authorship strikes me as deliberate.

  45. What amazes me is that everyone assumes that the “Unclassified Summary” under discussion is an official CIA position.
    Well, JM, my understanding is that the summary was written by Fitzgerald (or his team) and reflects what they learned when they spoke to the CIA as part of this investigation.
    As I said before, if one is still want to claim that Plame was not covert, they can claim that Fitzgerald is lying or incompetent.

  46. To echo another poster on here, do you have anything to back up your claims?

    What claims have I made? I just repeat what I see… Can you read, too? SECRET/NOFORN

  47. Tom Hilsinger
    Ha! Now I’M covert – and all you needed to make that claim was your false assertion that I’m using a pseudonym.
    Too funny, little mouse. Thanks for the thin air.

  48. Well, Tom S., since the document provided by Fitzgerald is both unsourced & undated, it’s anybody’s guess, isn’t it?
    Even if the fact that he could presumably have made this information public at almost anytime during his tenure as SP doesn’t give you pause, the fact that he tied its publication to his sentencing memoranda — and the significance he attaches to it there — should scare the hell out of everybody.
    Fitzgerald has been setting precedents in this prosecution that will ultimately gore a lot of different bulls.

  49. JM Hanes
    Are you under the impression that prosecutors at sentencing hearings don’t summarize the cases defendants have been convicted of? There is nothing scary or unprecedented about that and you look like a dolt saying there is.
    And Fitzgerald answered why he couldn’t, “presumably” or otherwise, no matter how many times you hold your breath and say it to yourself, make it public before.
    Again: dolt.

  50. George Tenet was in charge at the CIA not Capt. Ed. Everybody just seems to write their own rule book for this event. judge Walton will decide. A day in court is a day in court, I guess until your pardoned. Back to George Tenet, so does incompetence trump following the law? At what point/s in time did Richard Cheney try to usurp the CIA and under what authority? What day was he given the authority to immediately declassify intelligence documents?Isn’t this really about Joe Wilson becomming the vehicle to throw a wrench in the Vice President’s gears? I think George Tenet played the stooge until he was no longer needed. Medal of Freedom, Thank you very much. See Yaaaaa.

  51. Tom Shipley,
    Try a Googe search for “Brewster Jennings” Plame. Some of the 1998 D.C. area engagement and wedding stories described bride Valerie Plame as employed by Brewster Jennings. She also listed Brewster Jennings as her employer in 1999 under her new married name of Valerie Wilson.

  52. ome of the 1998 D.C. area engagement and wedding stories described bride Valerie Plame as employed by Brewster Jennings. She also listed Brewster Jennings as her employer in 1999 under her new married name of Valerie Wilson.
    And… Brewster Jennings was listed as a front for the CIA where, exactly? And when, exactly?

  53. So let me get this straight –
    Some people on here are claiming that the Russian spy outed Plame in the early 90s and we knew this – Therefore, it’s said, she couldn’t really be covert –
    It’s also stated that she was at a front company for the CIA that was known to be a front. So therefore she wasn’t covert. In the mid-90s –
    So the CIA kept her working after they knew her cover was blown?
    A counter to this argument would be that we didn’t find out Russia knew until much later –
    Regardless of all of that though, The Washington Post reported in a July 20 article, a State Department memo written June 10, 2003, contained a paragraph about Plame that was marked “S” for “secret.” —- If Plame’s identity was still marked as Secret in 2003, then apparently we still thought there was value in keeping her identity concealed –
    Regardless of all of that, and what I’ve been saying all along, is that the CIA were the ones to send this case in for investigation. So it has to be legit – Your whole argument is basically based around the CIA not knowing who they have under cover – which is one of the most absurd arguments I’ve ever heard and I really can’t believe its gone on so long –

  54. Cathyf,
    From where did you link to that document. Count me rather skeptical until I know more about it.
    Also, all your hypothesizing doesn’t hold a candle to Fitzgerald’s report that Plame was a covert CIA agent at the time of the leak, according to the CIA.
    She has also said this. You can also find CIA colleagues who will back this up:
    http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Advance_Colleague_of_outed_agent_seeks_to_setrecord_st_0722.html
    You people are so invested in the idea that Plame was not covert that you can’t see the truth when it’s laid right out in front of you.
    And Thom,
    OK, so isn’t she supposed to be listed as working for a front company? Isn’t that the purpose of a front company?
    Now you claim that the company was widely known back then? Was it? It’s became widely known AFTER Plame was outed and people went back and figured out Brewster Jennings must be a front group.
    I did google it and found nothing that inferred it was a “well-known” front when plame was using it for cover. Care to back that claim up?
    Here’s the wikipedia entry on it:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brewster_Jennings_&_Associates

  55. hey Dale, one thing you fail to mention in all of this, is that Joe Wilson was telling the truth about the niger docs. they were fake. outrageously so. and thats one of the main arguments that got us into a failed war of aggression. so you can produce all of the smoke and mirrors you want, but at the end of the day, GW Bush, Dick Cheney and company wanted war so bad they were willing to lie and fudge intelligence to get us there. Joe Wilson is a hero for standing up to them and trying to get the TRUTH out. the traitors in the current administration would have been hung 5 years ago by our founding fathers. Thats a fact!

  56. Here is the link to Fitzgerald’s employment summary.
    Pretty much ends all speculation, unless, as I said before, you want to call Fitzgerald a liar or grossly incompetent.
    http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/sections/news/070529_Unclassified_Plame_employement.pdf
    So now, we know for sure that Armitage, Libby and Rove leaked the name and identity to a covert CIA agent to newspapers in 2003 in a political attack on her husband.
    Again, I ask, why is Rove still working at the White House?

  57. Weasel words, Shipley, you show it’s over when you use weasel words. The term of art here is “moving the goal posts”.
    Brewster Jennings did not have to be “widely known” as a CIA front in 1998 for Plame’s public record employment by it to destroy her covert status, as you suddenly contend after realizing you’ve lost. There only had to be publically accessible information in 1998 that it was a CIA front, and there was.
    Next you’ll be claiming that as long as someone, somewhere, didn’t know in 1998 that Brewster Jennings was a CIA front, the society page stories about the Wilson/Plame wedding listing her as working for Brewster Jennings didn’t destroy her alleged covert status.

  58. Everyone who works at Langley drives into the building or walks into the building. What Plame and other covert agents don’t do is wear signs with their names on them, announcing they’re CIA. The same is true when traveling under their own names or assumed names: They don’t identify themselves as CIA. Joseph Wilson never identified his wife as CIA, and neither did Who’s Who.
    It’s also been repeatedly confirmed that Plame’s status was covert by Fitzgerald, by the CIA and by Plame herself during Congressional testimony.

  59. There only had to be publicly accessible information in 1998 that it was a CIA front, and there was.
    And what do you have to back this up, Tom?
    By the way…
    Brewster Jennings did not have to be “widely known” as a CIA front in 1998 for Plame’s public record employment by it to destroy her covert status
    Some of the D.C. area society columns and stories covering the wedding of quasi-celebrity Joe Wilson listed bride Valerie Plame as working for, or having worked for, a company which was a widely known CIA front. Yahoo searches at the time for the name of that company turned up hits saying it was a CIA front.
    Careful backtracking! Don’t want you to fall!
    Oh, and by the way, no matter how much you try and rationalize “outing” Plame, according the CIA, she was a covert agent at the time of the leaks.

  60. Next you’ll be claiming that as long as someone, somewhere, didn’t know in 1998 that Brewster Jennings was a CIA front, the society page stories about the Wilson/Plame wedding listing her as working for Brewster Jennings didn’t destroy her alleged covert status.
    You haven’t shown that ANYONE outside the CIA knew Brewster Jennings was a CIA front in 1998.

Comments are closed.