Posted on 07/13/2005 3:28:51 PM PDT by Jean S
Please allow me to share with you some of the things I don’t know.
I don’t know what Valerie Plame’s status with the CIA was in July 2003 when Robert Novak wrote his column mentioning that she was an “agency operative” and had recommended her husband, former ambassador Joseph Wilson, for a fact-finding trip to Niger. Was Plame a covert agent then? If not, how recently had she been a covert agent?
I don’t know.
I also don’t know what’s going on with The New York Times’ Judith Miller.
Since top presidential adviser Karl Rove and top vice-presidential adviser Lewis Libby signed strongly worded waivers releasing all reporters from any pledges of confidentiality, why hasn’t Miller testified? Does that mean her source was someone else who has not signed a confidentiality waiver?
I don’t know.
I also don’t know why Miller is involved in all this at all, since she never wrote a story about it. Was she some sort of “carrier,” as is now being theorized, and actually helped spread word of Plame’s identity?
I don’t know.
For that matter, I don’t know what Time magazine’s Matthew Cooper was doing either. Rove’s lawyer says Rove signed the waiver about a year and a half ago and has never changed it. Why was that waiver not acceptable to Cooper for 18 months and then, on the brink of going to jail, Cooper agreed to testify?
I don’t know.
I don’t know anything about the role the other journalists caught up in the case — Tim Russert, Walter Pincus and Glenn Kessler — played. Apparently on the basis of waivers signed by sources, they all gave information to special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald. What did they say?
I don’t know.
And of course I also don’t know what is happening with Novak. Given Fitzgerald’s aggressiveness in dealing with all figures in this case, Novak must have made some sort of accommodation. Did he testify? Refuse to testify?
I don’t know.
I also don’t know why many in the press, most notably The New York Times, were once so enthusiastic about the Fitzgerald investigation. On Dec. 30, 2003, the Times published an editorial headlined “The Right Thing, At Last,” which said, “After an egregiously long delay, Attorney General John Ashcroft finally did the right thing yesterday when he recused himself from the investigation into who gave the name of a CIA operative to columnist Robert Novak.” Why did the Times do that?
I don’t know.
And then, why did the Times change its position and condemn Fitzgerald who, the paper said, “can’t even say whether a crime has been committed.” Why would the Times say that, when it had once been so sure that a crime had been committed?
I don’t know.
I also don’t know about the actions of Joseph Wilson. For example, in his book, The Politics of Truth, he wrote, “The assertion that Valerie had played any substantive role in the decision to ask me to go to Niger was false on the face of it. ...Valerie could not — and would not if she could — have had anything to do with the CIA decision to ask me to travel to [Niger].” But later, the Senate Intelligence Committee, in its bipartisan report, said that “interviews and documents provided to the committee indicate that [Wilson’s] wife, a CPD employee [a reference to the CIA’s Counterproliferation Division], suggested his name for the trip. The CPD reports officer told committee staff that the former ambassador’s wife ‘offered up his name’ and a memorandum to the deputy chief of the CPD on February 12, 2002, from [Wilson’s] wife says, ‘my husband has good relations with both [Niger’s prime minister] and the former Minister of Mines (not to mention lots of French contacts), both of whom could possibly shed light on this sort of activity.’” So why did Wilson say his wife played no “substantive role” in it?
I don’t know.
I also don’t know why Wilson’s defenders accuse the White House of “smearing” him. What was the smear? Was it a smear to say that Wilson got the Niger assignment, at least in part, because his wife recommended him? If so, then the Senate committee “smeared” him, too. If not, what is the smear?
I don’t know.
And finally, I don’t know about Karl Rove’s public statements on the case. Last year on CNN, he said of Plame, “I didn’t know her name and didn’t leak her name.” Even if he hadn’t passed on Plame’s name — just mentioned her as Wilson’s wife — why not just say nothing, especially since the whole thing is under criminal investigation?
I don’t know.
The bottom line is, some of the most critical facts in the whole Wilson/Plame/CIA matter are just not known, at least not known by anyone outside of the Fitzgerald investigation.
But don’t worry. At least we can be sure that we will someday know them, right?
I don’t know.
York is a White House correspondent for National Review. His column appears in The Hill each week.
E-mail: byork@thehill.com
Dr.Robert G.Joseph
It looks bigger then John Edwards house in DC
It sure does.
Well, we can guess where THAT is going.
I suppose they will demand Rove testify.
Because the charge was the leaking of classified information.
You can bet this President and his aides would always protect those who serve our country and they would behave honorably toward them. That is the record they have built up. They were the target of those who have values 180 degrees in the other direction and no such scruples about not leaking classified information.
I don't know, but under the Clinton administration, both Wilson and Plame would be looking over their shoulder at every turn, not being fawned over by the press.
It must have been agony for Gergen to have to say that.
Timmerman said that after several years at the U.S. Information Agency, Ann Pincus was transferred in the late 1990s to the Office of Research and Media Reaction at the State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research, the same office that "lost" a laptop computer loaded with highly classified intelligence documents in April 2000.
There is going to be a Senate Hearing??
Oh Good Grief
Byron York:
I don't know. . .
:-)
Thanks for posting this.
And by the way the left is hissing and spitting, likely a high level one.
The White House was NOT originally "outraged" at the incident.
They were outraged that Wilson lied in his op-ed piece (now proven by the Senate Intelligence Commmitte report) and Rove was trying to tell Cooper not to trust Wilson.
Honestly, it sounded to me like Rove might have been trying to tell a friend not to make a fool out of himself.
And look how Cooper has repaid him.
Well, they've been to the White House a lot during the Clinton administration......I'd love for it to be Hillary.
Anyone else notice just how quiet the RINOs have been on this so far? By now, McCain should have at least come out and made some statement about how these are "serious allegations" and how President Bush and Karl Rove need to "come clean with the American people" so we can "get back to work." Yet he and the others haven't uttered a peep, even though every reporter in the country must be begging them non-stop to shank Bush again.
Ok then, why is there still an investigation going on?
No good deed ever goes unpunished.
You'd think the Administration might have learned that one by now, eh?
Since we all know just a little about this...why is David Gregory and the rest of the MSM so focused on Rove? I mean Gregory is obviously a hack but it seems the actual investigation is not news...is this by design?
What if Rove is fired? What if we find out he did it and it's all done? What then? What possible benefit does this have for the Dems?
I can't see a huge transformation of the American public voting in droves for the Dems because of this. It seems so silly to invest so much energy. In fact this whole display just proves our point about the HATE they have. Now if this was a debate on policy maybe you could get a few around the water cooler to jump in but this is getting silly.
I know!!!
If Karl Rove would have had sex with Miller, Cooper, Novak, Plame and Wilson then this would all be water under the bridge because it would all just be about " sex".
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.