The White House’s Legal Katrina

Human Events Online ^ | oct. 18 , 2005 | Victoria Toensing

[blogblogginaway]

There now appears to be consensus that no one violated the 1982 Agent Identities Protection Act in publishing the name of CIA employee Valerie Plame. It’s a hard law to violate. Its high threshold requires that the person whose identity is revealed must actually be covert (which requires at the least a foreign assignment within five years of the revelation), that the government must be taking “affirmative measures” to conceal the person’s identity, and that the revealer must know that the government is taking those measures.

So why didn’t Patrick Fitzgerald, the special counsel investigating the “leak,” close up shop long ago?

[Shermy]

"Lugsoul has insisted - with quotes to back him up - that Wilson did not say that, but that it was an inference made by some journalists who put together two facts - (1) it was Cheney who requested that the Niger claims be looked into and (2) Wilson was the one who looked into it - without realizing that there was never any contact whatsoever between Cheney and Wilson."

Wilson was careful in what he himself wrote, but his leaks to other reporters did make such claims.

[syriacus]

Mitchell was chums with Wilson

I didn't know. Then her "dissing" Wilson means even more than I thought. No wonder she looked ill.

[Cicero]

No one seems to have noticed a central point in this article, that the author of the law in question says that the White House seemingly was ignorant of the law. Sure, Wilson and the press spun it, but the danger of an indictment lies mostly in White House ignorance.

A perfect storm has gathered. It is the administration’s legal Katrina. The dark clouds are filled with Wilson’s spin spurred on by a media frenzy, a White House that did not have federal criminal law expertise, and a dogged prosecutor who appears willing to stretch the criminal law to get an indictment. The White House better get prepared for the aftermath.

Let me raise the appropriate question. WHY did the White House allow the President to go out before the cameras and make pledges that were legally ignorant? Wasn't Harriet Miers the person who should have been making those calls and giving legal advice, but apparently failed to do so even after having days and weeks of warning?

[sinkspur]

But the trial judge and the 9/11 commission staff concluded that Fitzgerald failed to prove that Enaam Arnaout, the Benevolence executive director, had provided financial support to al Qaeda, as the indictment had alleged. A federal judge, referring to the prosecution's evidence, said the defendant appeared primarily a victim of guilt by association.

Source.

[sarkozy]

Toensig assumes a lot about where Fitzgerald is going and what evidence he might have.
Just because she helped draft the law doesn't give her any insight into what, by all accounts, has been a leak-tight grand jury process. Contrast that to the Starr investigation, which seemed more intent on influencing news coverage through leaks than on conducting a criminal inquiry.
Fitzgerald, from all we hear, is a stand-up prosecutor, who deserves respect from the whole political spectrum for how he's conducted himself here.
We'll find out soon what he's found, or hasn't found, whether he writes a report or not. If he secures no indictment in the next two weeks we'll know he hasn't enough evidence to convince the grand jury (and save the that tired "ham sandwich" defense).
If the jury indicts, let the chips fall where they may.
All of Toensig's blathering about the media has absolutely nothing to do with what's going on in the grand jury room.

[AntiGuv]

Wasn't Harriet Miers the person who should have been making those calls and giving legal advice, but apparently failed to do so even after having days and weeks of warning?

No. You have bought the White House line that Harriet Miers held an important position before this year. To the contrary, she was merely Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy at the time of that statement. Alberto Gonzales was White House Counsel.

[syriacus]

Media Matters mentions that on the October 13 edition of Hardball,

Mitchell wrongly asserted that Plame's husband, former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, claimed that Vice President Dick Cheney "dispatched" him to Niger in 2002 to investigate the alleged sale of yellowcake uranium to Iraq.

It seems especially meaningful that, tonight, Mitchell repeated her assertion that Wilson said Cheney sent him.

[tet68]

Victoria is one smart cookie, this is a good read.

[tet68]

Funny, I reached it just fine at 6:30.
That is four minutes ago.

[Cicero]

Just as well. I hesitated to post that, because it's irrelevant to the present controversy anyway, but it just struck me that no one had commented on the probability that the White House was naive about the legal ramifications. Whoever was supposed to give legal advice appears to have fallen down on the job.

[AntiGuv]

Well, this'll be something to keep in mind when Miers withdraws and Bush nominates Gonzales to the Supreme Court. ;^)

PS. Though it is relevant to the other present controversy that Miers was just a glorified secretary..

[San Jacinto]

Let's see if I've got this straight-- A well known Washington flake and Bush-hater dons the cloak of "respected envoy" and "former Ambassador" and writes a column full of scurilous lies about his trip to Niger. Then, Just maybe someone in the administration tells some reporters, "Don't take this Wilson guy too seriously. You know, he may have gotten that gig to Niger because his wife works for the CIA."

The LSM rides in like the Calvary with bugles blaring and screams about the "intententional disclosure of a covert CIA" just to damage her husband. The Bush Administration falls into the trap, and two years of investigation later, it is clear that no law was broken concerning Ms. Plame's CIA status, but someone may be indicted anyway???

Just goes to show that the Administration should never have had the gall to try to defend itself against a pack of lies.

Next thing you know, some Administration official will deny - off the record - that the WH dynamited the levies in New Orleans, and there will be indictments for such a brutal attack on Administration critic Calypso Louie.

[Steve_Seattle]

"Contrast that to the Starr investigation, which seemed more intent on influencing news coverage through leaks than on conducting a criminal inquiry."

You probably haven't read "The Truth At All Costs," written about Starr by two former NYT and/or WP reporters, who pretty much concluded that Starr's alleged leaks were actually done by people in the Clinton camp. Nothing was ever leaked that wasn't already known by Clinton's lawyers. The tactic was to divert attention from Clinton's misdeeds and focus attention on Starr's alleged leaks. The strategy worked then, and it's apparently still working, seven years later.

[M. Dodge Thomas]

Either way he is riding the clock and we are paying the bill. Easy money!!!

Fitzgerald is a salaried government employee, makes the same if he’s working on a case in Chicago or Washington – no overtime. I don’t know what his pay grade is, but if for example he’s GS-15 he tops out at around $108,200 in Chicago, and it can’t be all that much more that that, the Attorney General of the US only makes $157,000. Fitzgerald could easily make 4-5 times that in private practice, whatever his motivation it’s not the money.

[ConservativeGreek]

Matthews smells blood

He smelled a Kerry victory too!

[San Jacinto]

Contrast that to the Starr investigation, which seemed more intent on influencing news coverage through leaks than on conducting a criminal inquiry.

No, contrast the constant personal attacks by the clintoon's against Kenneth Starr with the dignified treatment accorded Fitzgerald by the Bush Administration.

And as far as Fitzgerald is concerned--the proof will be in the pudding. It is abundantly clear to everyone by now that there was no violation of the particular statute at issue. If he cooks ups some far fetched charge concerning some after-the-fact issue, he will reveal himself as more concerned with his own standing among the media elite than with anything else.

[speedy]

I have no argument with anything you said, although I do hope she is off base in her concluding sentence.

[bjc]

Two conclusions. The WH should immediately sign Victoria Toensing up for either defense (hopefully will not be necessary) or the mother of all payback sessions targeting Wilson, Plame, Johnson, Corn, Pincus, Cooper, CIA cabalists, and anyone else who provided knowingly misleading statements in this case.
Second, prevaricating critics of any administration of the ilk of Wilson should be exposed by direct and open attack from the most relevant Cabinet Member. (Toensing did it very nicely in what 3 lines!!) In this case it should have been Powell. His apparent silence speaks loudly. Add him to the list of cabalists!
It is not a hurricane, it is a whirlwind and the reaper is about to come calling. (IPTG)

[speedy]

Yes I did. I don't see much in there that sounds good for the WH.

[M. Dodge Thomas]

What a lot of people here still aren’t getting is that you don’t have to commit a crime to be in deep legal trouble.

It’s a felony to lie to a Federal investigator even if you are not under other – the way the stature is written, it’s arguably illegal to lie to an IRS agent you meet at a party about your salary.

And it’s not necessary to commit a crime to be guilty of conspiracy – if you, and I, and a friend sit around shooting the bull about some high-tech way to rob a bank, and the US Attorney takes it seriously, we could all find ourselves under indictment.

These days Federal prosecutors have *enormous* latitude in what they can say and do in the course of an investigation – remember the way the FBI kept Monica from contacting an attorney? – and Congress and the courts have been steadily increasing that power for 25 years; if they are in fact charged Karl Rove or Scooter Libby would be far from the first well connected and powerful individuals to discover that the “law and order* regime they helped create considers them just more grist for it’s mill..