Skip to comments.Times: Cheney First Disclosed CIA Official's Name
Posted on 10/24/2005 9:05:41 PM PDT by InvisibleChurch
Monday, Oct. 24, 2005 10:24 p.m. EDT Times: Cheney First Disclosed CIA Official's Name
The New York Times reported late Monday that Vice President Cheney has been directly linked to the so-called "Plamegate" scandal involving the disclosure of the name of Valerie Plame, a CIA officer.
The paper reported that Cheney's chief of staff, Lewis "Scooter" Libby "first learned about the C.I.A. officer at the heart of the leak investigation in a conversation with Mr. Cheney weeks before her identity became public in 2003."
The paper sourced their story to "lawyers involved in the case."
The Times said that notes taken by Libby differ from his own testimony before the grand jury as to when he first learned of Plame's identity.
"The notes, taken by Mr. Libby during the conversation, for the first time place Mr. Cheney in the middle of an effort by the White House to learn about Ms. Wilsons husband, Joseph C. Wilson IV, who was questioning the administrations handling of intelligence about Iraqs nuclear program to justify the war."
Cheney apparently discovered details of Plame's CIA work after he questioned then CIA Director George J. Tenet about her husband, Ambassador Wilson.
But even if Libby or Cheney had disclosed Plame's identity as a CIA officer they may not have committed a crime.
"Disclosing a covert agents identity can be a crime, but only if the person who discloses it knows the agents undercover status," the Times said.
Cheney is ALLOWED to tell Libby about Plame, they both have security clearances.
And somehow I doubt that Libby wasn't smart enough to say what was in his own notes. Unless they got his notes from somewhere else.
If the notes actually said that Cheney/Libby talked about "getting" Wilson by outing his wife, they would have been out before the election -- no way the democrats wouldn't have leaked that to win.
It is almost as if the democrats are throwing out a dozen theories, each worse than the last, in the hopes that when Fitzgerald doesn't indict anybody, they can talk about all this evidence that was ignored. And, even though it was all speculation, people will remember it and treat is as true.
Just like people keep saying Wilson told the truth, that Bush lied in his 16 words, etc.
Ummm wouldn't that mean that the Plame name originally came from Tenet?
Well it's all guesswork but it looks like Rove isn't a target but Libby might be. If Libby lied then I can't defend him but if this thing is a goose chase about years old testimony then Fitzgerald is a joke.
It's the agenda === bring down Bush, and barring that, just bash the administration relentlessly and hope voters believe enough of it to vote democrat in '06 elections.
New lows are what the MSM does best.
I have a question.
How does anyone know whether Valerie Wilson, or Valerie Plame is the real name of the woman in question? Couldn't her name be something else and we just wouldn't know?
If she was "covert" at any time, how do we know she is not covert now, under a different name? Or not?
This whole thing could be a giant diversion.
Soooo, Tenet was the source. Tenet telling Cheney would be no crime. Cheney telling Libby would be no crime. Crime, Crime who's got the crime?
Good grief...how can you ask the question, with a straight face? Just how young are you? The MSM has ALWAYS and EVER gone out on a limb, when they hate someone/s and are salivating at the prospect of bringing him/her/them down.
Why has the Times launched a public attack on its own reporter, Judith Miller? Why did Miller's Times Editor, Abramson, refuse Miller permission to pursue the Wilson/Plame connection?
its one thing to have a political bias on a story. this is a story that will have a definitive endgame - either there will be indictments, or there won't be.
Why? Tenent is supposed to provide Bush and Cheney with classified information. Presumably Libby has security clearance to receive information from Cheney. It breaks down when Libby gives classified information to Miller or others. Cheney's only liability here would be if he lied about telling Libby or if he was actually involved in a conspiracy with Libby to out Plame. Not likely.
So? Cheney has security clearance to possess that info, and so does Libby. Conversation between the two of them does not constitute any prohibited disclosure, unless others without clearance were present or were shown the Libby's notes later.
it has no merit factually, unless Cheney testified under oath to the contrary. on the spin side, the media will spin any indictment of Libby into a "he lied to cover for Cheney".
I'd venture to say that this is all part of the continual undermining of the Bush administration that's been going on since 2002.
Again, this is all just so much NOISE; as is any factless discussion of it.
Libby telling Miller or other reporters could be a crime. Lying about whether you did or did not tell somebody is a crime.
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.