Replies

"Classified" is NOT "covert.

It's an "own goal" by Democrats and the news media against their own guy. Consider:

Prior to joining the current administration, Mr. Libby served as the Managing Partner of the Washington office of the international law firm of Dechert, Price & Rhoads. He was a member of the firm’s litigation department and chaired the Washington office’s Public Policy Practice Group.

OK, so who are Dechert, Price & Rhoads? Fair question.

The Dechert, Price & Rhoads firm is listed by OpenSecrets.org as being a Democratic Party (only) campaign donor:

DECHERT PRICE & RHOADS
PHILADELPHIA,PA 19103
9/29/1992
$3,000
New Jersey Gala '92

DECHERT PRICE & RHOADS
PHILADELPHIA,PA 19103
10/3/1991
$250
DNC/Non-Federal Corporate

DECHERT PRICE & RHOADS
PHILADELPHIA,PA 19103
2/22/1996
$1,000
DNC/Non-Federal Corporate

Contributions to the GOP: $0.00.

But wait, there's more. Scooter Libby was awarded the Department of Defense Distinguished Service Award and the Department of the Navy Distinguished Public Service Award in 1993...awards from the Clinton Administration.

Robert Novak called Scooter Libby "no partisan gunslinger."

Why? Because he was a Democrat working in GOP administrations. Scooter Libby was the go-to guy for the news media...he was their inside source at the White House...and now he's gone.

Good riddance.

"Classified" is NOT "covert.

Of course the media doesn't make a distinction.

Most likely she was in an analyst position of some kind working on classified materials. That makes her position "classified". A "covert" agent would be someone who is deployed overseas (most often to U.S. embassies) or has recently returned from overseas deployment. Plame had not been overseas in more than 5 years.

I'm woefully uninformed about this case but one question seems to stand out: Who told Novak about Plame? It would seem that given Novak's non-indictment and lack of jail time that whoever leaked to him wasn't considered a lawbreaker by the GJ.

Also, if Libby is lying what is he trying to conceal? How would it benefit the administration to not admit that they found out the Wilson was sent by his wife and that they found out and discussed it?

The weak link in this whole mess is the press. Fitz hangs his case on the testimony of the press as fact while negating Libby's testimony.

Somewhere there's a connection between Judy Miller and Libby but I can't see it yet. And given her being cast aside by the Times it seems they can't get far enough away from her.

"Classified" is NOT "covert.

Didn't Joe Wilson appear on CNN and acknowledge outright that his wife wasn't covert when Novak wrote his column?

I think I read the transcript here on FR. I think Wolf Blitzer was the interviewer.

Sets and subsets, Howlin.

Not all 'classified' is necessarily 'covert.' But all 'covert' is 'classified.'

'Classified' does NOT mean 'not covert.' It MAY mean 'not necessarily covert.'

"Classified" is NOT "covert.

There is another part of "classified" as well, which Fitzgerald isn't going into because it would be a disaster at trial. Something is not simply classified because a bureauctrat said it was classified. [Somewhere someone has probably classified the fact that humans breath air.]

In order to convict for revealing classified information you have to prove that the fact was properly classifed - i.e. that actual or potential damage to national security results from revealing the information, and that the government is not using classification to cover up improper actions or activities. It is because of the latter that attempts to take clearances away from whistleblowers often fails and results in damages and restoration of clearances.

In this case the CIA/Wilson/Pfame have tried to rely on her status to cover up a renegade political strike against the administration.

If the information is already out there and general knowledge, it is not classified, no matter how many government bureaucrats leap up and down and say it is.

So his claim about Pfame's status being classified is doubly disingenuous. Distinction one is that she is not covert. Distinction two is that details of her assignments at CIA are classified. That does not mean that stating what was too common knowledge that she worked for the CIA is an unauthorized disclosure of classified information.