You are simply incorrect. I don't know why you and several other insist on not reading the note from the White House Counsel in its entirety.
The whole statement says, "We were informed last evening by the Department of Justice that it has opened an investigation into possible unauthorized disclosures concerning the identity of an undercover CIA employee."
That statement is reiterating what the accusation is, not that these are the concluded facts of the situation. The DOJ has opened an investigation. The investigation is to look into IF there was a possible unauthorized disclosure of an undercover CIA employee's identity.
In fact, the investigation is likely to conclude that NO unathorized disclosure occurred, because the law pertains to "covert agents", not analysts and Mrs. Wilson was/is an analyst.
Hence, even if an administration official (which doesn't mean anyone in the White House) had named Mrs. Wilson, it wouldn't matter because she was an analyst and the law (Title 50, Chapter 15, Section 421) doesn't apply to analysts.
Please read Novak's most recent statement to see that he said, ""ccording to a confidential source at the CIA, Mrs. Wilson was an analyst, not a spy, not a covert operator, and not in charge of undercover operatives."
Read the law. Get a clue.
I know that the distinction is a bit fine and that I might be picking nits, so to speak, but accuarecy must be observed when posting information about such a touchy subject.
I don't see Valerie's name here.
Didn't diagram a whole lot of sentences in elementary school, did you?