Re: "Plame was a covert CIA agent or the CIA would not have demanded a special prosecutor to look into the leaking of a covert CIA agent's name."
I don't think we know that. I think Novak pinned down the reason for the investigation. That would be what Wilson has said too, i.e. that they want to know if the information from Wilson about Niger was well remembered and ignored. But who knows, really?
Here's what Wilson said:
" WILSON: My wife was not a clandestine officer the day that Bob Novak blew her identity.
BLITZER: But she hadn't been a clandestine officer for some time before that?
WILSON: That's not anything that I can talk about. And, indeed, I'll go back to what I said earlier, the CIA believed that a possible crime had been committed, and that's why they referred it to the Justice Department."
Now, it may be that he was saying she wasn't covert from the moment the article appeared, but by god it's hard to tell. He refuses to confirm that interpretation when asked. It could well be that she merely lost the opportunity to become covert again. Could be that she hadn't been covert since returning from overseas in '97. This would take her out of the realm of the 5 year provision in the '82 law, if not all laws. In terms of other laws, I think the question is indeed, as Democrats are proclaiming, did the President's speech knowingly ignore Wilson's report with prior knowledge, and if the CIA is right that they didn't pass on his report, why not?
Dan B. |
