Redstate

ccording to a long profile of the Wilsons that appeared in Vanity Fair (January, 2004), Wilson was caught off guard three days later when he received a phone call from Robert Novak, who, according to Wilson, said he'd been told by a C.I.A. source that Wilson's wife worked for the agency. "Can you confirm or deny?" Wilson recalls Novak as saying. "I need another source." Wilson says he did neither.

that "I need another source" makes no sentence in its place inside that paragraph.

Why would the New York Times stonewall the special prosecutor they themselves asked for, to the point that Judith Miller would go to jail before revealing who told her all this stuff?

Should it be "before revealing . . ." or "without revealing . . ."

I think you may just be a bit too subtle in connecting the last two whys.  You might want to even try at the end of the last paragraph putting something in along the lines of "unless Miller has a source other than a Republican" or "other than someone in the Administration."

A plausible explanation for this, the first why:

Why? Well, to hear Democrats tell it, Rove "outed" Plame to exact revenge on Ambassador Wilson.

Last night on the Countdown, Michael Isikoff and Allison Stewart had this exchange:

STEWART: We've talked about, and it's kind of obvious about the way this e-mail might hurt Karl Rove. Are there any ways which it might help him?

ISIKOFF: Well, it does, in fact, his, sources close to him have argued that it indicates that he is responding to questions by Cooper about Wilson, and he's pointing Cooper to facts, or at least, Rove's spin on the facts, that are different than what Wilson is saying. In other words, as Rove clearly seems to be presenting it in the e-mail, he's trying to correct the record about what Joe Wilson has been saying about the origins of his trip, the genesis of his trip to Africa.

So in that sense, you know, it could be argued that he's trying to get the truth out, at least from the White House's point of view, rather than, as others see it, smear a political critic.

Soylent Green is people.

But without any evidence, that's a stretch.

We've already been discussing this via IM, but I wanted to get my $.02 out in the open on this as well. Here are a couple points/questions that I'd like to see someone from the NYT answer:

1, Given the assumption that Plame's identity was at the very least known to the politically connected in the media and in Washington, and given the NYT's behavior in re: Judith Miller, is it more reasonable to expect that they're protecting Rove, or someone in the Carville category?

2. Right now I'm totally believing that a Carville/Begala/Trippi type leaked this information on the presumption that everyone would make the assumption that an administration official was behind the leak. Now that Rove has signed the general waiver, the only reason for Miller to keep silent right now - at least, the only reason that makes sense to me, is if she's protecting a non-administration person. Is there another plausible explanation? And who, besides someone in the Bush administration, would have a compelling interest not only in leaking this information but also in keeping their identity secret to the point of allowing Miller to go to jail, besides a Democrat operative attempting to throw a spear at the Bush administration?
   
3. If it's another administration person that Miller is protecting, the Administration CAN'T take a bigger hit than the one it's already taken So it stands to reason that the Administration takes all their lumps now and comes clean with the other source. The fact that there is absolutely no movement by either the NYT or Miller really leads me to believe we're talking Democrat operative or at the very least someone non-administration. Again, who outside the administration 1) has a compelling interest in leaking this and 2) has a compelling interest in keeping their leak secret?
   
4. Here's the kicker - Why in the world does the NYT front-page a story calling for Rove's resignation while their own reporter sits in jail protecting a different source? This is especially puzzling considering that Miller never published the story she is sitting in jail for. This is smelling more and more like Miller's source is someone embarrassing to the Times, and they are participating in the smokescreen to divert attention from Miller's role in all of this.

< removes tinfoil hat>

Thank you, that is all.

the theories on the Left that Rathergate was a setup.  

While certainly possible it does require a few leaps to get there.

How did this Democratic operative know about Plame?  Are you suggesting that Plame wilfully outted herself?

While it may seem odd that Wilson was on 3 major media outlets at virtually the same time it isn't all that surprising given the nature of our controvery devouring media.

Certainly the Miller angle is an interesting one.  Not sure how that is going to play yet but there are simply too many possible answers right now to even speculate as to what the right reason is.

being Rove, since if I was in her shoes you better believe I would be asking Fitzgerald what time he wanted me in court rather than doing my 18 months of jail time.

I don't understand why the Times is protecting Rove or anyone else, and I am bothered by the idea that a newspaper would feel justified in protecting a source who is suspected of committing a crime.  Even if I was gung ho in favor of papers being able to protect sources, I would want a "if the source committed a crime, there is no protection" clause in it.

The source being a dem, would be interesting and plausible, but I sometimes wonder if it isn't just a matter of the Times wanting to fight this for the cause of protection in general, not so much to protect Rove.

was lying, there are two sources out there, and maybe others (at least in the media Rove hasn't admitted to being Novak's source, but Cooper's source-at this juncture there isn't enough to really know).

When Rove signed the general waiver, the principle of protection went out the window. You don't have to go to jail to protect a source who doesn't want to be protected.

honestly who really goes to jail for a source who said you could reveal?  Um nobody.

Shoot I guess I wouldn't be a good journalist, because I can't much think of a source I would go to jail for period, especially if said source was suspected of committing a crime.

You know my position but I cannot resist repeating it because it deserves some focus.  I have 7 posts on this subject  - the one I like the most is this one

http://strata-sphere.com/blog/index.php/archives/258

The answer to this is captured in the examples of Johnathon Pollard and Dan Rather.  Pollard was a rogue government employee who decided he knew better about our government's dealing with Isreal.  So for his self-centered heroics he decided to sell secrets to the MOSSAD.

Plame and Wilson our professed zealots out to stop conservatives and their policies.  They are no less driven than Pollard.  And no less criminal.  Whatever Wilson learned in Niger, it was classified and shouldn't have been exposed in the media.  And Plame should have known it was (a) classified and (b) erroneous to his formal reports to the CIA.  But she kept quiet - because facts were not here goal - toppling Bush was.

Now Why is a NYTimes reporter in jail instead of getting the good on Karl & Co?  Because she was part of the conspiracy with Plame and Wilson.  In other posts I link to sites where Plame and Miller would probably know each other since they both focused on WMDs.  And like Rather, Miller was willing to conciously allow misinformation to be reported as fact in order to take down Bush.

Why is it so hard to believe these liberal zealots would risk their careers to save humankind from conservatives?  They believe they are the only salvation for mankind and Bush and cons are evil to the core?  What is a little personal sacrifice to save the planet?

Most on the left think Miller was acting in a friendly way towards the administration in the run up to the war. All her reports about WMD basically supported the government's claims.

So wouldn't it make sense that her source(s) were actually "high government officials"? She had a good reputation in those days.

Perhaps she is protecting someone else in the present government and feels that having this person's identity known would cause too much of a disruption in the midst of a war. A single breach of security might, in her mind, be preferable to a larger shakeup.

Then the  real questions to be asked are:

Who told Rove?

Who are the other sources of the leak?

I think you are assuming that the WH controls the person who can release Miller.  The person may be in the WH he/she personally doesn't want to go to jail, or the information is even more damning.

Now that the fox is amongst the chickens when it comes to Rove, it makes absolutely zero sense for the WH to cover for another person. You've got to figure that eventually Miller (or someone else) capitulates and reveals the source. In that eventuality, the grilling McLellan has been receiving over the last two days will seem like a cakewalk.

Politically speaking, and this administration is NOT politicaly stupid, if they know who the second source is, so would we.

they feel either.

1. Rove has done nothing illegal but the other source has.
   
2. They don't know who the other source.

Here:

Do you go to jail to protect the confidentiality of a source whose name has been revealed, and not by you but by someone else?

as anyone, but the only way that will happen is if Rove himself, and Bush for good measure (to shut up the idiotic impeachment talk you hear way off to the left), answer the 1 1/2th "why" question from the initial poster.  Why did Rove leak Plame's name (if we can believe the evidence that has so suddenly come to light after all this time)?  Or, if he didn't leak her name, why was he talking to the press about her right before Novak's column?  Democrats like to think it's part of some slimy political revenge scheme, but it is wise to hold off on judgments like that.  Rove is the only one who can answer that why, and he should, so this can pass and America can refocus on real issues.

As for Miller, there is another motivation for what she's doing other than taking marching orders from the Times and its lefty editors:  a massive ego.  She is happy to be a political and journalistic celebrity, dreaming in her cell of lucrative lecture tours and a book deal.  She can now pretend she's a martyr for journalism, and I'll be shocked if she holds out for more than a couple of months, less if this all blows over and people forget about her.

One question, though, and I'd love for your theories to be true and not-so-tinfoil-hattish, but:  isn't it well-established that it was "two administration officials" who leaked the name?  Why would Novak hold water for a Carville or Begala?

Andrea Mitchell on MSNBC admitted that it was common knowledge in the press (including herself) before the Plame affair that Plame was a CIA agent.

Karl Rove (or Paul Begala or Carville for that matter) are not connected to the CIA, they are political operatives and focus on that area. They are unlikely to be plugged into the National Security circles, just as a marketing guy is unlikely to be connected to finance gurus.

SOMEONE had to spread Plame's name around. Who? My best guess is someone connected to National Security issues, in or out of government in that area, who'd worked with Plame on various WMD issues. Likely candidates would be Tenet, Sandy Burglar, Woolsey, Rice, Bolton, Powell, and others on the National Security Council or connected to those issues.

Mitchell, Miller, Cooper and others are not super-sleuths. Obviously someone before this issue leaked Plame's identity, hence Fitzgerald convincing a judge he was not on a fishing expedition but had real evidence that Miller in particular along with Cooper had vital information for his investigation.

This to me seems to indicate that it may be that MILLER told Rove that Plame was a CIA secret agent; question being who told Miller.

If Rove was the principal target I'd expect Fitzgerald to subpoena a lot of Rove's records and so forth, various press strategies to force a plea bargain.

that absolutely no one not on thorozine has made:

Why would Novak hold water for a Carville or Begala?

Who has made this claim?

Rove is first and foremost a political operative. Wilson was carrying water for the Dems. Rove also knew Wilson was lying and so Rove was trying to take him out.

It is important to remember the political circumstances surrounding this "leak." Joe Wilson had returned from Niger and miraculously found himself on three prominent news outlets claiming that he had gone to investigate one of the Bush administrations claims, they turned out to be bogus, and nobody listened to his report.

Rove then, from what we know of his communications with Cooper, was attempting to save the press some face by letting them know that "getting too far out on this Wilson thing" was going to come back and bite them in the backside later. He let Cooper know that Wilson wasn't sent on the trip by Cheney, or Tenet, or even with the authorization of the DCI or the State Department, but rather because his wife, who "apparently worked in the CIA on WMD", had insisted that he go.

Far from exacting political retribution, Rove was attempting to keep the press from hanging themselves with the silly Wilson rope, which was exactly what they ended up doing anyway, once it turned out that virtually everything that Wilson said was a politically motivated lie.

issue at the moment until Fitzgerald's investigation draws to some conclusion so I tend to avoid these discussions.

At the same time I have to chuckle that Rove acted, assuming he did act, out of concern for protecting the press from making themselves look foolish.  That theory made my day!

You know how flattering cocktail party chatter works. Rumors not denied, or, perhaps, subtly winked at become fact.

The investigation should reveal Plame's real role at CIA. Here's my speculation. She was flying a desk and missed the old covert days. Hubby liked the lime light and probably demurely smiled when the spy stories floated by, neither confirming or denying. That's not outing, I guess.

Or perhaps just a failure to be even vaguely familiar with the contents of the Cooper email:

Cooper wrote that Rove offered him a "big warning" not to "get too far out on Wilson." Rove told Cooper that Wilson's trip had not been authorized by "DCIA"--CIA Director George Tenet--or Vice President Dick Cheney. Rather, "it was, KR said, wilson's wife, who apparently works at the agency on wmd [weapons of mass destruction] issues who authorized the trip."

I'm glad to see that facts can still make your day.

SOMEONE had to spread Plame's name around. Who? My best guess is someone connected to National Security issues, in or out of government in that area, who'd worked with Plame on various WMD issues.

Miller herself may meet that test. Miller wrote many stories for the Times about various aspects of the WMD issue. She accompanied military search teams in Iraq looking for WMDs, as an embedded reporter. She may well have had Plame in her Rolodex for a long time, as someone to check facts with, before any of this happened.

Why was Rove talking to Cooper?  Read the notes on Cooper - to warn Time away from Wilson.  Which as sage advice.

forget about Rove, he has nothing more to lose or gain so he stays put.  Forget about about Plame's name and employment - that was an open secret and many people have already stated as much, including Andrea Mitchell the other day.  So you can't leak public knowledge.

If you remove these two red herrings then you will find indicators on what is motivating the NYTimes and Miller.  So many people fall for the magician's sleight of hand it is amazing.  Rove and Plame's employment are distractions.

This makes absolutly no sense. I like reading Red State even though I often disagree because I find respect the integrity of the arguments, but this is ridiculous.

There is no question that Karl Rove leaked Valerie Plames identity to the press. His lawyer has admitted as much to the press. What remains to be seen are legal technicalities surrounds his knowledge of her undercover status. This begs a similar question to the fifth why of this post, that remains unanswered: If Karl Rove didn't find out about the leak by using his security clearance, then who did? How was that information passed from CIA to the White House? Which administration offical was responsible for passing the knowledge of Valerie Plame's undercover status to Karl Rove? Did the president know of Karl Rove's activities, and did he approve?

These are compelling questions, and do demand an immediate answer. Why a partisan democrat would pass along information to Karl Rove to smear a partisan democrat in an attempt to intimidate people from speaking out against the war seems highly implausible, conspriacy theories not withstanding.

That's how press and people in high positions get to trust each other.  They give each other heads up about pending things they may want to avoid or address.

Maybe you just never thought about how a news media person would gain the trust of Rove and vise versa?

Many people have stated Plame's employment at the CIA was an open secret in the elite social circles of DC.  Andrea Mitchell said so the other day - to name one.

So you cannot leak something that is already public knowledge - even if it is small number of elite news media types.  Get over that right now and save yourself the tears later.

What you fail to grasp is Wilson's open statements that he wanted to undermine Bush and his administration.  And this is how he and his wife planned to do it.

revealing her undercover status, the leak mentioned where she works, not that she was "undercover."

Part of being guilty of this crime is that you have to have knowledge of the undercover status, and Plame hadn't been under cover since 1997.  It is conceivable that Rove and any other admin official wasn't all that aware that she had been undercover.

Absolutely no one is questioning Rove's involvement at this point. In case you missed it, though, Judith Miller of the NYT is sitting in jail right now refusing to release the source that gave her the information. Rove has apparently called "olly-olly-oxen-free" since Matt Cooper isn't in jail, since Rove signed a personal waiver on their conversations. This leads us to believe that Miller had another source, and for reasons enumerated above, we believe it to be a non-administration official.

If Karl Rove didn't find out about the leak by using his security clearance, then who did? How was that information passed from CIA to the White House? Which administration offical was responsible for passing the knowledge of Valerie Plame's undercover status to Karl Rove? Did the president know of Karl Rove's activities, and did he approve?

The underlying premise of all these questions is still a matter of very great doubt - that Karl Rove even KNEW:

1. Valerie Plame's name
   
   
2. That she was an undercover agent

Go back and read the emails again. Also, it would be worth your while to read the post further upthread in which Andrea Mitchell (and others) have frankly admitted that Plame's identity as a CIA agent was no big secret in Washington whatsoever.

These are compelling questions, and do demand an immediate answer. Why a partisan democrat would pass along information to Karl Rove to smear a partisan democrat in an attempt to intimidate people from speaking out against the war seems highly implausible, conspriacy theories not withstanding.

Are you thickheaded? Where have we ever suggested that a partisan Democrat passed information to Rove?

You're making the (partisan) assumption that since Rove has been identified as a source, he must be the only source - and that assumption has been slain and left beside the road for dead. My belief is that this partisan Democrat passed this entire story (Wilson expedition and all) along to the media as a package.

Yes that is silly, indeed.  Everyone knows that if Br'er Rove tells the press not to do something, then they will certainly do it just to spite him... and now they have him just where he wants them.

He passed to them what turned out to be legitimate information that Wilson was a flake - if they go ahead and run with it anyway, whose fault is that?

...There is no question that Karl Rove leaked Valerie Plames identity to the press...

Well, not exactly. According to Newsweek Rove told Cooper that Wilson's wife worked at the CIA but did not say Valerie Plame. And according to other published accounts Valerie Plame's identity and employment were hardly a secret in Washington. Apparently the only people who didn't know about her were us hayseeds out here in flyover America and the night janitor at the Russian embassy in India.

... practically the only people more "important" to protect than Rove is the President and Laura! Who else, the Whitehouse pastry chef?

as most have been answered and none address the "compelling question" in this story of why Judith Miller would go to jail to protect someone in the Bush White House.

denying that is what Cooper is citing Rove as saying.  I'm not denying that is what Rove said.  I'm only smiling at the purported motivation.  Karl Rove is about as likely to be interested in protecting the press as Carville would have been in his position.  In my opinion, it was about political damage control and spinning the story by short-circuiting the story.  

Mind you...I'm not saying that is a bad thing.  It's pretty normal and I'm not making a value judgment at all.  I have no opinion whatsoever on Rove, Miller or anyone else's actions in this case.  In my mind, there is a legal process underway and it will reveal an outcome.  At that point, I suppose I might opine.

...Karl Rove (or Paul Begala or Carville for that matter) are not connected to the CIA, they are political operatives and focus on that area. They are unlikely to be plugged into the National Security circles, just as a marketing guy is unlikely to be connected to finance gurus...

But remember, by the time this happened Wilson had already gone over to the Dark Side, he had apparently become a political animal of the first order.

also her source, given that he has released the press from covering for him as a source.

for your theory is that characterization of Miller is pretty unique to certain segments of the left. It is highly unlikely that anyone in the Administration saw her as a "friendly" reporter.

Because she wants to be a martyr? There really isn't anything inconsistent about the NYT pushing for an investigation at the same time as Miller serving her jailtime. As anyone even remotely involved with the law or the press knows, these are the kinds of principles people are willing to make a stand on. Irrespective of the source.

As regards Andrea Mitchell and the open secret re: Plame's job. Does anyone have a link? TIA

...official wasn't all that aware that she had been undercover... the protection only goes back 5 years.

I think the motivations here are purely politics and self interest. (clever huh?)

I'll accept that outing an undercover agent is bad news, but it doesn't look like Plame was under cover, but that's an open question subject to spook regulations about which I don't have a clue.

My sense is that Rove understood that Plame was not under cover, but he tip toed anyway to maintain plausible deniability if things blew up. I think he was trying to kill Wilson's story in the nest, and rightly so.

I don't know or care about Miller's politics, but it makes sense to me that she knew about Plame and the Rove angle, and was snooping after a story. The story didn't run because Miller knew that there really wasn't a story. Plame was not undercover, and Wilson turned out to be a liar. Not much traction there.

is referring to the fact that Cooper's employer had already released his emails and notes to Fitzgerald.

The email names Rove so Fitzgerald had that information and Cooper knew it, however Rove may not have know what was in Cooper's notes. Fitzgerald still wanted Cooper to testify. It's clear Cooper did not think he had been released by Rove and was all set to go to jail with Miller.

Later, Mr. Waldman asked whether Time's disclosures and a blanket waiver form his source had signed were enough to allow him to testify. In an e-mail message on Tuesday night, Mr. Cooper said he believed the forms could have been coerced and thus worthless.

However on Wednesday morning Cooper and his lawyer saw a way out, they felt that Rove's lawyer had to all extents and purposes released Cooper to testify by his statement in the Wall Street Journal.

His lawyer, Mr. Sauber, called to alert him to a statement from Mr. Luskin in The Wall Street Journal.

"If Matt Cooper is going to jail to protect a source," Mr. Luskin told The Journal, "it's not Karl he's protecting."

That provided an opening, Mr. Cooper said. "I was not looking for a waiver," he said, "but on Wednesday morning my lawyer called and said, 'Look at The Wall Street Journal. I think we should take a shot.' And I said, 'Yes, it's an invitation.' "

 

Miller's lawyer however was not out talking to the press and it is possible her source is Rove, since we know Rove did not explicitly release Cooper. Cooper essentially used a technicality ( Rove's lawyer's very specific quote in the WSJ).

Quotes above are from your NYT link.

for a newspaper to cover for a source that is suspected of committing a crime?  

If there was a crime committed, it isn't quite like covering for a whistleblower-to protect them from retribution, this is protecting a supposed criminal to shield them from prosecution.

so isn't it better for everyone for Rove to go public with it and shut the reporters up?  Why is he letting this drag on so long?

for the most doltish remark of the day!

There really isn't anything inconsistent about the NYT pushing for an investigation at the same time as Miller serving her jailtime.

You seriously don't see a problem with the NYTimes hopping up and down demanding a special investigator get to the bottom of this when they are supporting their own reporter who is going to jail for refusing to reveal a source involved in the same investigation? Nevermind the fact that source protection legally does not extend to issues of criminal investigation, and therefore Miller's actions are illegal?

As anyone even remotely involved with the law or the press knows, these are the kinds of principles people are willing to make a stand on.

Yes, the principle of partisan hackery. How we should adore and revere those who are blatantly inconsitent for their own political agenda.

Makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

You're correct in identifying the two key questions. There are still questions regarding whether Rove knew Plame's name, or her undercover status. Neither of these questions relate to the propriety of the leak, but do matter in the legal definition of treason.

It is entirely possible that Rove didn't know her name, as his lawyer suggests that he simply referred to her as "Joseph Wilson's wife." This may not have explictly said the name Valerie Plame, but with her information her name could be found using a Washington Metro phonebook. Further, it is very unlikely that he did not know of her undercover status. In Novak's column he referred to Plame as an operative, which Lexis searches have shown is a phrase that he used in the past to refer to undercover agents.

I make no assumption that Rove is the only source on this. I'd be very willing to bet a rather sizable amount of dollars that the other source is none other than Scooter Libby, Vice President Cheney's Chief of Staff. Most likely, Libby and Rove were the sources of Novak's column.

Your suggestion that this is all a Democratic hoax is unfortunate and short sighted. My own suspicions lead me to believe that this administration would put his own political expediency over national security interests, but as an American it is always my hope that consensus can be reached on issues of vital national security. At this point, we know this much is true:

A. Rove's attorney has acknowledged that he talked about Plame with Cooper, without mentioning her name, days before Robert Novak's column publicly revealed her identity.

B. Rove (and Rove via McClellan) has repeatedly suggested that he had nothing to do with this story at all.

C. The White House has suggested that any person found to have anything to do with the improper leaking of Wilson's name to the press would be fired.

They simply aren't even taking up your arguments. I wish that Americans of good faith could come together to condemn this deplorable leak, and I wish the good citizens at Redstate would not abide by serious improprieties committed, even if committed by an administration they support.

Well, it seems that in the years since leaving the career civil service, Joseph Wilson had become something of a partisan Democrat. As Washington Post writer Richard Leiby noted on October 2, 2003, "Wilson makes no secret of being a left-leaning Democrat and intends to endorse Sen. John F. Kerry for president. Wilson, a former ambassador to Gabon who served as an Africa expert in the second Clinton administration, has long been friendly with leading Democrats." Writing in the Washington Times, Helle Dale quotes Wilson as saying, "Neo-conservatives and religious conservatives have hijacked this administration, and I consider myself on a personal mission to destroy both."

....the fact that the Bush administration was publicly attacking him & his wife might have had something to do with that?

I'd find that line of attack more interesting if you could find some serious evidence of partisanship before Rove started the smear campaign.  Afterwards is just self-defense.

I don't know his politics and I suspect you don't either.  We do know that he served in a very high position under Bush I and we do know it is a matter of public record that he contributed to George W. Bush's primary campaign in 2000.  That doesn't make it impossible he was a lefty but it sure puts it in the "highly improbable pending darn solid evidence to the contrary" category, I would think.

"It is all true"

And, it the same vein, "it is all piffle".

the Plame-wilson-rove affair is a tempest in a teapot, and I am beginning to think that W is getting a great deal of laughter out of this.

Leon H. mentioned above:

Right now I'm totally believing that a Carville/Begala/Trippi type leaked this information on the presumption that everyone would make the assumption that an administration official was behind the leak.

But Novak wouldn't cover for one of those slimeballs.  But that is probably not what Leon was implying.  Am I missing something?

Would you care to elaborate on that one?

One man's traitor is another's whistleblower. Daniel Ellsburg committed a crime. Deep Throat committed a crime.

I would imagine the vast majority of national security leaks are criminal acts, but the reporter shield laws (in the States) recognize that the information is more important than the crime.

re:

Are you suggesting that Plame wilfully outted herself?

The way I understand it, she was brought back to Langley in 1997 and Joe Wilson wrote in his biography that his wife worked for the CIA in 2003.  So, no, she didn't out herself, but her husband did.  Sorry, I don't have links, but I have seen them in other threads here.  Feel free to let me know if you see anything that contradicts this.

On Joseph Wilson's own website. What was the point you were making about treason again?

According to Cooper, in his statement on TV, "A short time ago, in somewhat dramatic fashion, I received an express, personal release from my source," Mr. Cooper said. "It's with a bit of surprise and no small amount of relief that I will comply with this subpoena."

So your much of your post is founded on a false premise:

since we know Rove did not explicitly release Cooper

which Cooper says is not true.

....alleged smear campaign. Honest slip.

is the leak they are covering for, and they should have to cough up the name.

know his politics.

His and his wife's political contributions are public record.

If her identity was "common knowledge" then why wasn't that the administration line immediately, when this all came out. Go back and look at the quotes the administration made about the seriousness of the crime committed here. If her name was common knowledge, the crime would not be significant. Even the White House acknowledges the seriousness of the crime here.

Also, take a look at the brief Fitzpatrick filed in court to get Miller thrown in jail. It has 7 out of 41 pages blacked out, in which Fitzpatrick makes the case for how important the case is to national security. You simply can't defend who ever is guilty of this crime by dismissing the nature of the crime. Someone in the white house leaked the indentity of an undercover agent to the press.

Wait for an imminent RedHot/FP story on that issue.

According to Newsweek Rove told Cooper that Wilson's wife worked at the CIA but did not say Valerie Plame.

Do you see a big difference between saying, "Wilson's wife" and saying, "Wilson's wife, Valerie"?  I can't see how the former leaves the person's identity in question unless Wilson has a non-standard number of wives.

cover was blown by Ames, so she was brought back in 1997 and worked a non covert job in the WMD department.

When was Wilson's biography written?  Before or after the Novak article?  I didn't realize he had written about her job in his book.

In that case, why are we even investigating this?

Her name was on his website. What wasn't was the fact that SHE WAS AN UNDERCOVER CIA AGENT WORKING ON WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION ISSUES.

...if members of the press refuse to take good advice because they believe the source to be bad.  jmaier seems to be operating from the simplistic view that Rove is all bad, Press is all good, and there are no complexities or personal factors involved in their interaction.  I was just applying a little iocaine logic via Br'er rabbit. =:}

You just have to listen to the silence and stonewalling to understand that the WH realizes that this is an issue that will only get worse.  

This Administration has demonstrated excellent spin control ability before, and if they felt that this was the worst of the information to come out, they would be pushing out a brush-off of the issue and change the subject.  Ken Mehlman has started to do just that, but he could possibly be off the official WH spin reservation.

The fact that they are stonewalling indicates might indicate that they know this will end badly.  If the rumors about the investigation focusing on the effect of the Plame leak on the CIA front company "Brewster Jennings $ Assoc." are true, then the (rather premature, IMHO) calls of "treason" and "congressional investigation!" will seem a little more reasonable.

If this issue was truly nothing important, why is the President (very publicly and obviously) not answering questions?  Why damage the "straight shooter" image?  Why not come out, say that Karl wasn't THE leaker but only a secondary source, and put it behind them?

No, I don't see a problem. The system is working. The newspaper is doing its job as the Fourth Estate, and the reporter is doing her job protecting her sources.

I'm not sure I see anything partisan about Miller protecting the WH source. Do you mean because it's a known fact that Miller is a secret DNC operative? If you meant something else, and I just didn't follow you, I'd appreciate you explaining it to me.

"...indicates might indicate..."

Jeez, I need more coffee before I post.

working undcover and hadn't been since 1997-when they thought her cover compromised by Ames.

Granted the CIA didn't just up and announce that she was a former undercover operative either, but Rove didn't say she was undercover in his comments to Cooper.

The problem here is 1. we don't know who else Rove spoke to, and what he told them (what we have so far, doesn't seem to meet the standards of the crime) and 2. we do not know who the other source is (we know Novak said two, and one of them may have been Rove).

At this point there isn't enough information to go speculating that deep regarding Rove.

That is not what I'm saying.  Karl Rove, if he did anything, was probably doing his job.  Control a story.  That doesn't mean lying or having any ill motives other than what I said.

On the "big" issues, I have no opinion.  There is a prosecutor, a legal process, and presumably an outcome at some point.  I'd prefer to see everyone stop the speculating, attacking and defending and let the process run its course.

At this point, there isn't even any indication that Rove is the target of the investigation.  It could be Miller herself.  Someone else in the administration, Democratic operatives.  Who knows.

No evidence of this but:

Wilson had to pitch his story.

Wilson might have been saying something like "it is more than just my word as an exAmbassador who spent a week drinking gin in Africa, my wife, the spy, says the Europeans all know this is crap too."

Who else would need protection from Miller and NYT and get it?

very few people know the details of Plame's resume with the CIA.  Seems there is a lot of speculation but very little information.

"Are you suggesting that Plame wilfully outted herself?"

How does it fare under Occam's razor?

Wilson openly stated his desires to undermine the 'necons' and destroy them.  Bush and all those promoting regime change have always been labeled neo-cons.  OK so far?

Plame was one of many in the CIA who also opposed going into Iraq.  They needed a way to stop Bush or at least pay a heavy political price.  It did not hurt Wilson was angling for a cabinet level job in a Kerrey administration, something he had in hand until the Senate report on his lies came out.

So Plame and Wilson decided to send Wilson to Niger and come back with a 'report' they could use in the media.  Wilson knew his wife sent him on the trip and his report was back to her.  They both knew they could not release information on Saddam's nuclear intentions since she was CIA and he was State Dept (at one time).  So they KNEW he shouldn't be discussing this with the press, let alone authoring an Op-Ed and book!

There plan was to set themselves up a neo-con destroyers, save the planet from the neo-cons and get publicity and leadership jobs out of it.

They got all but the last piece - the leadership jobs.  But that was because the whole mess fell apart when Wilson (and Plame behind government doors) were caught lying.

If you wonder why Wilson and Plame are being so quiet then you don't appreciate the kind of trouble they are probably in for faking critical, national security intelligence and spreading that to the public.  Not to mention running a roque international policy effort out of the CIA and at cross purposes with the State  Dept.

Why do you think they grand jury deposed Colin Powell?

The statements concern the leaking of classified information.  If Plame's name and occupation where not classified (and it is clear Andrea Mitchell is not working for Rove or Bush when she popped that idea) then what is classified/

Well, for one thing any material related to the current, best estimate on Saddam's nuclear weapons intentions is classified.  And that is what Wilson (and Plame through Wilson) divulged in his Op-Ed, interviews and books.  Did it ever occur to you why Wilson got caught in a lie about forged documents he had (supposedly) never seen?

Documents his wife as a WMD analyst would definitely seen???

I mean - duh!!

But it was on Powerline.

Here is my posting on it

http://strata-sphere.com/blog/index.php/archives/258

Gratuitous linking is so bad, I know.

it is sort of fun in a trainwreck sort of way, but in the end we don't know that much and won't until Fitzgerald makes his report (and even then we may not know everything).

We also do not know just how much Rove knew about Plame's resume.

She was pulled from her covert position in 1997-it is possible that Rove was unaware that she had ever been a covert operative.

Also, we need to remember that all these reporters were also using sources from the CIA, and we don't know who those sources were or what they were saying about Plame and Wilson's trip.

I really think the 4th and 5th "Why's" got me into my most conspiracy-theory minded mode.  I know conspiracy theories are frowned upon on this side of the moat, so let me just say up front: This is rank, unsupported, unjustified speculation for fun only.

So with that said, let's look at the following factors: The Protected Source is someone who

1. knows Wilson and Plame
   
   
2. knows lots of reporters
   
   
3. has enough juice to get high-and-mighty media types to pay attention
   
   
4. has a well-established NYT reporter willing to go to prison rather than expose his/her identity

Now, consider that based on what has been reported about Plame's identity and employer being an open secret in Washington's elite circles, and that Plame's "covert status" is very much under question, there may have been no crime committed.

So... the danger to the Protected Source may not be criminal liability, but a political one.

These combine to point to perhaps a Patron Saint of the Democratic Party, rather than a simple political operative who can, in all honesty, be sacrificed, especially if the damage is political and not criminal in nature.  From this standpoint the Paul Begalas and Sandy Burgers of the world don't really seem to fit.

Bill and particularly Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, do fit rather perfectly.  They know Wilson and Plame, know lots of reporters, have more juice than Minute Maid, are most certainly the kinds of people that Judith Miller would absolutely go to jail to protect, and who would face serious political damage from this kerfuffle, even if no criminal liability attaches.

Joe Wilson was on Clinton's National Security Council after all, and Valerie Plame met Wilson in 1997 when she was a covert CIA operative.  The Clintons were in a position to know that Plame was a CIA operations officer, especially as she was married to a man that Bill appointed to the NSC.

If they knew, or had heard through sources at (let's say) Time, which knew from Matt Cooper that Rove did mention "Wilson's wife", they might have calculated that the blowback from the media coverage would have taken Karl Rove the Architect out of what was sure to be a contentious presidential election in 2004.

I know this is all pure bunk until the Fitzgerald investigation gets to the bottom of the affair, but in all seriousness, ask yourself these questions:

• If no crime has been committed, who stands to lose big from being named as Miller's source?
  
• Who would let Miller go to jail rather than coming forth and stating, "I'm the Source"?
  
• Who is important enough that Miller would go to jail rather than coming forth and naming names? (Note that the naming of names would be to the secret grand jury, not to the media at large.)

Speculation, but fun speculation nonetheless.

-TS

And it was posted on Powerline.

Check the updates on my post

http://strata-sphere.com/blog/index.php/archives/258

Maybe I should at least cut a hole in my tinfoil hat to let some air in but, just for fun, let's imagine the cosmic justice in this:

Plame, Wilson and Miller are discussing what they believe to be flaws in administration actions; Plame gets her husband to go public with exaggerated or downright falsified data, knowing that the real memos are classified and won't be made public, believing that her identity won't be connected due to secrecy.  The Kerry campaign helps get publicity for the Wilson claims, and all goes as planned, except that Rove gets Plame's name into the picture.

They believe they can capitalize on the leak and screw Rove, the evil genius, at the same time that they smear the administration as liars.  All goes well, until a special prosecutor gets named and starts looking beyond the initial leak and starts asking those dumb why questions of Nick's.  

Now, Miller is in jail because she can't fink on Plame, Wilson has been discredited, and it looks as if the whole house of cards may fold if the prosecutor puts it all together.  If the evil genius walks away from this, and Plame, Wilson, and Miller take heat, the lefties of the world will spontaneously combust.

Of course, all this is just speculation from flyover country and my sources are beaming down from space.  But if any or all of it is true, I would certainly enjoy watching this play out.

If you assume that a person who has dedicated their life to a career would be willing to throw it away to score some political points I guess Occam's Razro could apply.

I generally assume people are acting out of self-interest over political zealotry

sometime in 1999-2000.  We had ours 9/99 and I can tell you she was not working on anything for the CIA for at least 12 months....

but I can't reveal my sources. :P

Another interesting tidbit that has not been explored here, (in re: did Rove know that Plame was undercover) is the alleged phone call he made to Chris Matthews shortly after the Novak article, stating that "Wilson's wife is fair game."

While speculation, it seems to be the comment of someone who knew that discussing Plame may have had some unsavory legal ramifications-- that is until her status at the CIA became public knowledge via Novak.  What else are we to make of Rove calling her "fair game" (assuming that Matthews' account is correct)?

This White House has let the liberals and the media walk full face into their own mistakes.  They let Rather gut himself on his fake memos, they let Daschle implode himself on the Iraq war, Durbin on GITMO and Kennedy on Abhu Ghraib...

They give out rope as long as they want to, because in the end they know the answers and they will not hurt them.

Compare that to the early resignation of the Treasury secretary when his mouth was not working unison with the Bush plans...

If Rove was a problem he would be gone.  6 years people have watched this administration sukker punch the left time and time again and still few have figured it out yet.

Maybe it is simpler than that.

Maybe the other source is Jayson Blair, and NYT and Miller would rather rot in jail than admit they fouled up with him again.

with releasing classified information if he has broken the law as you said?  

You seem to have a real inside track on the machinations of the CIA and what is and isn't classified.

Simple, she was fair game because her identity was well known AND Plame and Wilson are the targets of the criminal investigation.

It's all right there in front for everyone to see if they cared to look past Rove.

What do you think the grand jury is doing?

Prosecutors take their jobs seriously and Fitzgerald does not seem to be the kind to play around with marginal stuff.  First we stipulate that Plame's identity was not the big secret, so if the crime was outing her then end of Grand Jury.

But wait, the grand jury is still on!  And McClellan and Rove and Bush are GLADLY taking the heat from the media UNTIL the grand jury determines the final outcome.  

Miller is in jail, but she has no source to cover since Plame's identity was out and Rove is out....

OK, what is left to investigate.

Yeah, it will be fun to watch if true. And this is all speculation.  But it fits ALL the facts we have in front of us.  And as Holmes said (I think): once all other options have been eliminated, what remains - however improbably - must be the answer.

that the Grand Jury has subpoened these journalist plus various White House staffers because they are looking for evidence that the information that Wilson PUBLISHED IN THE NEW YORK TIMES was classified?  

Ummmm, ok.  

that shows that his wife sent him on the trip and by what authority?

Start reading about page 46.

the same thing as sending or authorizing.

Until you get to the part where they talk about the "this crazy report" memo.

Not sure how that shows that she authorized the trip.

Maybe I should at least cut a hole in my tinfoil hat to let some air in but, just for fun, let's imagine the cosmic justice in this:

Plame, Wilson and Miller are discussing what they believe to be flaws in administration actions; Plame gets her husband to go public with exaggerated or downright falsified data, knowing that the real memos are classified and won't be made public, believing that her identity won't be connected due to secrecy.  The Kerry campaign helps get publicity for the Wilson claims, and all goes as planned, except that Rove gets Plame's name into the picture.

Kerry Campaign? In July 2003?

The Senate Committee has her memo on the subject.

Google is easy to use.