Plame: ‘It was not common knowledge on the Georgetown cocktail circuit’

The Plame scandal has always been a tough one for the right to defend. The White House exposed the identity of an undercover [tag]CIA[/tag] agent, on purpose, during a time of war. Any way you slice it, that’s a pretty wretched thing to do, especially for a group of people who claim the high ground when it comes to national security.

Conservative cognitive dissonance being what it is, the right insisted, repeatedly and shamelessly, that the leaks were harmless and inconsequential — because Valerie Plame, they said, wasn’t really an undercover CIA agent.

This morning, Valerie [tag]Plame[/tag] Wilson explained to the House Government and Oversight Committee that she was, in fact, a covert CIA officer before administration officials leaked her name and identity.

“In the run-up to the war with Iraq, I worked in the Counterproliferation Division of the CIA, still as a covert officer whose affiliation with the CIA was classified,” Plame sad in her opening testimony.

She added, “While I helped to manage and run secret worldwide operations against this WMD target from CIA headquarters in Washington, I also traveled to foreign countries on secret missions to find vital intelligence.”

Faiz compiled a list of just the recent high-profile conservatives who justified the Plame leak by arguing she wasn’t covert.

* Washington Post editorial: “The trial has provided…no evidence that she was, in fact, covert.” [Washingotn Post, 3/7/07]

* Mort Kondracke: “I frankly don’t think since Valerie Plame was not a covert officer that there was a crime here.” [Fox, 3/9/07]

* Sean Hannity: “She did not meet the criteria, in any way, shape, matter or form as a covert agent.” [Fox, 3/6/07]

* Robert Novak: “No evidence that she was a covert agent was ever presented to the jury.” [Fox, 3/6/07]

* Brit Hume: “Whether the woman was covert, Valerie Plame was covert within the meaning of the law, remains at this point, still unclear. Unlikely she was.” [Fox, 3/6/07]

I’m sure they’ll rush to correct the record now.

Here’s Valerie Plame Wilson’s opening statement. [updated]

“Good morning, Mr. Chairman, and members of the Committee. My name is Valerie Plame Wilson and I am honored to have been invited to testify under oath before the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform on the critical issue of safeguarding classified information. I’m grateful for this opportunity to set the record straight. I’ve served the United States loyally and to the best of my ability as a covert operations officer for the Central Intelligence Agency. I worked on behalf of the national security of our country, on behalf of the people of the United States until my name and true affiliation were exposed in the national media on July 14, 2003, after a leak by administration officials. Today, I can tell this Committee even more.

“In the run-up to the war with Iraq, I worked in the Counter Proliferation Division of the CIA, still as a covert officer, whose affiliation with the CIA was classified. I raced to discover solid intelligence for senior policy makers on Iraq’s presumed weapons of mass destruction programs. While I helped to manage and run secret worldwide operations against this WMD target from CIA headquarters in Washington, I also traveled to foreign countries on secret missions to find vital intelligence.

“I love my career because I love my country. I was proud of the serious responsibilities entrusted to me as a CIA covert operations officer. And I was dedicated to this work. It was not common knowledge on the Georgetown cocktail circuit, that everyone knew where I worked. But all of my efforts on behalf of the national security of the United States, all of my training, all of the value of my years of service were abruptly ended when my name and identity were exposed irresponsibly.

“In the course of the trial of Vice President Cheney’s former Chief of Staff, Scooter Libby, I was shocked at the evidence that emerged. My name and identity were carelessly and recklessly abused by senior government officials in both the White House and the State Department. All of them understood that I worked for the CIA, and having signed oaths to protect national security secrets, they should have been diligent in protecting me and every CIA officer. The CIA took great lengths to protect all of its employees, provided at significant taxpayer expense, painstakingly devised creative covers for its most sensitive staffers. The harm that is done when a CIA cover is blown is grave, but I can’t provide details beyond that in this public hearing. But the concept is obvious. Not only have breaches of national security endangered CIA officers, it has jeopardized, even destroyed entire networks of foreign agents, who in turn risk their own lives and those of their families to provide the United States with needed intelligence. Lives are literally at stake. Every single one of my former CIA collegues, my fellow covert officers, to analysts to technical operations officers, even the secretaries, understand the vulnerabilities of our officers and recognize that the travesty of what happened to me could happen to them.

“We in the CIA always know that we might be exposed and threatened by foreign enemies. It was a terrible irony that administration officials were the ones who destroyed my cover. Furthermore, testimony in the criminal trial of Vice President Cheney’s former Chief of Staff, who has now been convicted of serious crimes, indicates that my exposure arose from purely political motives. Within the CIA, it is essential that all intelligence be evaluated on the basis of its merits and actual credibility. National security depends upon it. The tradecraft of intelligence is not a product of speculation. I feel passionately as an intelligence professional about the creeping, insidious politicizing of our intelligence process. All intelligence professionals are dedicated to the ideal that they would rather be fired on the spot than distort the facts to fit a political view. Any political view or any ideology. As our intelligence agencies go through reorganizations and experience the painful aspects of change, and our country faces profound challenges, injecting partisanship or ideology into the equation makes effective and accurate intelligence that much more difficult to develop. Politics and ideology must be stripped completely from our intelligence services or the consequences will be even more severe than they have been and our country placed in even greater danger. It is imperative for any President to be able to make decisions based on intelligence that is unbiased. The Libby trial and the events leading to the Iraq War highlight the urgent need to restore the highest professional standards to intelligence collection and analysis and the protection of our officers and operations. The Congress has a Constitutional duty to defend our national security and that includes safeguarding our intelligence. That is why I am grateful for this opportunity to appear before this Committee today and to assist in its important work.

“Thank you and I welcome any questions.”

I’ll have more later, but let me just say now that she is an excellent witness. The networks are ignoring today’s hearing, but it’s on C-SPAN (which is running a feed online).

“The networks are ignoring today’s hearing”

Of course they are. Valerie is an inconvenient fact that they can not manipulate or spin away. Why they are doing so?

Here it is:

Corporation Rules (remarkably similar to Cheney’s rules):
1) He (it’s almost always a he) who has the gold makes the rules
2) The corporation is never wrong even when it is.
3) When the facts show otherwise. See Rules 1) and 2).

  • I’m sure they’ll rush to correct the record now.

    Who will be the first to accuse Plame of lying under oath about her status and call for an independent prosecutor?

  • “The networks are ignoring toeay’s hearing” – even NPR is ignoring it. You don’t think our “defenders of the republic” might be a little shitfaced that they swallowed in public the way they did and don’t want to remind people? Huh? Maybe? Ya think?!

  • Ironically, the news department of my local Fox affiliate channel has been running significant coverage of the Plame hearing all morning and even has video highlights posted on their website:

    http://www.ktvu.com/index.html

    They also have an interesting story about how Zsa Zsa Gabor’s husband is suing Bill O’Reilly for calling him a fraud.

    http://www.ktvu.com/hollywood-vine/index.html

    Just goes to show that all Fox channels are not like Fox News. How refreshing is that? 🙂

  • I probably should have said, “Just goes to show that not all Fox channels are like Fox News.”

    Makes more sense that way, I think.

  • Who will be the first to accuse Plame of lying under oath about her status and call for an independent prosecutor?

    And who will be the first to ask “Why does Valerie Plame hate America?”

  • “The networks are ignoring today’s hearing”

    Are you serious.?????…

    Yeah liberal media my ass…..

    I guess Repubs are going to say she lied under oath…but according to them lying under oath is no big deal if you are Republican like Scooter Libby or Alberto Gonzales, right

  • Michael Hayden also confirmed to the committee she was covert.

    So basically the 72%ers have pitched a shut-out on Plamegate. There is not a single winger talking point worth resurrecting or defending.

  • The Los Angeles based Stephanie Miller Show (AM 1090 Seattle) broke into its regular programming to air Plame’s remarks live. I was so captiivated by listening to her that I couldn’t turn away to see how anybody else was handling it. I’m always so glad that I never rely on TeeVee for news (except Jon Stewart, of course).

  • I had CSpan on while working and from what I saw of Plame, she was a spectacular witness. Answered in as calm, poised manner as one could possibly do, yet communicated that the whole affair was outrageous and dangerous.

    Second witness is the director of the WH security office who has now admitted multiple times that the WH conducted NO investigation of its own into the security breaches surrounding the Plame leak — and still hasn’t. He’s getting hammered and is not smiling.

  • Here’s how the conservatives will report on it:

    “It was . . . common knowledge on the Georgetown cocktail circuit, that everyone knew where I worked.”

    Clever use of the veto pen!

  • The way I’ve seen it spun (from a troll at ThinkProgress who probably got the blast fax from Rove) is interesting:

    Your name, Valerie Plame, was listed in Who’s Who in America from 1999 through 2005, under your husband’s listing? [sic] Did you seek special permission from the CIA to be included in that entry?

    When did you first inform Joe Wilson that you worked for the CIA?

    When you learned that your husband had included your name in his bio for the EPIC Iraq forum, did you make a report that your identity had been compromised?

    At the time of the alleged disclosure by Richard Armitage that you worked at the agency, your husband was working for the Kerry campaign, correct?

    There’s quite a few of those over there, but as usual, NONE OF THEM HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE TOPIC AT HAND. It’s all just more smoke and mirrors designed to hide the fact the Bush administration, once again, put politics over national security.

  • As Ed @ 8 points out, Waxman’s opening statement stating that Plame was covert was vetted by the CIA. In essense, the CIA confirms that she had covert status when outed. The wingers, on the other hand, are still claiming that she wasn’t. At least Rush is and I would bet the house that Teonsing (sp?) will also.

  • Truly lame AP wire article spins for Republicans:

    Plame also repeatedly described herself as a covert operative, a term that has multiple meanings. Plame said she worked undercover and traveled abroad on secret missions for the CIA.
    But the word “covert” also has a legal definition requiring recent foreign service and active efforts to keep someone’s identity secret. Critics of Fitzgerald’s investigation said Plame did not meet that definition for several reasons and said that’s why nobody was charged with the leak.

    Plame’s testimony today definitively debunked those accusations by the unnamed “critics.”

  • Ms. Plame’s appearence is most worthy to all who are truly American patriots. To those others, (you know, America haters such as Hannity and others), Ms. Plame is a threat to their whim and caprice. There will be no correction of the record by any of these ne’erdowells. They are truly incapable of forthrightly accepting their wrongheaded thoughts and beliefs. -Kevo

  • In fact, the point I forgot to make in #16: Plame’s appearance gives the talkinghead morons a convenient straw argument that all of this dust up is literally a he said/she said news item. How convenient for them. -Kevo

  • Wow, that troll post quoted by Mark D. makes my head spin. Do people like that actually think? (and I use that term loosely.) Are they able to buy food for themselves, and conduct normal life? How can they figure out how to put their pants on, when their logic is so broken?

    It’s not the name Valerie Plame, or her being Joe Wilson’s wife, that mattered, it was her connection with the CIA!

    It was, logically, to the benefit of her role as a covert employee, that she have a full-featured and public life, in Who’s Who and her husband’s bio, NOT connected to the CIA. She was supposed to be known, just not as a CIA employee.

    That’s friggin’ obvious, isn’t it? I mean, if you’re not devoutly (or cynically) devoted to defending the administration?

  • Rove and Cheney undermined the security of the United States.

    They should lose their security clearances and their ability to work for the Federal Government.

    Nothing else matters.

    You’ll note that Richard Armitage doesn’t work for the Government anymore.

  • I agree with Mark D’s point that a huge part of the Plame issue is that the righties can’t get the concept of hiding in plain sight. That part of her cover also integrated with her personal life as wife of an ambassador allowed her to easily move in circles others could not and allow her access to places that other less obvious people would have arroused suspicion. It’s quite brilliant to have a woman that could be seen so openly seen yet in reality be a covert operative. After all, what draws more suspicion, someone sneaking around in the bushes or someone obviously walking down the street?

    And the media, being an integral part of the smear, may not want to draw attention to a scandal in which it was in ways both knowledgeable and unwitting accomplice to a crime. Not covering the hearing means the media is engaged in a cover-up of its own.

  • “The networks are ignoring today’s hearing”

    A search at news.yahoo.com finds CNN, ABC, CBS, and Fox showing stories on her testimony in the first 30 hits. In what sense are the networks ignoring the story?

  • Just watched Victoria Toensing spending about a hald an hour blaming the CIA and repeating over and over “She wasn’t covert under the law.” It was fun to watch Waxman tear her a new one.

  • lib4,

    I guess Repubs are going to say she lied under oath…but according to them lying under oath is no big deal if you are Republican like Scooter Libby…

    brilliant. ‘cue up the quotes ’cause we’re going to need them.

  • Wolf Blitzer was also spewing the lie, uh line that “some say that Plame was not covert.”

    What a douche bag. Think how the righies would scream if Al Gore did this and the agent was a *man.*

  • Valerie Plame Wilson rocks … and I have to laugh at the stupid Republicans and Talking Heads who said Ms. Wilson wasn’t covert. After the vice president of United States approved the outing a COVERT CIA agent, then, yes, she no longer was covert, you idiots!!!!

  • Comments are closed.