I know I’ve been obsessing over this story for a couple of months, but since it’s getting so little attention, I’m doing my best to keep the flame of controversy flickering.
Let’s recap again for those who are just joining us. The CIA sent Joseph Wilson to Niger last year to investigate claims that Iraq was trying to acquire yellowcake uranium for a nuclear weapons program. Wilson discovered the claim was bogus and issued a report to Bush administration officials, but the president proceeded to repeat the allegation, including in the State of the Union. Wilson came forward to explain that he had first-hand knowledge of the inaccuracy of the claim, kicking off a little scandal I like to call Niger-gate.
Almost immediately, the administration tried to diminish the story by attacking Wilson’s credibility. When that didn’t work, two unnamed “senior administration officials” told conservative newspaper columnist Robert Novak that Wilson’s wife, Valerie Plame, was involved at the CIA in sending Wilson to Niger in the first place. Though the claim was false, the administration outed Wilson’s wife as an undercover CIA agent in the process.
This, of course, raised a host of problems. First, the administration placed a CIA agent’s career in danger. Second, they jeopardized the safety of her contacts around the world. Third, it’s a felony to leak classified information, which this was.
So, who, exactly, was responsible for leaking the information to Novak? Novak isn’t saying. For his part, Joseph Wilson believes that Karl Rove was responsible, but he hasn’t produced any evidence to substantiate the claim.
In the meantime, the White House has made no apparent effort to find out who did tell Novak, and the national press has shown zero interest in getting to the bottom of this.
Yesterday, however, my ripple of hope reached the White House press corps. Someone finally asked White House press secretary Scott McClellan if there’s any truth to Wilson’s Rove accusation.
Slate’s Tim Noah, a personal fav of mine, noticed that McClellan received two direct questions about Wilson’s accusation at yesterday’s briefing. Here’s exactly what was said:
Unidentified reporter: On the Robert Novak-Joseph Wilson situation, Novak reported earlier this year quoting “anonymous government sources” telling him that Wilson’s wife was a CIA operative. Now, this is apparently a federal offense, to burn the cover [of] a CIA operative. Wilson now believes that the person who did this was Karl Rove. He’s quoted from a speech last month as saying, “At the end of the day, it’s of keen interest to me to see whether or not we can get Karl Rove frog-marched out of the White House in handcuffs.” Did Karl Rove tell that…
McClellan: I haven’t heard that. That’s just totally ridiculous. But we’ve already addressed this issue. If I could find out who anonymous people were, I would. I just said, it’s totally ridiculous.
Unidentified reporter: But did Karl Rove do it?
McClellan: I said, it’s totally ridiculous.
Putting aside my jubilation that someone finally followed up on this, let’s look at the substance of McClellan’s response.
First, the idea that “we’ve already addressed this issue” is completely wrong. A few questions were raised at a White House press briefing in July, but McClellan evaded the questions and refused to address the substance of the controversy. Besides, this is a new angle that hasn’t been addressed by the White House at all — a former ambassador who played an important role in the Niger-gate scandal has accused the president’s top political advisor of leaking classified information to a sympathetic journalist.
Second, it’s hilarious that McClellan would emphasize that he wishes he could identify “anonymous people.” That’s great, Scott, but the question wasn’t about an unnamed White House official, it was about Karl Rove. (McClellan obviously studied at the Ari Fleischer school of answering questions.)
Lastly, labeling the accusation “totally ridiculous” is an odd response since 10 seconds prior McClellan hadn’t even heard of the accusation. How does he know it’s ridiculous unless he goes to find out if it’s true?
Of course, I know McClellan can’t exactly say that. If in response to the question about Rove, he told the White House press corps “I’m not sure if my boss committed a felony by outing an undercover CIA agent but I’ll ask him and get back to you” the reporters would smell blood. As Tim Noah put it, McClellan knows to “deny damaging stuff well before you know whether it’s true.”
Nevertheless, McClellan didn’t answer the question. Wilson’s accusation still stands without a direct White House response. I’m delighted an enterprising reporter dared to bring this issue up yesterday, but I’m afraid the press corps still has some follow-up to do.
These questions still deserve answers.