The New York Times ran an overview piece today about the Plame Game scandal, noting that the investigation has gone from casual and friendly to intense and serious.
[T]he investigation into who at the White House leaked the name of an undercover C.I.A. officer has become much more intense in the last few weeks. Some administration officials have been summoned for confrontational interviews. Current and former members of the White House’s communications and foreign policy teams have hired lawyers. At least a handful of White House aides have had to appear before a federal grand jury.
At the White House, the topic is rarely discussed openly among those who have already been drawn into the investigation and those who think they may be, people who have been questioned in the case said. The result, they said, is an information vacuum that is being filled to some extent by fear of what current or former colleagues may be telling investigators.
The article didn’t include any major new breakthroughs, but there’s one point that warrants attention. As the Times noted, Bush has directed the White House staff to “cooperate fully” with federal investigators involved with the probe.
At the same time, however, some White House officials have been asked to sign waivers that would free reporters from any confidentiality agreements they agreed on in the past. The Times explained that the signed statements are “apparently intended to deprive journalists who wrote about the leak an ability, if questioned or subpoenaed, to cite the need to protect anonymous sources.”
Despite Bush’s public statements about cooperation, many White House staffers are refusing to sign the statements as well as agreements that they will not disclose information about their discussions with investigators with other administration officials.
I can imagine that these staffers, some of whom are concerned about their involvement in a potential felony, may be hesitant about signing documents that could lead to the identity of the leakers. But it becomes increasingly difficult to believe that the White House is giving federal investigators its “full” cooperation if staffers are refusing to sign these statements that would advance the probe and help explain what, exactly, happened.
In fact, House Dems would like an explanation about why these aides are refusing to sign these statements. Reps. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) and John Conyers (D-Mich.) wrote to the president yesterday, noting that these refusals are “impeding the Justice Department’s investigation and are inconsistent with your directives to White House officials to cooperate with the investigation.” The lawmakers also ask Bush to explain “what steps [he] is taking to ensure that White House officials are complying with your directive to cooperate.”
Waxman and Conyers agreed that White House staffers have a Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination, but noted that the illegal leak of Valerie Plame’s name is a serious breach in national security.
“There is no constitutional right to have access to classified information or to be entrusted with the nation’s most sensitive security secrets,” the letter explains. “Individuals who receive access to the country’s most critical and highly-guarded secrets have an obligation to cooperate fully in investigations into security leaks.”
We’ll see if the White House responds quickly to the Waxman/Conyers letter. Somehow, I kind of doubt it.