"The Deadly Serious Crime Of Naming CIA Operatives"

Another Dean (John) knows a "cancer growing on the Presidency" when he sees it.

He did in 1973. Nixon was impeached in 1974.

He sees it now, thirty years later...but it's much worse in 2003.
2004. Yes, 2004. Just watch his drive.
Past is Prologue...

http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20030815.html

----
The Bush Administration Adopts a Worse-than-Nixonian Tactic:
The Deadly Serious Crime Of Naming CIA Operatives
By JOHN W. DEAN
----
Friday, Aug. 15, 2003

On July 14, in his syndicated column, Chicago Sun-Times journalist Robert Novak reported that Valerie Plame Wilson - the wife of former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, and mother of three-year-old twins - was a covert CIA agent. (She had been known to her friends as an "energy analyst at a private firm.")

Why was Novak able to learn this highly secret information? It turns out that he didn't have to dig for it. Rather, he has said, the "two senior Administration officials" he had cited as sources sought him out, eager to let him know. And in journalism, that phrase is a term of art reserved for a vice president, cabinet officers, and top White House officials.

On July 17, Time magazine published the same story, attributing it to "government officials." And on July 22, Newsday's Washington Bureau confirmed "that Valerie Plame ... works at the agency on weapons of mass destruction issues in an undercover capacity." More specifically, according to a "senior intelligence official," Newsday reported, she worked in the "Directorate of Operations undercover officer."

In other words, Wilson is/was a spy involved in the clandestine collection of foreign intelligence, covert operations and espionage. She is/was part of a elite corps, the best and brightest, an among those willing to take great risk for their country. Now she has herself been placed at great - and needless - risk.

more..

and Smirky an friends just smirk about it...
he- he- he- ha ha ha.
How cute,
just punish your political opponents by not only endangering their lives and ruining all hopes of a future career, but expose others undercover who are affiliated in vulnerable positions around the world.
Not to mention all the years of work--

-the cost of trust just blown?-- major--
The cost to U.S security? priceless-

-what about the "war on terraism"?

Another act of Treason for Shrubco.

That is chilling, and not so much as a yawn from the media.

These people act more and more like the thugs they are every day. They are not even trying to hide it at all anymore. Bless Dean for this article, it's nice to know someone is keeping this story alive. So everytime there's an administration change all the u.c. agents have to worry about having their covers blown. Lovely.

And they have put Wilson in the awful position of trying to get this crime prosecuted while still trying to protect his wife. It would not surprise me if he did slip up and forget to say theoretically, and they came after him for blowing her cover.

And I like the part where he said the media was more concerned about shareholders...they are totally tanking and of course it is OUR fault with because of cable and the internet, they just can't compete, poor things.

anyone in Congress doing anything about it? I would ask the same of Justice but, we know that's a waste of time. :grr::

Dean suggests the correct response is a grand jury or special prosecutor, although unlikely to happen with the Dicktator in charge.
It was probably him who did it!

another excerpt:

"Frankly, I am astounded that the President of the United States - whose father was once Director of the CIA - did not see fit to have his Press Secretary address this story with hard facts. Nor has he apparently called for an investigation - or even given Ambassador and Mrs. Wilson a Secret Service detail, to let the world know they will be protected.

This is the most vicious leak I have seen in over 40 years of government-watching. Failure to act to address it will reek of a cover-up or, at minimum, approval of the leak's occurrence - and an invitation to similar revenge upon Administration critics. "

wow

it is over a month since novak's column came out. google "valeria plame" on news and see what comes up.

how McClellan is treating all questions about this. Well, this and the long section about the laws covering this. Dean's articles usually get pretty wide distribution. This one in particular needs to be out there. It's keeping the story alive. Bravo!

not only would Wilson's wife be ruined, but any agent she had associated with or worked with in an under-cover capacity, would be as well. That could be quite a number of hard-working agents.......

Her career is over, tho hopefully not her life. However, she has a network of contacts and they are likely in peril, some of them at least. AND it's not impossible that some of them might try to off her.

Very, very bad juju. I'm hoping the intel community will sock it to Bush like they've never socked it to anybody. They've already been leaking like seives for months now anyway. Some of them definitely know "where the bodies are buried." I'm hoping they'll sing.

Eloriel

From the subject article:

Another applicable criminal statute is the Intelligence Identities Act, enacted in 1982. The law has been employed in the past. For instance, a low-level CIA clerk was convicted for sharing the identify of CIA employees with her boyfriend, when she was stationed in Ghana. She pled guilty and received a two-year jail sentence. (Other have also been charged with violations, but have pleaded to other counts of the indictment.)

The Act reaches outsiders who engage in "a pattern of activities" intended to reveal the identities of covert operatives (assuming such identities are not public information, which is virtually always the case).

But so far, there is no evidence that any journalist has engaged in such a pattern. Accepting Administration leaks - even repeatedly - should not count as a violation, for First Amendment reasons.

<snip>

I understand the dangers in letting my anger at these MF'ers in charge make me want to lash out at the whores who dutifully gushed (leaked is too polite a word) this woman's identity. I thought a lot about this and while I don't want it to be a slam dunk that a reporter who reveals someone's identity is a criminal, I would have thought there was some kind of standard that would say they should check with the CIA before revealing an agent's identity.

Remember that episode of Andy Grifith where Andy knew the guy who said he was an FBI agent was a fake when he let them take his picture. I have known since the 60's (grade school) that "secret agents" (FBI, CIA, KGB, ect.) have to stay secret.

I haven't found Novak's article, but all I've heard is that Novak said the White House said she was a CIA agent. Not that he let it slip in the context of a story. He passed on information he was given by the White House.

Shouldn't journalists have an obligation to think about the implications of what they publish? There are rules about verifying facts and sources and about revealing the identity of a minor or a rape victim. Shouldn't they be required to get another person to sign off on something like this? Someone like the agent, perhaps, or maybe the agent's supervisor?

If Novak had some potential risk in this he would be forced to reveal who the White House source is and why he felt compelled to publish what this person told him. Was he instructed to do so?

Is this claim of First Amendment protection law or opinion? The article only says it "should" not count as a violation for First Amendment reasons - not that it "doesn't" count.

Or am I wrong in my thinking on this?

You KNOW they will NOT let this stand..

I believe this is true in all of the alphabet agencies and

hope they don't take the whole country down with them, down much further

than they already have that is.

not the reporter. Think Pentagon Papers. The alternative would to be a very chilling effect on the press, if they could be prosecuted for publishing whatever the gov't doesn't want in print.