BLITZER: But she hadn’t been a clandestine officer for some time before that?

Once the CIA filed a criminal referral and that fact was disclosed to the public, the fact that she was a NOC at the time Novak wrote his piece was on public record. But when she became did not enter the public record immediately. In between the time that the NOC status was disclosed and other biographical details became public record, Wilson might be said to have disclosed classified information had he answered a question like Blitzer’s. Indeed, only he and Plame know the details of the agreement they have with the CIA on what they may and may not talk about. Furthermore, the agreement as to what is public record and what is not has almost certainly evolved as more material has come out.

By the time of the Blitzer interview, the Plame biography was out there, and was probably on the public record. However, people who hold security clearances are very careful about unscripted discussions and reflexively dodge questions that people who don’t hold security clearances may think are innocuous. I am pretty certain he could have answered the question without disclosing confidential information. But he may have sensed a trap that could have resulted in disclosure.

So, why Wilson chose to answer Blitzer as he did is a matter of speculation. Basically, nothing is certain except that Wilson has been more or less cautious depending on the circumstances. That may have a lot to do with how well events are scripted and whether inadvertent disclosures can be fixed by an editor before going nationwide. Maybe not.

By looking for minor dissonances in Wilson’s story while ignoring gross dishonesty by the White House, you are grasping at straws while timbers are crashing down on your head.

…
No Apparent Violation Of The Identities Protection Act
..

Charles: Uh… MDP. By the time of the Vanity Fair interview, the CIA had confirmed that Plame had been covert by filing a criminal complaint with the Department of Justice.

modus potus wrote that, “[u]nder law, Wilson couldn’t say” whether Plame was a covert agent. I responded with the question about Vanity Fair because Wilson confirmed precisely this information to the magazine. I’m not saying Wilson did anything wrong in speaking to VF. I am saying that his selective reticence is suspcious.

And maybe you’re full of shit, mdp. Or rather, maybe you were not full of shit until the day you received your GOP talking points enema.

By the time of the Vanity Fair interview, the CIA had confirmed that Plame had been covert by filing a criminal complaint with the Department of Justice.

Right up to the day that Novak blew her cover.

The attempt to pretend that Plame’s NOC status was not destroyed by the Novak article is a morally bankrupt argument. It serves only to try to save criminals from the lash of justice.

Why was Wilson willing to confirm to Vanity Fair that Plame was a covert operative in the 1997?

At the time, Wilson was based in Stuttgart, serving as the political adviser to George Joulwan, the U.S. general in charge of the European command; Plame was based in Brussels. Meeting in Paris, London, and Brussels, they got very serious very quickly. On the third or fourth date, he says, they were in the middle of a “heavy make-out” session when she said she had something to tell him. She was very conflicted and very nervous, thinking of everything that had gone into getting her to that point, such as money and training.

She was, she explained, undercover in the C.I.A. “It did nothing to dampen my ardor,” he says. “My only question was: Is your name really Valerie?”

Under law, Wilson couldn’t say. As someone who’s held security clearances, it was drilled into me that even if classified information was revealed on the front page of the New York Times, it was neither to be confirmed or denied until I had determined that the classifying authority had de-classified it.

Kevin Donoghue: MDP, isn’t that rather an obvious statement? What about the day before?

Wilson refuses to say. Maybe he wants to leave the misimpression that she was a covert agent until the moment Novak’s column appeared. Since the entire world now knows she worked for the CIA, why is he being coy about her status at the time?

I imagine Rove trying to encourage the kind of talking points that have come out now but the line is so weak that the journalists informed only picked up on the secret information aspect causing attention of entirely the wrong sort.

As an act of revenge it seems rather odd. She wasn’t personally endagered. I can imagine that she is very annoyed but it doesn’t seem like the kind of thing that would spring to mind as revenge. I mean it makes the couple look like the parents in Spy Kids.

This is not meant to be any kind of apologia, it just seems more likely to me.

However, that doesn’t mean he is out of trouble in the least. He can still face espionage charges, and charges stemming from violating his NDA. Both charges dissociate the requirement of KNOWINGLY divulging classified information.

Frankly they are pretty much airtight compared to the Intelligence Identities Protection Act. VP’s covert status is null, only her classified status matters. (which was clearly secret). It doesn’t allow for negligent disclosure or divulgement of “well-known” classified information, nor does it allow for “confirmation” of classified information.

Which..as far as I can tell, destroys the defense
his actions.

Why don’t you peddle your lunatic right-wing up-is-down traitorous horseshit somewhere else. You may have taken leave of your senses but most at CT have not. I suppose the CIA refers cases for investigation to the Jusice Dept. for kicks. Is being a traitor “politically convenient” for you MDP?

And no Ted, if you knew the first thing about this you’d realize MDP isn’t making a “fair point” but simply vomiting up the latest Republican smear against a CIA officer and her family. Spineless and pathetic.

cheers,—lj—

MDP, isn’t that rather an obvious statement? What about the day before?