Excerpt of The Departure by Michael Parker

  HOME

Wednesday, November 12, 2003

What Has Happened to the CIA Operative Leak Investigation?

It is the twelfth day of November and I have not heard any news about the Plame investigation since October 24th, the day after the FBI interviewed (according to the AP report) more than three dozen Bush Administration officials, including Rove and McClellan about the leak.   

A Google search for "Plame Leak Investigation" shows an article printed in the Seattle Post Intelligencer on October 29th, the title of which seems quite revealing, " Secrecy restrictions on leak investigation leave out FBI official."  But when I click the link to read the story, I receive an error from the paper saying that the article does not exist.  When I complete a search in the archives for this article, I get the same error.  If I query the archives for "Valerie Plame," which is included in the Google's description of the article, I get a list of other articles except this one.  Is this not strange?

I did find an interview with Wilson on October 31 by LA Weekly titled Unfair Game. I found the responses to the last two questions noteworthy:

Q: Do you think John Ashcroft should recuse himself from the investigation?

WILSON: At a minimum. I find it objectionable that Ashcroft is taking daily briefings from the head of the criminal_prosecution division on this, an ongoing investigation, given the nature of his previous relationships with Mr. Rove and others in the White House.

Q: Are you looking forward to getting out of this debate?

WILSON: There are those who try to make the argument that Im just a publicity seeker. I didnt get back into this debate until I felt that the neoconservative movement was going to take our country into war without really understanding what the potential consequences were. I felt I had some experience, and I had some informed judgments that would add balance to this debate. The rest of this, this whole Niger business, was as a consequence of my government lying. I did not seek to have my name attached to this part of it, but it is what it is, and eventually Im sure that I will go back to my private life, which has been in complete upheaval.

That said, it does seem to me that this goes to the very essence of what we are as a people and as a political society. I think that this government has been the most reckless and the most dangerous of any government in the 30 years that Ive been around Washington, and I have every intention of using the notoriety that I have in a way that encourages people to take back their democracy.

I found another noteworthy interview with Wilson on November  Mens News Daily out of California. I liked the following questions and replies: 

TN: Regarding the revelation of your wife as a CIA operative, do you think Karl Rove was behind the leak?

Wilson: Scott McClellan has admitted that Karl Rove spoke about it to the press after the leak took place. Now the only thing that we're disputing now with these guys is whether or not he used the term "fair game" or not. Now my contemporaneous notes from a journalist who called me say that that is precisely the term he used. My credibility, my batting average with this administration on truthfulness is about 3 for 3 so far.

TN: But the question again: Is Karl Rove the leaker?

Wilson: I don't know the name of the leaker. I will say this: the CIA is an executive branch agency that reports to the President of the United States. The act of leaking the name of a national security asset to the press was a political act. There is a political office that is attached to the office of the President of the United States. That office is headed by Karl Rove.

It is a useful place to start asking questions. Now, nobody has told me the name of the leaker or who authorized the leak. I did not know until I saw the Washington Post article that there were apparently two waves. There was the wave of the leak, two by six, two leakers to six journalists. And then there was a subsequent wave when Karl Rove and perhaps the communications office were pushing the story.

TN: Novak says it wasn't the White House.

Wilson: Well I don't care. Novak has changed his story so much that it's hard for me to understand what he is talking about. He also says that he isn't one of the six, but that issue is somewhere between Novak and the Washington Post and the person who leaked. I can tell you only that Novak called me before he wrote his story asking for a confirmation, and he confirmed to me after he wrote the story that there were two senior administration officials who provided the information to him. And I can tell in the week after his story appeared, I was getting calls from reputable members of the press saying that the White House was pushing the story.

TN: Including?

Wilson: Including my favorite, a respected journalist calling me up, and saying, "I just got off the phone with Karl Rove, he tells me your wife is fair game."

TN: Any names attached to these journalists?

Wilson:Well the only one that I have actually used is Andrea Mitchell and that was in the second wave. The other two, one was a producer, and I had not used his name before, and I will not use it now. The third one is a fellow who me he was going to prepare to confirm it but he then sort of went back on that, so I keep his name private as well.

TN: Is that the basis for the "frog-march" remarks?

Wilson: Well the "frog-march" remark, the basis for that of course is the telephone call saying that "your wife is fair game." Absolutely.

TN: What do you think he meant by "fair game"?

Wilson: That it was okay to go ahead and drag my wife out into the public square and administer a beating, to "slime" her as they say, or use her to in somehow discredit me.

****

TN: From your perspective, your wife indeed was a covert operative at the time of the disclosure of her name to Robert Novak?

Wilson: It's not really from my perspective and remember this is not a crime that has been committed against my wife or against me. If there was a crime, it was committed against our country. The CIA has referred the matter to the Justice Department for further investigation, I don't believe that's a frivolous referral.

TN: If it's determined that in fact there was no leak, that no crime was committed, are you prepared to take back some of the things you've said?

Wilson: Well, actually what I have said is that I would support the investigation, and the investigation will turn up what the investigation turns up. And if there is anything to take back in all of this, it would only be the handcuffs part of the frog-marching out of the White House. Because irrespective of whether or not the Justice Department determines that there was a crime committed and there is prosecution of that crime, even in this bare-knuckles town of Washington, it is below the belt of politics to drag a family member out into the public square to administer a beating because you find yourself unable to adequately discredit her husband who is your adversary in this particular matter.

TN: So you don't blame Rove for the leak, you blame him for pushing the story and dragging your wife into the public square?

Wilson: It's not so much that I blame him, it's that my information which I have no reason to disbelieve and every reason to believe, particularly since Mr. Rove has now acknowledged through Mr. McClellan that he in fact did talk about my wife to members of the press, that the White House actually pushed this story.

Despite Wilson's attempts to keep the focus where it should be, (and I'm not suggesting that that was his intent in participating in these interviews), tragic copter crashes and explosions in Iraq; silly entertainment news and coverage about the mini-series on the Reagons, Jessica Lynch, and Elizabeth Smart; and coverage of two highly publized court cases, among other things, seem to have diverted people's attention from the importance of this investigation.  Is this investigation dead in the water?


10:26:05 PM   | COMMENT [] | TRACKBACK []

Blog banner taken from the oil painting "The Departure" (40"x 30") by Michael Parker, 1999.


November 2003
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
            1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30            
Oct   Dec

Click on one of the calendar days to read my journal posting for that day.

E-MAIL ME
Film Page

PREVIOUS POSTS


FAVORITE BLOGS
  

Archives

[Macro error: Can't call the script because the name "monthlyArchiveLinks" hasn't been defined.]
MUSIC REVIEWS

Mario Frangoulis
Sarah Brightman's 'Harem' Spectacular
Switchfoot: The Beautiful Letdown
The Reinvention of Madonna

NEWS
  Salon
  LiberalOasis
  New York Times
  Slate
  Tom Paine
  Mother Jones
  The Guardian
  CNN
  The Washington Post

  - Start your own blog
  Subscribe to this blog in   Radio:
Subscribe to "Michael Parker's Journal" in Radio UserLand.
Click to see the XML version of this web page.
Updated Salon Blogs

Salon Rankings


© Copyright 2005 Michael Parker. Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.
Last update: 3/31/2005; 7:41:06 PM.
Powered by