CIA Leak Case

You can watch it live here. From the opening questions, I can kind of see how the Republicans are starting to frame this. They are going on the premise that Robert Novak leaked Plame's name. The question to these Republicans should be, "what was Robert Novak's security clearance at the time of the article?" We all know the answer to that - none. It just shows how far these Republicans are willing to go to distort the facts when our national security has been compromised and one of our spies has been outed. Why do they hate America so much?

McClellan has agreed to testify to Congress about the CIA leak case. I bet there are a ton of "oh shits" being heard around D.C. tonight.

Time to reopen that investigation now that Scott McClellan has admitted Bush authorized the leak of Valerie Plame's identity. I know what the right wing spin will be; "Well he's the President, he can declassify what he wants, when he wants", but them why the big investigation? Why not come out and say "I did and and I'm allowed to", instead of costing tax payers millions in this investigation?

When it looks like these missing emails may have altered other investigations then it is time for a criminal probe into it:

Apparent gaps in White House e-mail archives coincide with dates in late 2003 and early 2004 when the administration was struggling to deal with the CIA leak investigation and the possibility of a congressional probe into Iraq intelligence failures.

Here is where the Plame case may come into play in this:

Among the times for which e-mail may not have been archived from Vice President Dick Cheney's office are four days in early October 2003, just as a federal probe was beginning into the leak of Valerie Plame's CIA identity, an inquiry that eventually ensnared Cheney's chief of staff.

Pretty convenient that emails would happen to be missing from those four days, and Melanie Sloan seems to concur:

Even after Scooter got his "get out of jail free" card from Bush, the case continues to get more interesting. Scott McClellan is set to have his memoirs hit the shelves in April and it includes juicy information like this:

"I had unknowingly passed along false information. And five of the highest ranking officials in the administration were involved in my doing so: Rove, Libby, the vice President, the President's chief of staff, and the president himself."

So we now have someone who was very high up in the White House admitting involvement by the President in a case involving the ousting of a CIA agent. Of course the White House will start using the "disgruntled employee" line of defense, but perhaps it is time for Congress to seriously look into this matter. Or will we just set a precedent for committing treason in this country?

Just now being reported that a federal judge had thrown out Joe and Valerie Wilson's lawsuit against Cheney. More details as they come in. It sounds like some activist judge to me.

Josh found this article that appeared in USA Today less than 2 weeks ago:

The Supreme Court made it harder Thursday for most defendants to challenge their federal prison sentences.

Appeals courts that review prison terms imposed by trial judges may deem them reasonable if they fall within federal sentencing guidelines adopted in the mid-1980s, the high court said.

The justices upheld a 33-month sentence given to Victor Rita for perjury and making false statements. Rita is a 25-year military veteran and former civilian federal employee.

The prison term falls within the guidelines range and was upheld by the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, posing the question of whether sentences within the guidelines ordinarily will be considered reasonable.

So will Bush also commute the sentence of this guy? The cases are very similar. Perhaps the White House needs to be asked about this today.

Not a pardon, but rather he commuted the sentence. That means no jail for Scooter. Bush says he felt the punishment was too harsh. So is that saying that lying about a blow job is a worse crime than lying under oath regarding the outing of a CIA agent? It appears so.

Bush just handed the Democrats a great campaign talking point. Only 19% of the people polled believe Libby should have been pardoned (and this is essentially the same). Let's see how Congress reacts to this now.

UPDATE #1

The Muckraker has Bush's statement up. I wonder why he just released a statement and chose not to address the nation? Sounds like the White House knew this would cause a shit storm.

Oh - and if you are ever called before the court, or involved in a legal investigation, go ahead and lie. George Bush sez it's ok. (end sarcasm).

UPDATE #2

Apparently the White House has turned off their phone lines. Sounds like they don't want to listen to the people they work for.

UPDATE #3:

Daily Kos has the reactions up of Democrats here and here. Sounds like it is time for Congress to open a full investigation into the leak and pull Cheney and Bush in to testify. Or is a blow job still more serious?

Scooter's motion to stay out of jail during appeals has been denied. This will definatley put pressure on Bush to pardon him, as he will be in jail within the next 4-6 weeks.

(And let's not get into jokes about pickles being in Libby after he arrives at the big house!)

Last night the subject of pardoning Scooter Libby was brought up at the GOP debate. All the conservatives said they would. Sam Brownback went as far as to say that Clinton only had his law license revoked for perjury. How quickly we forget the entire impeachment thing. (Oh and one other thing Sen. Brownback. If perjury was the only charge, Libby may have received a lighter sentence. There were 3 other charges and they all involved obstructing justice into a criminal investigation regarding our national security. Maybe to Republicans blow jobs are far more important than national security, but the Democrats feel national security trumps marital indiscretion.)

So now we have all the wingnuts beating their pardon chests harder and louder. From the National Review to William Kristol, the calls for pardon are getting louder. As matter of fact, today's Washington Post says that "pardon is a topic to sensitive to mention" in the West Wing:

The sentence imposed on former White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby yesterday put President Bush in the position of making a decision he has tried to avoid for months: Trigger a fresh political storm by pardoning a convicted perjurer or let one of the early architects of his administration head to prison.

The prospect of a pardon has become so sensitive inside the West Wing that top aides have been kept out of the loop, and even Bush friends have been told not to bring it up with the president. In any debate, officials expect Vice President Cheney to favor a pardon, while other aides worry about the political consequences of stepping into a case that stems from the origins of the Iraq war and renewing questions about the truthfulness of the Bush administration.

The White House publicly sought to defer the matter again yesterday, saying that Bush is "not going to intervene" for now. But U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton indicated that he is not inclined to let Libby remain free pending appeals, which means the issue could confront Bush in a matter of weeks when, barring a judicial change of heart, Cheney's former chief of staff will have to trade his business suit for prison garb. Republicans inside and outside the administration said that would be the moment when Bush has to decide.

Just now breaking on MSNBC

Another Wingnut myth busted:

An unclassified summary of outed CIA officer Valerie Plame's employment history at the spy agency, disclosed for the first time today in a court filing by Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald, indicates that Plame was "covert" when her name became public in July 2003.

The summary is part of an attachment to Fitzgerald's memorandum to the court supporting his recommendation that I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Vice President Cheney's former top aide, spend 2-1/2 to 3 years in prison for obstructing the CIA leak investigation.

The nature of Plame's CIA employment never came up in Libby's perjury and obstruction of justice trial.

So will all the Malkins and Reynolds out there correct their past statements that Plame wasn't covert, or are they happy with attacking people who spend their lives trying to defend our nation?

The document dump from the Department of Justice has shown one very well-known name on the list of those to possibly be fired:

U.S. Attorney Patrick J. Fitzgerald was ranked among prosecutors who had "not distinguished themselves" on a Justice Department chart sent to the White House in March 2005, when he was in the midst of leading the CIA leak investigation that resulted in the perjury conviction of a vice presidential aide, administration officials said yesterday.

The ranking placed Fitzgerald below "strong U.S. Attorneys . . . who exhibited loyalty" to the administration but above "weak U.S. Attorneys who . . . chafed against Administration initiatives, etc.," according to Justice documents.

The chart was the first step in an effort to identify U.S. attorneys who should be removed. Two prosecutors who received the same ranking as Fitzgerald were later fired, documents show.

Now isn't it ironic that Fitzgerald was also on the short list of names to fire? No there isn't anything political here. One prosecutor who brought down a corrupt Republican congressman, Randy Cunningham, gets fired right after her investigation leads to indictments of the former third ranking person at the CIA. Now we have the man who successfully prosecuted Scooter Libby also on the list.

I wonder how Fitzgerald didn't "distinguish" himself? I guess this isn't distinguishing to the administration:

Fitzgerald also won the Attorney General's Award for Distinguished Service in 2002 under Ashcroft

Fitzgerald has been coined one of the best prosecutors in the nation. That was well before the Libby trial. He has brought down some major corruption within government. This should remove any doubt on the entire purge and prove these firings were political.

I am no lawyer, but this is really starting to sound like conspiracy and collusion to me. Perhaps it is time for the judicial and legislative branch to look more seriously into this.

He was going to get right to the bottom of it! Sure he was:

Dr. James Knodell, director of the Office of Security at the White House, told a congressional committee today that he was aware of no internal investigation or report into the leak of covert CIA agent Valerie Plame.

The White House had first opposed Knodell testifying but after a threat of a subpoena from the committee yesterday he was allowed to appear today.
Knodell testified that those who had participated in the leaking of classified information were required to attest to this and he was not aware that anyone, including Karl Rove, had done that.

He said that he had started at the White House in August 2004, a year after the leak, but his records show no evidence of a probe or report there: "I have no knowledge of any investigation in my office," he said

Hell why should they investigate? Bush knew damn good and well who leaked it and who directed it. Instead he wanted to put on this show of outrage and spend millions for Fitzgerald to investigate. Sounds like Congress now needs to investigate Bush further.

Sounds like there is still a chance other charges could be filed down the road, but not highly likely. It is great to hear the facts straight from Fitzgerald's mouth. The one big fact - Valerie Plame's identity was being protected by the CIA. This is the one the wingnuts will try to spin.