For Bush, Effect of Investigation of C.I.A. Leak Case Is Uncertain
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82
X-Mailer: Yahoo Groups Message Poster
X-Originating-IP: 216.155.201.69
X-eGroups-Msg-Info: 1:12:0
X-Yahoo-Post-IP: 68.98.145.15
From: "David Bier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-Yahoo-Profile: bafsllc
Sender: osint@yahoogroups.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Mailing-List: list osint@yahoogroups.com; contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: mailing list osint@yahoogroups.com
List-Id: <osint.yahoogroups.com>
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2005 02:43:35 -0000
Subject: [osint] 
Reply-To: osint@yahoogroups.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

"So far the disclosures about the involvement of Karl Rove, among
others, have not exacted any substantial political price from the
administration. And nobody has suggested that the investigation
directly implicates the president.

Yet Mr. Bush has yet to address some uncomfortable questions that he
may not be able to evade indefinitely."

And Rove and Libby may find themselves indicted for obstruction of
justice and lying under oath if they can't reconcile differences
between their sworn testimony and the testimony given by journalists
that contradicts the Rove and Libby versions.  At that point, Bush43
may have to either fire them or apply his Texas twang to the phrase,
"I am not a crook."

David Bier

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/24/politics/24bush.html

July 24, 2005
For Bush, Effect of Investigation of C.I.A. Leak Case Is Uncertain
By RICHARD W. STEVENSON

WASHINGTON, July 23 - His former secretary of state, most of his
closest aides and a parade of other senior officials have testified to
a grand jury. His political strategist has emerged as a central figure
in the case, as has his vice president's chief of staff. His spokesman
has taken a pounding for making public statements about the matter
that now appear not to be accurate.

For all that, it is still not clear what the investigation into the
leak of a C.I.A. operative's identity will mean for President Bush. So
far the disclosures about the involvement of Karl Rove, among others,
have not exacted any substantial political price from the
administration. And nobody has suggested that the investigation
directly implicates the president.

Yet Mr. Bush has yet to address some uncomfortable questions that he
may not be able to evade indefinitely.

For starters, did Mr. Bush know in the fall of 2003, when he was
telling the public that no one wanted to get to the bottom of the case
more than he did, that Mr. Rove, his longtime strategist and senior
adviser, and I. Lewis Libby Jr., Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of
staff, had touched on the C.I.A. officer's identity in conversations
with journalists before the officer's name became public? If not, when
did they tell him, and what would the delay say in particular about
his relationship with Mr. Rove, whose career and Mr. Bush's have been
intertwined for decades?

Then there is the broader issue of whether Mr. Bush was aware of any
effort by his aides to use the C.I.A. officer's identity to undermine
the standing of her husband, a former diplomat who had publicly
accused the administration of twisting its prewar intelligence about
Iraq's nuclear program.

For the last several weeks, Mr. Bush and his spokesman, Scott
McClellan, have declined to address the leak in any substantive way,
citing the continuing federal criminal investigation.

But Democrats increasingly see an opportunity to raise questions about
Mr. Bush's credibility, and to reopen a debate about whether the White
House leveled with the nation about the urgency of going to war with
Iraq. And even some Republicans say Mr. Bush cannot assume that he
will escape from the investigation politically unscathed.

"Until all the facts come out, no one is really going to know who the
fickle finger of fate points at," said Tony Fabrizio, a Republican
pollster.

The case centers on how the name of a C.I.A. operative came to be
appear two years ago in a syndicated column by Robert D. Novak, who
identified her by her maiden name, Valerie Plame. The operative, who
is more usually known as Valerie Wilson, is married to Joseph C.
Wilson IV, a former diplomat who had publicly accused the
administration eight days before Mr. Novak's column of twisting some
of the intelligence used to justify going to war with Iraq. Under some
conditions, the disclosure of a covert intelligence agent's name can
be a federal crime.

The special prosecutor in the case, Patrick J. Fitzgerald, has kept a
tight curtain of secrecy around his investigation. But he spent more
than an hour in the Oval Office on June 24, 2004, interviewing Mr.
Bush about the case. Mr. Bush was not under oath, but he had his
personal lawyer for the case, James E. Sharp, with him.

Neither the White House nor the Justice Department has said what Mr.
Bush was asked about, but prosecutors do not lightly seek to put
questions directly to any president, suggesting that there was some
information that Mr. Fitzgerald felt he could get only from Mr. Bush.

Allan J. Lichtman, a presidential historian at American University in
Washington, said the lesson of recent history, for example in the
Iran-contra case under President Ronald Reagan, is that presidents
tend to know more than it might first appear about what is going on
within the White House.

"My presumption in presidential politics is that the president always
knows," Mr. Lichtman said. "But there are degrees of knowing. Reagan
said, keep the contras together body and soul. Did he know exactly
what Oliver North was doing? No, it doesn't mean he knew what every
subordinate is doing."

Although it is possible that other officials will turn out to have
played leading roles in the leak case, the subordinates whose actions
would appear to be of most interest to Mr. Bush right now are Mr. Rove
and Mr. Libby, who as Mr. Cheney's chief of staff had particular
reason to protect the vice president.

According to accounts by various people involved in the case, Mr. Rove
spoke in the days after Mr. Wilson went public with his criticism in
July 2003 to both of the first two reporters to disclose that Mr.
Wilson's wife worked for the C.I.A., Mr. Novak and Matthew Cooper of
Time. Mr. Cooper has said he also spoke about the case with Mr. Libby.

By September 2003, as a criminal investigation was getting under way,
Mr. McClellan was telling reporters that Mr. Rove had nothing to do
with the leak, saying he had checked with Mr. Rove about the topic.

Around the same time, the president was saying he had no idea who
might have been responsible. Asked by a reporter on Oct. 6, 2003,
whether the leak was retaliation for Mr. Wilson's criticism, Mr. Bush
replied: "I don't know who leaked the information, for starters. So
it's hard for me to answer that question until I find out the truth."

Asked the next day if he was confident that the leakers would be
found, Mr. Bush, alluding to the "two senior administration officials"
cited by Mr. Novak as his sources, replied: "I don't know if we're
going to find out the senior administration official. Now, this is a
large administration, and there's a lot of senior officials. I don't
have any idea. I'd like to. I want to know the truth."

Republicans said the relationship between Mr. Bush and Mr. Rove was so
deep and complex that it was hard to imagine the president cutting
ties with him barring an indictment.

"Can you survive being involved in something you probably shouldn't
have been involved in where you didn't break any laws?" Mr. Fabrizio
said. "Well, you probably can, especially if you are Karl."

Mr. Fabrizio said that even if Mr. Rove left the White House, he would
continue to consult with Mr. Bush "unless they put him in a tunnel."

Mr. McClellan and other White House officials have repeatedly declined
to answer when asked if Mr. Rove or Mr. Libby had told the president
by October 2003 that they had alluded to Ms. Wilson's identity months
earlier in their conversations with the journalists.

But Mr. Bush's political opponents say the president is in a box. In
their view, either Mr. Rove and Mr. Libby kept the president in the
dark about their actions, making them appear evasive at a time when
Mr. Bush was demanding that his staff cooperate fully with the
investigation, or Mr. Rove and Mr. Libby had told the president and he
was not forthcoming in his public statements about his knowledge of
their roles.

"We know that Karl Rove, through Scott McClellan, did not tell
Americans the truth," said Representative Rahm Emanuel, Democrat of
Illinois and a former top aide in the Clinton White House. "What's
important now is what Karl Rove told the president. Was it the truth,
or was it what he told Scott McClellan?"

There is a third option, that neither Mr. Rove nor Mr. Libby
considered their conversations with the journalists to have amounted
to leaking or confirming the information about Ms. Wilson. In that
case, they may have felt no need to inform the president, or they did
inform him and he shared their view that they had done nothing wrong.

Mr. Bush has also yet to answer any questions publicly about what if
anything he learned from aides about Mr. Wilson and Ms. Wilson in the
days after Mr. Wilson leveled his criticism of the administration in
an Op-Ed article in The New York Times on July 6, 2003.






--------------------------
Want to discuss this topic?  Head on over to our discussion list, [EMAIL 
PROTECTED]
--------------------------
Brooks Isoldi, editor
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

http://www.intellnet.org

  Post message: osint@yahoogroups.com
  Subscribe:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]


*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has 
not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a part of 
The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to OSINT 
YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the 
included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of 
intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods, 
techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other 
intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes 
only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material 
as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use 
this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' 
you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 


Reply via email to