Skip to main content

What is at the heart of the Plame affair

Now that it is known that Karl Rove found out about Valerie Plame from a journalist and then spoke about that to a journalist, who heard it from ......well, we don't know that yet, but according to many of the different reports I've heard, it doesn't matter - it wasn't any secret anyway.

Then because Wilson just can't stand prosperity he gets on CNN and pretty much destroys the whole case by admitting his wife wasn't - and hadn't been for a while - a "covert operative" in the legal sense, thus no law was broken.

So where do we go from here?

If you have been following my posts you know I have this idea that this story from the beginning was not about the leak, but about a far greater story - one that almost seems like a Tom Clancy novel.

I've been on the phone all day to some old Army buds in Virginia (I'll let you guess), and I spoke to them "in the clear", so as to get what they were hearing "around the shop".

Here is what I'm gathering so far.

Back before the Iraq war, around 2002 there was a lot of scurrying around the CIA - specifically with those ops and other senior members who had a concern about the Administration's seeming march to war. They were not sold on "Regime Change", instead opting for more intel, sanctions, warnings, etc.

This is what Howard Fineman, as well as other writers and experts wrote about this as well. In short, there was some "bad vibes" between the Bush Administration and the CIA.

Now here is what isn't so clear. What, if any was Valerie Plame's involvement? That is, other than the known fact that she recommended her husband, Mr. Wilson - a known Administration critic - to go to Niger to investigate the claims that Saddam was after Nuclear materials. A report that Valerie Plame called "a crazy report..(sic)" As Fineman said in his article:

"What did Valerie Plame think of the seriousness of Saddam’s WMD capability? Sooner or later, we’ll find out—because it bears on what Wilson probably thought before he ever got to Niger to ask questions."

The real question is, why did she recommend her husband, who despite what has been reported, wasn't totally qualified for the job? Just Nepotism? Doing 'hubby' a favor - you know, "make me famous!" or was it some other reason.

Over at Captain's Quarters Blog, the Captain asks the quesion like this:

"Plame didn't just make an off-hand suggestion and then play hostess once. She repeatedly suggested Wilson for the job, wrote a memorandum requesting him for the mission, and then delivered the assignment to Wilson herself.

All this begs the question: why was Plame so set on using her husband for the job? Wilson told the SSIC that she had characterized the initial report of Iraq-Niger contacts as "crazy". After Wilson returned, he reported that the Iraqis had indeed tried to start trade talks in secret with Niger, and that the Nigerian PM believed that to be an effort to get yellowcake uranium. However, after the invasion of Iraq, Wilson started leaking a warped version to journalists such as Walter Pincus, also described in the SSIC report and determined to be false.

It looks like Plame wanted a specific result from the Niger investigation, and she selected the man who she felt would guarantee it."


This is where I find Howard Fineman's point interesting:

"What did Valerie Plame think of the seriousness of Saddam’s WMD capability? Sooner or later, we’ll find out—because it bears on what Wilson probably thought before he ever got to Niger to ask questions."Yeah, I think at this point we'd all like to know.

At this point, let me paint a picture for a minute, you know, throw some things out for thought:

"What IF there was a plot around 2002, within the CIA to discredit the report, and so ward the administration off it's war plan? We don't know. But it is strange that Valerie (who was a WMD expert), recommended her husband.

Well, if it was a 'plot' the plan didn't work, as we know the Administraton discounted much (if not all) the report, and invades Iraq anyway.

Just to digress a minute, the rejection of the report sort of blows "The Bush Administration cooked up intelligence", theory. The reason I say that is because it was Wilson himself who said that he was sent at the request of the Vice President, which of course wasn't true - and for good reason.

Why would Cheney want a known critic of the administration's position on Iraq policies to go on the trip when they knew what his predictable results would be? It would be then more than suspicious if that were the case, and then discount the data. It just doesn't make sense.

So with the "musing" done, I'll give you my "crazy" view of what might have happened .

Let's say that Valerie Plame was specifically involved (or recruited) in a plot to discredit the "yellow cake" report. She recommends her husband - possibly even briefing him on the results they desire and Wilson goes and comes back according to the Script. He says, "No yellow cake".

But the "plan" doesn't work.

So as the "storm" of controversy explodes over the lack of WMD, and the CIA comes under scrutiny, another plan is hatched. A delay tactic is lauched and Joesph Wilson again takes the point.

He writes a book, does interviews on TV talk shows, just to say "I told you so!" "They ignored my report"..."See?"

Then the Senate Intelligence Report comes out and Wilson is exposed as a liar.

So he's taken off the table (and John Kerry's website), and vanishes. In the meantime comes Robert Novak, his column and the famous leak of Valerie Plame's identity. Outraged democrats get the FBI to look into it, and then the CIA asks for an investigation. The President appoints a special prosecutor to look into it.

Then this week, as Rove becomes implicated, Wilson suddenly resurfaces, demanding Rove's head. Interestingly certain Democrats - namely Charles Schumer come forward with him, as well as other anti-war Senators and Congress members.

Then, just as quickly the NY Times basically clears Rove, and at the same time Wilson has talked too long and reveals (what we already knew) about his wife's true status with the CIA, he disappers again.

Now were are we?

Better yet - where is Valerie? A year ago she was all over the place, in Vanity Fair, etc. Today - no where to be found - at least not in print or on TV. No statement, nothing....curious.

So that's where I'm coming from at this point. More than a leak, and possibly a little treason involved. The further question at this point is what if any involvement were some members of our Government were involved? Again, I'm not accusing, but I find it intesting that Charles Schumer has turned up twice. Once to ask the FBI for an investigation and yesterday with Wilson. It's just curious.

Now with my crazy theory making over, the fact is that we simply aren't going to know everything until Fitzgerald finishes his investigation, which quite frankly because of it's length belies the fact that what he is finding is more than just what he started out to find.

Until then, I'm looking into my angle - you know, digging, scratching, shaking the bushes. I'll keep you updated.

Note: If you haven't already checked it out, go over to Captain's Quarters Blog and check out Ed. undressing of Mr. Wilson - bookmark it!









Filed under:

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Calling Mr. Fitzgerald?

**UPDATED AND BUMPED****

As I told you about in this post yesterday as a source confirmed to me that the Justice Department has launched a probe into the NSA leak. Mr. Risen, you are in trouble - prepare your defense. I told you so.

The White House will be announcing the probe at about 12:30pm. My source tells me that this probe will most likely result in another prosecutor being assigned as of course Fitzgerald is still busy/dizzy on the Plame/Game No-Leak. Additionally, other probes into other recent leaks such as the CIA 'prisons'leak is in the works as well. As I said, this is the NEW Bush - on the attack - it's no more Mr. Nice Guy!

About time! Also covering Michelle Malkin

*****End Update*********

UPDATE II: Looks like I owe my source big time as yet another tip comes true as the Washington Post is on the target list as well for the CIA Prison leak.

****End Update II*************************************

Update III: Via Fox: "The government has no legal right to…

Is the lid about to be blown off Able Danger?

Those who have been wishing for a full blown Able Danger investigation are about to get their wish. The "gate" has been unlocked.

9/11 Iraqi Connection

With Democrats calling for yet more investigations into pre-war intelligence, and Republicans like myself pushing back to help their 'sudden amnesia”, the growing stories of Able Danger and even China Gate, are beginning to make news.

The three main theories about why Able Danger hasn't gotten out of the "blog stage", are 1) To hide Clinton era responsibility for stopping the 9/11 attacks, and/or 2) To hide the truth behind China-Gate, or 3) The facts show that there in fact was a direct link between Iraq and 9/11.

Taking either one you can see why the Clinton worshipping MSM for the most part hasn't touched the story. Of the later point, Democrats, the MSM and even some of our investigations state that there was no 'direct' link between Iraq and 9/11. Say otherwise and the MSM will slice and di…

Able Danger - Pulling Back the Covers of the real Clinton Legacy

First, let's dispense with the bull crap. The meeting between Mohammed Atta and Iraqi Intelligence officer Al-Ani, on April 8th, 2001 happened.

Yet, just don't mention it to the MSM, becaue since May of 2002, the MSM declared an all out assault on the story. A meeting incidently, that the Czech government has to this date stood by.

Let's review a little history:

October 13, 2001: Story of the meeting is leaked from somewhere in the Czech foreign service.

yet.....

October 20, 2001: Ny Times, John Tagliabue writes a story citing other Czech officials said the meeting never took place.

so.....

October 26, 2001: Czech Minister of the Interior, Stanislav Gross has a press conference not only confirming the orginal report but giving further details of Atta's other trip to Prague in June 2000.

then.....

October 27, 2001: The NY Times "recants" the October 20th denial.

The story continues it's oddessy of 'back and forth' until May 1st, 2002, when Walter P…