New York Times Reporter Jailed

[MissAva]

Judith Miller is now in jail, for up to four months. An undercover CIA agent was reveled....

 

[MINE!!]

Was that CIA agent killed? For some reason I think I heard this....am I wrong?

 

[tanuki]

And yet Novak walks free.

Don''t ya ever just wonder what stuff he has on someone high up in the Bush administration that he isn''t even in hot water over this?

Whatever it is, it must be a piece of information that they really want him to keep his mouth shut about.

 

[Momoftwo]

There is some argument over whether anything was really revealed. Talk in the DC area (where I live) is that they were never that secretive about what she did and no no one was killed over this.

Also, even if he reported it, he did nothing wrong as he is a reporter and not a cleared govt employee who is aware of how security works and chose to tell. Whoever told him did if they were aware of her status. I really dislike when reporters cover up crimes by not revealing sources. Is getting the story more important than getting the crimminal?

 

[MINE!!]

My bad MomofTwo... I do not know why I thought I had heard this... must be too many movies..LOL

 

[lostdog]

" But it also puts us in the position of relying on one persons impartiality and judgement as to what is right and wrong (John Markoff comes to mind here).."

You do rely on one person's judgement as to right and wrong. Yourself.

A reporter isn't judging right and wrong for you. Of course, if you'd rather that people in power be the sole judges of not only whether they are doing right or wrong, and also the sole arbiter of whether you get to know about it, just sit tight, your wish is coming true.

"2. The need to find serious security related issues and leaks to help keep the people that do dangerous work on behalf of the United States as safe as posisble..

Add to this that the leak of information may have been more politically motivated than anything since Palme was an operative doing WMD investigation in 2003 (when all of this started), and the issue gets more tangled.."

The source of the information, at least according to Matthew Cooper (whose employer caved in and may have kept him from jail), was Karl Rove. You decide whether that may have been "political", whatever that means.

So, we should jail reporters, for not revealing sources? Even, as in Judith Miller's case, for not revealing sources in stories they didn't write? And remember, the issue isn't that she wouldn't name her source, it's that she wouldn't let the government obtain her notes and records. She has been one of the leading journalists covering WMD issues in this country. What certain people in the government really wanted there was a fishing expedition into all of her other contacts, and the opportunity to punish anyone who talked to her (regardless of what they might have said). And in that process of obtaining her records they would effectively be destroying her ability to conduct her job in the future, as no source would be willing to talk confidentially to her in the future in fear of government or other retribution.

It's a very scary precedent for the government to be going on witch hunts through the press and anyone who is in contact with them.

 

[AGBF]

Excerpt from article:

"Nearly two years after stating that any administration official found to have been involved in leaking the name of an undercover C.I.A. officer would be fired, and assuring that Karl Rove and other senior aides to President Bush had nothing to do with the disclosure, the White House refused on Monday to answer any questions about new evidence of Mr. Rove's role in the matter."


White House Silence on Rove as Source of Leak

 

[AGBF]

Date: 7/6/2005 11:08:33 PM
Author:Matatora
Judith Miller is now in jail, for up to four months. An undercover CIA agent was reveled....

The papers released after the Supreme Court decision holding that journalists have no right to confidentiality named Karl Rove as the source of the leaked information. Yes, Karl Rove of the White House. He leaked the name of the operative, Valerie Plame, to Robert Novak.

 

[AGBF]

Date: 7/12/2005 11:32:41 AM
Author: Feydakin
Should we drag him behind a bus now or wait until there is a real investigation with more evidence than ''he said so'' against Mr. Rove??

About the dragging behind the bus: unlike you, I do not believe in capital punishment (let alone cruel and unusual punishment), so the answer would be, "no".

Should he White House answer (which it has refused to do)? Yes.

 

[AGBF]

Date: 7/7/2005 5:17:27 PM
Author: tanuki
And yet Novak walks free.

Don't ya ever just wonder what stuff he has on someone high up in the Bush administration that he isn't even in hot water over this?

I think you misundertand the situation, tanuki. Robert Novak, according to the papers turned over by "Time" magazine, was given the identity of the operative by Karl Rove of the the White House.

Novak did the dirty work of the White House. He did what they wanted. He has no need to "have anything on them". He was their partner.

The White House exposed Valerie Plame because her husband was critical of President Bush, specifically with an Op-ed piece in "The New York Times". The moral of the story is that President Bush will sacrifice anyone, even CIA operatives, who gives him trouble.

He is a ruthless man.

 

[AGBF]

Anyone who wants to read the allegations (about which the White House will not comment), here is a précis from Wikinews:

Wikinews Account of Rove Involvement

 

[AGBF]

Date: 7/12/2005 1:10:45 PM
Author: Feydakin
From Wikinews, the free news source that you can write!

You neglected to mention that there are numerous links to documents within that article. What, exactly, are you questioning, Steve? I know you have followed this story carefully. What allegations against Rove do you think have been fabricated? Why should the White House be given a free pass (allowed to be silent) about the allegatons against Rove?

 

[AGBF]

Date: 7/12/2005 1:10:45 PM
Author: Feydakin
From Wikinews, the free news source that you can write!

Like this better, Steve? Since it is written by professional journalists?

Newsweek on Rove

Notice I deliberately left news reports by "The New York Times", that suspect lefty rag, out of this.

 

[AGBF]

Date: 7/6/2005 11:08:33 PM
Author:Matatora
Judith Miller is now in jail, for up to four months. An undercover CIA agent was reveled....

Matatora,

Now that Karl Rove, President Bush's chief political advisor, has been shown to be the source of the leak (because Plame's husband dared to criticize President Bush) do you still feel exposing Plame as a CIA agent was a "no no"? Or was that your attitude only when you thought some liberal from "The New York Times" exposed her?

 

[AGBF]

Date: 7/12/2005 1:36:02 PM
Author: Feydakin
Now, do you still think you know what I''m thinking??

I do not know what you are thinking, but nothing you posted surprised me. Everything you said above seems consistent with the beliefs you have put forward in the past in this forum.

We disagree only on whether the White House (which previously did comment to say, unequivocally, that Rove was not involved in exposing Plame and that if it were found that anyone in the White House had been involved that he would be fired) should now remain silent.

 

[AGBF]

Date: 7/12/2005 6:19:08 PM
Author: Feydakin
Perhaps you are looking for a lightning fast reaction and an instant firing befoer the investigation is complete?? Or are you just taking Cooper''s notes as fact and letting it go at that??

I do not believe I said that he should be fired. All I did was to remind everyone that that the Bush White House promised it would fire anyone who had leaked Ms. Plame''s identity.

As for a "lightning fast" investigation? The White House was asked about Mr. Rove being the source of the leak back in 2003. Is three years "lightning speed" to you?

 

[AGBF]

Steve,


Yes, doing research can be a great pleasure. One feels he is peeling an onion, learning more and more. The two fields to which I was attracted: history and psychotherapy involved looking and then looking for more and then looking for more. There are secrets to be learned.

As to digging up dirt: I do not need dirt for excitement. On the other hand, when it is there, I do want to unearth it. It is part of the secret.

As a social worker I am not (like some colleagues) especially interested in the more bizarre family lives of clients. I am interested in the minutiae; in the pieces of the puzzle; in reconstructing what might have made someone what he is today.

The "dirt" is incidental. Just as I don't help people look for recovered memories of sexual abuse, I do not try to find conspiracies in government. If a client tells me that he was abused, however, I listen. And if a document tells me a President lied, however, I listen. Listen. Then evaluate.

 

[rubydick]

Steve,

I believe a bit more research on this one is in order. Plame was a covert CIA employee, working for a CIA front company (Brewster-Jennings & Associates). Her duties were apparently focussed on WMD's. When Rove/Bush outed her, they not only betrayed the secret work she was doing, but they busted the front company (and endangered the lives of all those working for said company) that had been set up by the CIA and all those she had been in contact with.

Some dare call that treason and I include myself in that group. Note that I am no big fan of the CIA, nor any of the manifold intel agencies that reside like ticks on our collective skins, steadily sucking blood from each and every one of us. But since the laws regarding the outing of covert CIA operatives were put in place at the instigation of the current President's father, I feel it's fair to say that Dubya should dance with the one what brought him here.

Now we can talk about Clinton getting a blow job and sexuallly harassing women and getting impeached for it. And then we can talk about the attacks of 9/11 and the outing of a covert CIA operative post-9/11, someone whose job was to investigate and protect us from precisely the thing that we "supposedly" invaded Iraq for. She was outed for exactly the reason that her husband had chosen to go public regarding his personal knowledge of the lies that were spun by BushCo to lead us into war with Iraq.

I've said this before, I'll say it again. Clinton was a crook in so many ways, but his crimes can't compare to what the current administration is committing. I'll be happy to entertain arguments to the contrary, but please, cite specifics and let's discuss the issues, not my faith in my beliefs, nor your faith in yours. This is about issues and evidence, reason, not faith. This is not football, nor religion; we are all on the same team.

 

[AGBF]

Date: 7/13/2005 8:13:47 AM
Author: Feydakin
The CIA themselves have said that Plame was NOT a covert agent 2 years ago, and that she had not worked in a covert capacity for more than 5 year prior to the the leak.. For the law that is being used to apply, the CIA must be actively trying to protect the identity of their agent.. She was driving her own car through the front gate of the CIA every day for more than 5 years.. Not terribly stealthy in my mind..

Steve,

What is your point? If she was not a covert agent, why did anyone bother to identify her as they did? You asked before why she couldn't just have been found dead. That she wasn't found dead doesn't mean that no one was out to get her or her husband. I believe her being outed was meant to be a punishment for her husband.

As to why anyone would take a risk...well, there are theories about that. Theories that some people might call conspiracy theories and that I, therefore, have not mentioned. One theory is that Dick Cheney was behind it.

 

[MissAva]

Several reports had in the past admitted that they knew hwho she was, they have since recanted their statements. What I wonder is if Carl was willing to give one reporter a waiver why not both? And in truth she was given a wavier (sp?) to say anything she knew and who her source was in court. The NYT told her not to. It makes you wonder who her source was...

 

[MissAva]

I recently found out this was not true, yes he used the name but if it was already in the open then it isnt a leak. Not IMO anyway.

Date: 7/12/2005 8:14:12 AM
Author: AGBF

Date: 7/6/2005 11:08:33 PM
Author:Matatora
Judith Miller is now in jail, for up to four months. An undercover CIA agent was reveled....

The papers released after the Supreme Court decision holding that journalists have no right to confidentiality named Karl Rove as the source of the leaked information. Yes, Karl Rove of the White House. He leaked the name of the operative, Valerie Plame, to Robert Novak.

 

[rubydick]

Date: 7/13/2005 8:13:47 AM
Author: Feydakin
Richard, triple check your facts.. The CIA themselves have said that Plame was NOT a covert agent 2 years ago, and that she had not worked in a covert capacity for more than 5 year prior to the the leak.. For the law that is being used to apply, the CIA must be actively trying to protect the identity of their agent.. She was driving her own car through the front gate of the CIA every day for more than 5 years.. Not terribly stealthy in my mind..

Oh yeah, Brewster-Jennings & Associates.. At this point there is no proof that there were any other employees than Plame herself.. So it would be fairly difficult to out anyone else by revealing this information..

Why do you keep bringing up issues like blow jobs?? I don't recall mentioning any of this ever.. In fact, I could care less about Clinton's past or present sex life.. If you want to compare crimes, why pick something like oral sex with an intern half your age in the work place?? Why not the 'suicide' of Vince Foster??

Steve,

Again, check your facts. If a front company was set up for her to work for, ask yourself why? Why give her a phony company if she isn't doing covert work? But don't take my word for it. Take the word of a CIA officer himself:

The Big Lie About Valerie Plame by Larry Johnson

It's now proven (his lawyer has admitted it) that Rove abused his security clearance by leaking classified data. Why does he still have that clearance?

I brought up the blow job because Clinton's lying about sex rose to the level of an impeachable offense for the Republican-controlled House of Representatives. Compare that with what Bush has done.

Clinton was not impeached over the Vince Foster affair. He was impeached for lying about sex.

 

[AGBF]

Date: 7/13/2005 11:53:33 AM
Author: Matatora
I recently found out this was not true, yes he used the name but if it was already in the open then it isnt a leak. Not IMO anyway.

Yes, indeedy. Karl Rove is innocent. As he said, he didn't give her name! Karl Rove, the President's chief political advisor, identified her only as Ambassador Wilson's wife, not as "Valerie Wilson" or "Valerie Plame". Of course nobody could figure out that Ambassador Wilson's wife was Mrs. Wilson! Heck no!

Here's the issue, Matatora, from MSNBC:

"Rove's words on the Plame case have always been carefully chosen. 'I didn't know her name. I didn't leak her name,' Rove told CNN last year when asked if he had anything to do with the Plame leak. Rove has never publicly acknowledged talking to any reporter about former ambassador Joseph Wilson and his wife. But last week, his lawyer, Robert Luskin, confirmed to NEWSWEEK that Rove did—and that Rove was the secret source who, at the request of both Cooper's lawyer and the prosecutor, gave Cooper permission to testify."

 

[AGBF]

Does it Matter if Karl Rove Outed an Analyst or an Operative?

The law may say, "yes". Common sense says "no", Karl Rove shouldn't out (expose the identity of) any CIA employees.

But what if she was an undercover operative? William Rivers Pitt makes a very persuasive case that she was an undercover operative until Rove blew that cover!

"The current spin from administration defenders within and without the mainstream media is that Valerie Plame was only an analyst, and not an operative. This, somehow, is supposed to lessen the blow of an administration willing to attack the families of its critics. Yet the characterization of Plame as an analyst is factually incorrect. For one, Robert Novak himself indicated that she was an operative in the original report that birthed this scandal. 'Wilson never worked for the CIA,' wrote Novak, 'but his wife, Valerie Plame, is an Agency operative on weapons of mass destruction.'

Ray McGovern, who was for 27-years a senior analyst for the CIA, further confirms the status of Plame within the CIA. 'I know Joseph Wilson well enough to know,' said McGovern in a telephone conversation we had today, 'that his wife was in fact a deep cover operative running a network of informants on what is supposedly this administration's first-priority issue: Weapons of mass destruction.'

McGovern further elaborated on the damage done when such an agent has their cover blown. 'This causes a great deal of damage,' said McGovern. 'These kinds of networks take ten years to develop. The reason why they operate under deep cover is that the only people who have access to the kind of data we need cannot be associated in any way with the American intelligence community. Our operatives live a lie to maintain these networks, and do so out of patriotism. When they get blown, the operatives themselves are in physical danger. The people they recruit are also in physical danger, because foreign intelligence services can make the connections and find them. Operatives like Valerie Plame are real patriots.'


Article

 

[lostdog]

"For your statement to be correct, you have to assume that all reports are totally objective and reporting only the truth.. It is quite possible that a reporter or journalist could have a personal agenda and by being able to ''hide'' sources, could alter information that is presented as fact.. "

Actually, I am assuming that that''s impossible and was never expected to be the case. There is no law that says reporters are objective, nor in practical terms (or philisopical terms if we want to muck around there) could they ever really be.

Maybe we hope that they are reporting what they believe to be true. If they are making it up, somebody else might later disprove them.

Editors, responsible ones, might be a littel more strict about allowing the references to "unnamed sources", which is in truth a crutch for lazy reporters. But sloppiness and laziness is a different issue. The credibility of using that term is declining faster all the time.

But using soucres, without naming them or being forced to name them, happens all the time. It''s how the press comes to understand complicated issues (when it tries). They talk to people central or nearly central to the event, understand their positions and thinking and analysis, then assimilate that and report something. By definition they report it with their own bias, culture, political, national, racial, economic, religious, personal, whatever. That''s what makes the world go around.

And until recently, the last several decades, people chose news sources for their non-objective points of view. (And people are starting to again as we turn into a nation of people afraid to hear opinions that disagree with our own because we might have to then do some thinking, or worse, tolerating. Better to be coddled and pandered to than seek multiple divering viewpoints and decide for yourself. )

 

[AGBF]

Here's an update on this issue.

"As he weighs whether to bring criminal charges in the C.I.A. leak case, Patrick J. Fitzgerald, the special counsel, is focusing on whether Karl Rove, the senior White House adviser, and I. Lewis Libby Jr., chief of staff for Vice President Dick Cheney, sought to conceal their actions and mislead prosecutors, lawyers involved in the case said Thursday.

Among the charges that Mr. Fitzgerald is considering are perjury, obstruction of justice and false statement - counts that suggest the prosecutor may believe the evidence presented in a 22-month grand jury inquiry shows that the two White House aides sought to cover up their actions, the lawyers said.

Mr. Rove and Mr. Libby have been advised that they may be in serious legal jeopardy...."

Focus is on Karl Rove's Role in Cover-up of Leak

Deborah

 

[AGBF]

Date: 7/7/2005 6:34:08 PM
Author: Momoftwo
I really dislike when reporters cover up crimes....

How do you feel when Karl Rove does it?

Deborah

 

[movie zombie]

should not be surprised that Libby is involved: look at his history re watergate. actually, many of this administration have ties back to watergate...... history repeats itself.

peace, movie zombie

 

[AGBF]

Date: 10/21/2005 12:33:20 PM
Author: movie zombie
should not be surprised that Libby is involved

Yes, indeedy! His memory while testifying in front of the Grand Jury was faulty, too. You see, when he testified he didn't remember that Dick Cheney knew who CIA agent Valerie Plame was before her identity was leaked. (Uh...that's the maiden name of Valerie Wilson, wife of the man who showed George W. Bush was a liar in an article in "The New York Times". Her identity was mysteriously leaked after her husband exposed George Bush as a liar. What a coincidence!)


"I. Lewis Libby Jr., Vice President Dick Cheney’s chief of staff, first learned about the C.I.A. officer at the heart of the leak investigation in a conversation with Mr. Cheney weeks before her identity became public in 2003, lawyers involved in the case said Monday.

Notes of the previously undisclosed conversation between Mr. Libby and Mr. Cheney on June 12, 2003, appear to differ from Mr. Libby’s testimony to a federal grand jury that he initially learned about the C.I.A. officer, Valerie Wilson, from journalists, the lawyers said."


Dick Cheney's Involvement

Deb

 

[movie zombie]

yep, just read the article before checking into pricescope! was going to do a separate thread just for it until i saw you''re reference to the same article.

didn''t he do jail time for watergate?

peace, movie zombie