David Corn (The Nation): The Real Goal of the Get-Wilson Crusade

[Dudley_DUright]

So this is what the campaign against former ambassador Joseph Wilson is about? In a long editorial yesterday, the hawks of The Wall Street Journal called for Patrick Fitzgerald, the US attorney investigating the Bush administration leak that identified Wilson's wife as a CIA officer, to "fold up his tent." The goal of the WSJ conservatives--and perhaps that of the other GOPers who have been bashing Wilson--is to get the Bush White House off the hook for the leak that outed Valerie Wilson (nee Plame). This leak, which appeared in a Robert Novak column a year ago, ruined the career of a government employee who worked to prevent the spread of unconventional weapons. It may have undermined national security by impairing her operations and threatening her contacts. And it was a possible violation of the federal law that prohibits government officials from disclosing the identities of covert government officers.

In other articles, I've addressed the campaign against Wilson (see here, here and here). But let's zero in on the logic--or lack thereof--of the Journal's editorialists. They write:

"Mr. Wilson had been denying any involvement at all on Ms. Plame's part, in order to suggest that her identity was disclosed by a still-unknown Administration official out of pure malice. If instead an Administration official cited nepotism truthfully in order to explain the oddity of Mr. Wilson's selection for the Niger mission, then there was no underlying crime. Motive is crucial under the controlling statute."

Much is wrong in this short paragraph. First, Wilson did not deny "any involvement at all on Plame's part." He denied that she had specifically recommended him to be an envoy for the CIA. He has said she was involved in bringing him to a meeting at the CIA that led to his assignment. But Wilson and his detractors are now arguing over the details of this minor matter. But if there is going to be a nitpickfest, the Journal should be careful to get its facts straight.

more...

http://thenation.com/capitalgames/index.mhtml?bid=3&pid=1586

[Jack Rabbit]

1. Mr. Corn is right on all important counts

However it's sliced or diced, somebody in the White House outed Valerie Plame. Nothing else matters. Even if Wilson could have been mistaken about the now-infamous Niger document being a forgery that would still be no excuse for blowing Ms. Plame's cover.

We can go on with some speculation about what circumstances might justify outing Ms. Plame, but they would come to naught. Wilson's mission to to determine the authenticity of a document that was, in fact, not just a forgery but a crude forgery. That is what he reported back to Mr. Cheney's office. If they didn't like the answer they got, they simply should not have asked the question.

Or better yet, instead of asking Joe Wilson, perhaps they should have asked George Tenet. He would have seen that the document had days of the week that didn't match the dates for the given calendar year and had the letter head was that of a Nigeran official who had been out of office for twenty years and would have reported to Cheney, "Don't worry, it's for real -- slam dunk!"

[Miss Authoritiva]

2. Just dumb, dumber, and dumberer.

Every once in a while, I go back and reread the original Novak column. It remains clear as ever that Novak, in a hilariously feeble attempt to undermine Wilson's credibility, did not need to out Plame in the course of his attempt. In fact, the mention of Wilson's wife seems to be tossed in. Typical Bush Administration policy: why just be nasty when you can be really nasty. Their petulance undid them. What Novak's excuse is I have no idea.

[Fovea]

3. Novak wants to be the head of the ministry of truth

in the second term. This bit of 'cheney you' attack is typical of the id driven administration of Caligula. And most people lose interest in it in high school, some really sick little puppies never do.