shotbanner.jpeg

September 01, 2006

Fingers Crossed

The Strib on Armitage: "I know you are but what am I?".

No, really:

To hear Bush administration defenders tell it, news that Richard Armitage was the original source of the leak of Valerie Plame's CIA work means the entire Plamegate tempest was a whole lot of nothing. That spin should be a tough sell, if folks pay attention to the facts.
But very easy if you pay attention to the real facts.
Armitage is a former Navy officer who served with distinction in various high-ranking defense and diplomatic posts under Presidents Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush.
Yeah, but he let Valerie Plame's name slip.
In chitchat at the end of a conversation with newspaper columnist Robert Novak in 2003, while deputy secretary of state, Armitage let slip that Valerie Plame, wife of Iraq war critic Joseph Wilson, worked at the CIA. Armitage apparently did not know Plame's CIA work was undercover and classified.

So there you go, administration supporters say: There was no conspiracy to "out" Plame as part of a plan to "get" Wilson. So far as Armitage goes, that makes sense. He appears to have made a foolish, forgivable mistake, though why he remained silent about it is mystifying.

Only if you assume the "mistake" was "foolish", and have "forgiven" it in advance.

Armitage is a long-time foe of the administration - one of the left-of-center ideologues who clog the State Department and the CIA.

But Armitage's error does not lift the thick layer of Plame-related gunk from the reputations of White House adviser Karl Rove, Vice President Dick Cheney and his ex-chief of staff, Lewis Libby. While Armitage had no anti-Wilson ax to grind, they did.
Right - a justifiable one.

And while Armitage may have had no bone with Wilson, he certainly did with the Adminsitration - a fact the Strib chooses to ignore.

In fact, Armitage learned about Plame's CIA association from a memo written in response to a request from Cheney's office for information about Wilson. The White House's "get Wilson" effort was already underway. Armitage's slip offered them an opportunity of which they made maximum use.
So?

Wilson - an employee of the Executive Branch - screwed the Executive Branch. He wrote one thing in his report to the CIA, and then contradicted it in his NYTimes OpEd.

Novak needed confirmation of Armitage's information. He got it from Rove. Between them, Rove and Libby peddled the story to various Washington reporters, insinuating that Wilson's CIA-sponsored trip to Niger to investigate possible Iraq purchases of uranium was a junket arranged by his wife -- and that Wilson was a has-been showboat who just wanted a free trip to Africa, where he had worked as a U.S. diplomat.
Right, but not as a weapons inspector!

Wilson had zero background in tracking down illegal weapons and materiel shipments!

Wilson may be a showboat, but he is also an experienced African hand who was sent on a legitimate mission by the CIA (not by his wife), and convincingly disproved the Niger-Iraq uranium stories central to the Bush case for war
Except that he did no such thing.

The Strib has had its' collective mind made up about Bush and this war since long before Bush allegedly pre-sold himself on invading Iraq.

Posted by Mitch at September 1, 2006 06:43 AM | TrackBack
Comments

"I just don't understand why that simple fact doesn't put this whole charade to rest."

Come on Bill - you know better....they never let something as mundane as facts get in the way of a good conspiracy.....

Posted by: The Lady Logician at September 1, 2006 10:10 AM

Jeez, even the WashPost seems to have changed their tune, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/31/AR2006083101460_pf.html

But not the ever-vigilant(e?) Strib!

Posted by: Steve G. at September 1, 2006 11:32 AM

To quote an actual competent conservative "well, there you go again."

The issue was less the name of the leaker - though of course since we were told the leaker would be fired and Rove also leaked the name, it kind of is about the leaker - but rather that they attempted to get political payback by revealing Plame at all. Bush ordered it, through declassification which is his technical right as President, but for the good of the country. Do you really believe protecting his political poll numbers constitute "good of the country?"

They let slip through Armitage, if Novak is to be believed, a classified piece of information. Whether you consider it classified really isn't material, it was marked classified, and pursued lawfully as an illegal declassification, and the CIA referred it as such. Even if it were already in the public space, the fact remains they didn't release her name for any other real reason that simply to go after Wilson, and the testimony from Rove and others speaks to Bush's intent to counter Wilson by putting Plame's name out there. He could have discredited Wilson by arguing against what Wilson said, instead, he intimidated the entire CIA by outing Plame. What sort of effect do you suppose this will have on long-term intelligence efforts, "don't say anything critical of the administration, don't do anything they dont' like, don't give them news they don't like, or they may declassify your status, end your career, put your friend's lives in danger, and generally mess with your day?" Is that the kind of "stand up guy" you admire, the "christian values" you think are to be copied?
Speak up, and we'll ruin you. Rove's been doing it for years, outing Plame smacks of his tactics, that it was Armitage and then Rove is hardly news, except to you.

The actual issue is that they lied to cover it up. You conveniently forget that Lewis "Scooter" Libby is on trial for the cover-up. That's the part where they pretended for two years not to know how this originated after Bush told people, behind closed doors, to do it. He might not have known who exactly, and he may not have approved this exact path, but he darned sure knew he said to do it. He then walked out and lied and said he had no idea to the nation. Where is your outrage?

That inconvenient little truth is something you just don't want to cross.

It seems when facts get in the way, ignoring them is your path of least resistance.

Posted by: ted at September 5, 2006 11:06 PM
Post a comment









Remember personal info?
hi