Dept. of More Followups, Burning Plame Edition
Speaking of James “Captain Atom” Joyner, in an otherwise vaguely argued item, he puts a couple of useful pieces of the picture in handy proximity. He’s got a link to a report on the suddenly famous State Dept. memo, with the big “S” for Secret on the paragraph about “Valerie Wilson’s” employment by the CIA. He’s got the text of the Agee Law. (See comment thread.) And he reproduces a couple of confusions common to Republican writing about the case. So the item offers a handy opportunity to clear up what are innocent misconceptions of some and deliberate obfuscations by others.
First, it may well be that Valerie Plame was no longer a NOC – officer with non-official cover – by Summer 2003. But the Agee Law doesn’t just apply to NOCs. It applies to any “present or retired officer or employee . . . whose identity as such an officer, employee, or member is classified information.” That’s the meat of clauses A) and i). Go check the full text. I’m not distorting. The State Dept. memo is yet more evidence that Plame’s employment by the CIA was classified information. So when you hear someone say “Plame wasn’t a NOC any more!” it doesn’t matter.
Second, let’s reproduce the full text of the third of the quite restrictive requirements for coverage:
(ii) who is serving outside the United States or has within the last five years served outside the United States;
Plame-case minimizers often argue that Plame wasn’t stationed overseas after 1997, six years before some number of top Bush Administration staffers burned her in response to her husband’s writing. But the plain text doesn’t say “stationed,” it says served. On its face, if Plame took any foreign trips on Agency business as a covert employee – if she represented herself under Agency instructions as something other than what she was – she would be covered by the Act, at least if you get ordinary language about its text.
Lastly, and less importantly, James remarks in comments that it seems very strange that a covert employee would drive to Langley every day and work in an office in CIA Headquarters. My understanding is that this is not actually strange at all. Clandestine-Services employees rotate through Langley (really McLean, I know) as a matter of course. They do not cease being covert employees when they do so.
Summing up: Reasons to think that Valerie Plame Wilson is covered under USC Title 50 Section 421 (Protection of identities of certain United States undercover intelligence officers, agents, informants, and sources):
1. The CIA’s criminal referral of Summer 2003.
2. The State Department memo.
3. Testimony from numerous former CIA personnel as to her status.
4. Lack of denial from the White House itself, as opposed to its volunteer auxiliary.
5. The continuing support of federal judges for the subpoena and detention requests of the special prosecutor.
Reasons to think Valerie Plame was not covered by USC Title 50 Section 421:
1. Michael Moore is fat.
2. There were very few typewriters with proportional letter spacing back in 1972.
3. There is no number 3.
Comment by The Editors —
July 21, 2005 @ 11:20 pm
#4: Margret Cho has a pet hamster named Patty Hearst, and its bedding is made of shredded American flags. This is also a very good reason to invade Iran.
Comment by The Editors —
July 21, 2005 @ 11:21 pm
Forgive my boldness.
Comment by Walt Pohl —
July 22, 2005 @ 1:28 am
To be fair, Michael Moore really is fat.
Trackback by Outside The Beltway —
July 22, 2005 @ 6:11 am
Security Clearance Seriousness
Ace continues the discussion about the revelation that a State Department memo showed Valerie Plame Wilson’s status as a CIA operative to be classified “Secret.” He links to a FAS description of the classificiation system and conclu…
Trackback by Outside The Beltway —
July 22, 2005 @ 6:11 am
Security Clearance Seriousness
Ace continues the discussion about the revelation that a State Department memo showed Valerie Plame Wilson’s status as a CIA operative to be classified “Secret.” He links to a FAS description of the classificiation system and conclu…
Comment by Jon Hendry —
July 22, 2005 @ 8:26 am
Here’s a bit of remarkable mendacity:
.
Sanford, one of the authors of the Act, and one of the key people giving specious reasons why Plame isn’t covered, was recently on MSNBC’s Dan Abrams’ show. He cited a USA Today article as proof that she hadn’t been stationed overseas since 1997, so wasn’t covered.
.
What he didn’t mention was that he was likely USA Today’s source for that tidbit. Or perhaps it was his colleague Toensing. (Who is a friend of Novak).
Comment by jmags —
July 22, 2005 @ 11:04 am
I think reason #3 is actually “There are four lights,” but I could be wrong.
Comment by alex —
July 22, 2005 @ 4:12 pm
The excuse that she couldn’t have been covert because she worked at Langley has to be one of the most empty-headed talking points ever. Listen, why don’t you head down to CIA headquarters and start taking photos of all the people showing up to work? Remember to bring your own lube for the cavity search, because the guys who come talk to you might have forgotten theirs…
Comment by Eric Thompson —
July 22, 2005 @ 5:43 pm
Is it just too much to ask for that the CIA actually release a statement as to whether Valerie Plame was or was not covered by this law? If she travelled outside of the country within five years of the leak or otherwise qualified, the CIA could announce that without having to list what she did and where she went.
I’d just like to know, as opposed to listening to both sides explain at length and with infinite confidence why anyone who disagrees with them is evil or a fool.
Comment by Barry —
July 22, 2005 @ 6:40 pm
Eric, the usual assumption is that, if the CIA couldn’t have proven grounds for a violation of the law, then the DoJ wouldn’t have gone ahead with appointing a prosecuter. This was Bush’s DoJ, under Ashcroft, and it’s not like they took kindly to accountability.
Comment by Barry Freed —
July 22, 2005 @ 7:50 pm
Given the various flip-flopping and contortions the right-wingnut GOP worshippers have been executing of late there is really only one single burning question I have for them that I’d really like to get an answer to:
You’re in a desert, walking along in the sand when all of a sudden you look down and see a tortoise. It’s crawling towards you. You reach down and flip the tortoise over on its back. The tortoise lays on its back, its belly baking in the hot sun, beating its legs trying to turn itself over. But it can’t. Not without your help. But you’re not helping. Why is that?