Leak: Slime, Not Crime?
Corn, David, The Nation
"I want to know." So says George W. Bush now, speaking about the source of the leak that revealed that the wife of former Ambassador Joseph Wilson is a CIA operative. But when conservative columnist Robert Novak published an article on July 14 citing "senior administration officials" that blew the cover of Valerie Wilson (nee Plame), Bush showed no interest in finding out anything about the leak--a leak that may have undermined national security (she was reportedly a clandestine officer working on weapons counterproliferation); a leak that appeared to be aimed at punishing or discrediting Wilson, who had challenged White House Iraq policy, especially its prewar use of the claim that Saddam Hussein had been shopping for uranium in Africa. (Writing for The Nation and its website on July 16, I was first to report that the Novak column was evidence of a possible White House crime.)
It was only after the CIA requested, two months later, that the Justice Department investigate the anti-Wilson leak that Bush and the White House paid public attention to it. They had to--the probe was on the front page. And the Washington Post, quoting a "senior administration official," reported that "two top White House officials" had contacted at least six journalists, trying to get them to run with the leak. Still, at this point Bush, according to press secretary Scott McClellan, elected not to whistle his staff into his office and demand they tell him if they were involved in the leak. He wants to know--but he'll leave the inquiry to John Ashcroft's Justice Department, not a special counsel.
What does Bush want to know? The Wilson matter is not only about a possible criminal leak. It may well turn out that under the Intelligence Identities Protection Act--which makes it a crime for someone with access to classified information to reveal the identity of a covert officer--the leakers are not open to prosecution. For instance, the leakers might have informally learned of Valerie Wilson's identity and not realized she was or had been under cover. But that's a matter for independent-minded investigators to determine, not Bush-friendly TV pundits who cry that they see no scandal here.
Criminality, however, is not the sole issue. The early evidence suggests that the White House--whether directly behind the leak or not--did try to exploit it. McClellan has …
Questia, a part of Gale, Cengage Learning. www.questia.com
Publication information: Article title: Leak: Slime, Not Crime?. Contributors: Corn, David - Author. Magazine title: The Nation. Volume: 277. Issue: 13 Publication date: October 27, 2003. Page number: 5. © 1999 The Nation Company L.P. COPYRIGHT 2003 Gale Group.
This material is protected by copyright and, with the exception of fair use, may not be further copied, distributed or transmitted in any form or by any means.