Why no investigation of the Niger forgeries by FBI?

The basis for the "16 words in the State of the Union Speech" was a set of forged documents called, collectively, the Niger forgeries. They were provided by the Italian Intelligence Service (SISMI) to both the U.S. and to the British. They were the alleged "proof" that Dick Cheney was told several times by the FBI Director, George Tenet, was not credible. Tenet had references to them removed from at least two speeches given by Cheney in the Fall of 2002.

In his Sunday "60 Minutes" interview Tenet says that the reference to Iraq seeking Uranium in Africa should have been removed from Bush's 2003 State of the Union speech, but that he did not himself read the speech before it was given and it slipped through. (This should be verified with whoever Tenet delegated the vetting of the speech to.)

Sen. Rockerfeller asked the FBI to thoroughly investigate the Niger forgeries years ago. And what has happened? Josh Marshall brings the story up to date.



Between Congressional the government oversight that the Democrats have reinstituted since regaining control of Congress, and the civil suit which Valerie Plame has filed (against Dick Cheney and a cast of characters from the White House), more will come out. Soon, I suspect.

Personally, I think that a key figure is going to be Michael Ledeen, a long-time radical Neoconservative who has strong right-wing connections in Italy and who was deeply involved in the Iran-Contra Affair during the Reagan administration.

So now we wait for the next shoe to drop.

---

As always, references to Wikipedia should not be considered authoritative. They provide good references.

Why I consider Rove, Cheney, Novak and Libby to be traitors to America

I have spoken rather harshly of the people who gave Valerie Plame Wilson's name and CIA affiliation to members of the Press to be published. It really doesn't matter to me why they did it. Richard Armitage is only slightly less culpable, since he apparently convinced Patrick Fitzgerald that when he gave her name to Bob Novak that it was somehow an accident. I am on the fence whether it was actually accidental or if Fitzgerald simply decided he could not meet the elements of proof of the rather ovbviously inadequate law against spreading such classified information. When I say I have spoken harshaly of those people, rest assured. I have toned my real fealings towards them down markedly before putting those feelings into words.

I will also add that the fact that Karl Rove and Dick Cheney both still have security clearances is an utter disgrace to the entire Bush administration and to the frightened overage child who occupied the office of President. No greater display of Bush's utter incompetence for this job can be demonstrated.

That said, let me refer you to what Brent Budowsky Says about the Plame case:

The CIA leak case is not about Joe Wilson, or Valerie Plame, or whether one supports or opposes the Iraq war. The CIA leak case is about integrity and truth in intelligence, which is essential in defeating terrorism, in winning wars when we must fight them, and avoiding wars when we should not fight them. The CIA leak case is about honor and patriotism, about protecting those who serve bravely and covertly, just as we should stand completely behind men and women in uniform.

The CIA leak case is about the need for strong human intelligence, a need that is urgent and has been urgent for more than three decades.

The CIA leak case is about the obsession and ideology that disrespects facts, and disrespects truth, and declares Mafia-like vendettas against those who make good faith and professional efforts to ascertain them. The CIA leak case is about using partisan and political pressure to distort and pervert the search for truth, which is what good intelligence is all about, and the CIA leak case is about what goes wrong when these cardinal principles, time honored for every intelligence service on earth, are violated. [Snip]

It is immaterial whether the CIA Identities Act was technically violated. In my view it probably was; reasonable people can disagree; Patrick Fitzgerald said that lies threw sand in the gears of justice, so perhaps we will ultimately find out, perhaps not.

Understand the protestations of those who argue most aggresively for pardon, are those who argue most aggressively that the identity law was not broken, but support the pardon in large measure because they also fear the ultimate revelation of the truth, whole truth and nothing but the truth. [Editor - highlighting is mine.]

I respect Patrick Fitzgerald. Someone committed Treason - never forget that - publicizing the identity of a CIA officer is High Treason against the United States, even if done by a reporter or by accident or after someone else has already passed that information on to the reporters. If Patrick Fitzgerald says he could not successfully prosecute that Treason because "Scooter" Libby took it on himself to lie, perjure himself, and thereby Obstruct Justice (which the jury unanimously agree that he did) there is no basis for a Pardon.

Once Libby's appeals are completed and he is either clearly guilty or found that his guilt is not proven in court, he should be called back to the Grand Jury to testify again aboput who actually committed Treason. If he lies, perjures himself and again obstructs justice, that is a new crime for which he can again be tried. This is true even if he gets a Pardon for this original crime.

The incompetence, corruption, criminality and treason of this administration knows no bounds. Digging those things out and punishing the culprits decisively and exposing the extent of their failures and criminality is extremely important to the future of America. There should never be a statute of limitations for these Republicans.

Rove, Cheney, Libby all committed treason by outing Plame

I agree with Juan Cole. The people who provided Valerie Plame's name and CIA affiliation to journalists like Judy Miller (and in Rove's case, confirming that information to bob Novak) meet the Constitutional definition of Treason. That is:

Article III, Section 3:

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

The law may not properly deal with this situation, which is why the Constitution includes the impeachment procedure.

Cheney clearly was committing treason. Bush almost certainly knew, but even if he did not, his failure to conduct a thorough investigation of who leaked Plame's name. This came out last Friday in the House Hearings. [See FDL Liveblogs the House Plame Hearings and look down to where Dr. James Knodell, Director, Office of Security, The White House testified and stated that there has been absolutely no investigation into the leaking of Plame's identity by employee Karl Rove."

This might well be what Libby was protecting Cheney from when he took the fall and was convicted.

How did I MISS this? (Oh, yeah. Can't afford cable.)

Sometimes I get my news from north of the border.

No, No, not Oklahoma, north of the BIG border, the one with Canada. Catnip tells us that CNN was reporting Friday that "...we've just received a bulletin from the FBI that, and I quote, "suspected members of extremist groups have signed up as school bus drivers in the United States, counterterror officials said Friday, in a cautionary bulletin to police"."

It must not have worked. The American news outlets still reported on the Valerie Plame testimony to Congress, and overlooked the danger to our schoolchildren (which the FBI did say was very low.)

Oh, and I love what Catnip's daughter calls the yellow school busses. "Cheesewagons." Could they be the state transportation for Wisconsin?

FDL liveblogs the House Plame hearings

Again we have an FDL liveblog. So let me offer links to the various posts on FDL. Be sure to read the comments, since Cspan is carrying this and many of the commenters provide info that the livebloggers do not.

Witnesses today will be:

Ms. Valerie Plame Wilson, former employee, Central Intelligence Agency

Panel I.
Dr. James Knodell, Director, Office of Security, The White House
Mr. Bill Leonard, Director, Information Security Oversight Office, National Archives and Records Administration

Panel II.
Mr. Mark Zaid, Attorney - See background here.
Ms. Victoria Toensing, diGenova & Toensing, LLP - See background here,.

Links:

• The Non-Grand Jury materials.
  By: EmptyWheel.
  Emptywheel analyzes what we know and what is missing because the grand jury didn't investigate it for the Libby trial. Be sure you read this.
• Well that was interesting.
  
  By: Jane Hamsher.
  Commentary on the days' testimony. The single most important thing to come out according to Jane was "...from Dr. James Knodell, who — as Director of the Office of Security at the The White House — admitted that there has been absolutely no investigation into the leaking of Plame's identity by employee Karl Rove."
  
  Henry Waxman sets the scene for the Hearings by questions of Valerie Plame
• Head of CIA says Valerie Wilson was a covert officer
  By: Christie Hardin Smith
  "Gen Hayden, current head of the CIA, Valerie Plame Wilson was a covert CIA agent at the time that her name was published by Robert Novak."
  
  
  Valerie Plame briefly explains how badly outing her secret identity damaged American security. [Details omitted for security reasons.]
• 8. Waxman Hearing, Panel II – Part II
  By: Christie Hardin Smith
  “Zaid talks about the jeopardy involved in the exposure of a CIA agent.”
  Victoria Toensing argues that Valerie Plame was NOT covert under the Act – her expertise is that she helped write the act 25 years ago, but has no definitive information of Plame’s status from the CIA. She also wants to carefully define what a “leak” is before she will discuss whether the White House leaked the name of a covert CIA agent.
  The Congresspersons were not satisfied with Toensing’s dancing around answers to the questions she was asked, one accused her of defining the terms so narrowly that her answers could be interpreted as correct but that they were meaningless. Chairman Waxman stated that he felt some of her answers were wrong, so that he would hold the record open while they were checked against various sourced including the Libby trial record and Patrick Fitzgerald.
  
• 7. Waxman Hearing, Panel II – Part I
  By: Christie Hardin Smith
  “Panel number two is upcoming: Mark Zaid and Victoria Toensing will be giving testimony. Wondering who Mark Zaid is? Well lookee here. And Victoria Toensing? Try reading here for starters.”
  
• 6. Waxman Hearing, Panel I -- Part III
  By: Christie Hardin Smith
  Dr. James Knodell questioning is continued.
  “Rep. Waxman goes into the Woodward discussion of having extensive access to classified information when covering the WH in his books. Points out that when a critic discloses anything critical of the Administration, there is an immediate outcry from the WH. But when they disclose information, it is well within their purview to do so, according to the WH. This approach is inconsistent — and appears to be political in their approach to enforcement."
  
• 5. Waxman Hearing, Panel I -- Part II
  By: Pachacutec
  Dr. James Knodell, Director, Office of Security, The White House, is questioned.
  
• 4. Waxman Hearing, Panel I -- Part I
  By: Pachacutec
  The point is made that the White House security people did not look into the leak of Plame’s name to the press. No one did until, months later, Patrick Fitzgerald began his investigation. The fact that classified information was given to the Press was of no interest to the White House.
  
• 3. Valerie Plame Wilson, Part III
  By: Pachacutec
  “Valerie Plame Wilson: "I cannot begin to speculate on what Karl Rove's intentions were."
  “And FYI, there is a memo written by the CPD officer that contradicts the Senate Committee Report's conclusions on the mission to Niger, and Waxman will be asking for that memo.”
  “Valerie answers that she was working on investigation of Iraq WMD. Holmes Norton [asks] the effects of the outing of a covert operative. [Response] Possible death of an agent and of others connected to the agent.
  
• 2. Valerie Plame Wilson, Part II.
  By: Pachacutec
  More Valerie Plame – “Valerie, under oath: I DID NOT RECOMMEND, DID NOT SEND, DID NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY.”
  
• 1. Enter “The Wife.”
  By: Pachacutec
  Valerie Plame is up. “Waxman declares Valerie was covert,” which limits what can be asked.
  
• They’re scared.
  By: EmptyWheel
  Short discussion of the preparations for how both Democrats (Majority) and Republicans (Minority) are going to handle these hearings. The Republicans don’t want them to happen.
  
• Waiting For History
  By: Scarecrow.
  This is the introduction to the Hearing coverage. Essentially it is a setup for the rest of the coverage.

Aaaaand we return to Plame-Gate; Cheney is threatened.

Murray Waas has another of his excellent reports on the Plame leak. This time he describes the effects the Libby Trial is having on Dick Cheney. If Libby is convicted, then Fitzgerald is going to look much more closely at Dick Cheney and his role in the whole mess.

[Thanks to TPM Cafe.]

Links to earlier Firedoglake PlameGate posts.

The links (below) provide a list of postings on the Plame outing from February 17, 2005 to October 5, 2005.

• A listing of Firedoglake posts on PlameGate from September 01, 2005 to October 5, 2005.
• A listing of Firedoglake posts on PlameGate from July 18, 2005 to August 30, 2005.
• A listing of Firedoglake Posts on the Plame outing from February 17,2005 to July 17,2005.