Bush admits administration leaked CIA name

cat's meow · #1 (**permalink**) 07-12-2007, 01:31 PM

He sure got to the bottom of that, the 'decider' said he was going to fire someone too...

Quote:

Bush admits administration leaked CIA name

Updated: 42 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - President Bush on Thursday acknowledged publicly for the first time that someone in his administration likely leaked the name of a CIA operative, although he also said he hopes the controversy over his decision to spare prison for a former White House aide has "run its course."

"And now we're going to move on," Bush said in a White House news conference.

The president had initially said he would fire anyone in his administration found to have publicly disclosed the identity of Valerie Plame, the wife of former Ambassador Joseph Wilson and a CIA operative. Ten days ago, Bush commuted the 30-month sentence given to I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby by a federal judge in connection with the case.
Story continues below ↓advertisement

Libby, the former chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney, had been convicted of lying and obstruction of justice in the CIA-leak case.

Bush would not directly address answer a question about whether he is disappointed in the White House officials who leaked Plame's name.

"I'm aware of the fact that perhaps somebody in the administration did disclose the name of that person," Bush said. "I've often thought about what would have happened if that person had come forth and said, 'I did it.' Would we have had this endless hours of investigation and a lot of money being spent on this matter? But, so, it's been a tough issue for a lot of people in the White House. It's run its course and now we're going to move on."

He also defended the decision to commute Libby's sentence. "The Scooter Libby decision was, I thought, a fair and balanced decision," Bush said.

Full Libby pardon?
In comments shortly after the commutation was announced, the president left open the possibility of an eventual pardon for Libby.

"As to the future, I rule nothing in and nothing out," the president said a day after commuting Libby's 2 1/2-year prison term in the CIA leak case.

Bush said he had weighed his decision carefully to erase Libby's prison time for lying and obstruction of justice. He said the jury's conviction should stand but the prison term was too severe.

President Bush will pardon Libby

"I made a judgment, a considered judgment, that I believe was the right decision to make in this case," the president said. "And I stand by it."

Chief Bush spokesman Tony Snow has said Bush was satisfied with his decision to commute Libby's sentence.

"He thought any jail time was excessive. He did not see fit to have Scooter Libby taken to jail," Snow said.

The spokesman told reporters at a White House briefing last week that even with Bush's decision, Libby has a felony conviction on his record, two years probation, a $250,000 fine and probable loss of his legal career. "So this is hardly a slap on the wrist," Snow said. "It is a very severe penalty.

While Democrats criticized the president, Snow said Bush was "getting pounded on the right for not granting a full pardon."

U.S. District Judge Reggie Walton, who sentenced Libby to prison, declined Tuesday to discuss the case or his views on sentencing. "To now say anything about sentencing on the heels of yesterday's events will inevitably be construed as comments on the president's commutation decision, which would be inappropriate," the judge said in an e-mail.

Clemency timing
With prison seeming all but certain for Libby, Bush suddenly spared Vice President Dick Cheney's former chief of staff. His move came just five hours after a federal appeals court panel ruled that Libby could not delay his prison term. The Bureau of Prisons had already assigned Libby a prison identification number.

Asked whether Cheney — who calls Libby a friend and who has enormous influence within the White House — had pressed for Bush to commute Libby's sentence, Snow said, "I don't have direct knowledge. But on the other hand, the president did consult with most senior officials, and I'm sure that everybody had an opportunity to share their views."

"I'm sure that the vice president may have expressed an opinion. ... He may have recused himself. I honestly don't know," Snow said.

However, the president made the decision without seeking any advice from the Office of the Pardon Attorney at the Justice Department, the White House had previously said.

Snow defended Bush's decision to not follow the usual course of running the matter past the Justice Department, saying details of the case were still fresh in everybody's mind, and that the president did not need to be brought up to date on details.

Democrats have charged cronyism in Bush's sparing Libby jail time. But Snow said, "The president does not look upon this as granting a favor to anyone, and to do that is to misconstrue the nature of the deliberations."

© 2007 The Associated Press.

cat's meow · #2 (**permalink**) 07-12-2007, 01:49 PM

But yet, there is more...

Quote:

Novak: Rove was one source in outing Plame
Columnist admits assisting CIA probe, but refuses to ID 'primary source'

Updated: 3:33 p.m. PT July 12, 2006

WASHINGTON - Now that Karl Rove won’t be indicted, now that the president won’t fire him, now that it really doesn’t matter anymore, more details of the Valerie Plame leak investigation trickle out.

In his latest syndicated column released Wednesday, columnist Robert Novak revealed his side of the story in the Plame affair, saying Rove was a confirming source for Novak’s story outing the CIA officer, underscoring Rove’s role in a leak President Bush once promised to punish.

The columnist said he learned of Plame’s CIA employment from a source he still refuses to publicly identify, and then confirmed with Rove and then-CIA spokesman Bill Harlow, whose roles in talking to Novak have been previously reported.

Novak said for the first time that prosecutors looking into the leaks already knew his sources when he agreed to disclose them.

Novak comes late to the Plame game, long after several other reporters talked publicly about the involvement of Rove and of Vice President Dick Cheney’s chief of staff, I. Lewis Libby, in leaking the CIA identity of the wife of Bush administration critic Joseph Wilson. Novak says he kept his mouth shut so long because prosecutors asked him to.

Free to speak now
A month ago, Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald said he didn’t anticipate seeking charges against Rove. Novak wrote that, more recently, Fitzgerald told his lawyer that after 2½ years his investigation of the CIA leak case concerning matters directly relating to Novak has been concluded, freeing him to talk now.

Triggering the criminal investigation that resulted in Libby being charged with perjury, obstruction and lying to the FBI, Novak revealed Plame’s CIA employment on July 14, 2003, eight days after her husband went on the attack against the Bush administration.

Initially refusing to identify his sources to the FBI, Novak knew that Fitzgerald had obtained signed waivers from every official who might have provided Novak information about Plame. Despite that, Novak was prepared to resist. He says he relented in early 2004 when it became clear that Fitzgerald “knew the names of my sources.”

Novak could still have protected his sources, but his lawyer told him “I was sure to lose a case in the courts at great expense.”

In contrast to other reporters whose news organizations footed the bill for lengthy and expensive legal battles, the fact that Novak was a no-show in contentious court proceedings fed a rumor mill.

“Published reports that I took the Fifth Amendment, made a plea bargain with the prosecutors or was a prosecutorial target were all untrue,” Novak writes. The facts were simpler. He was telling prosecutors everything he knew, and taking a beating in public for not talking about it.

Bush White House protected
Keeping quiet had the effect of providing protection for the Bush White House during the 2004 presidential campaign, because the White House had denied Rove played any role in the leak of Plame’s CIA identity.

As Rove’s legal problems grew a year ago, Bush said he stood by his pledge to “fire anybody” in his administration shown to have leaked Valerie Plame’s name. His press secretary, after checking with Rove and Libby, assured the public that neither man had anything to do with the leak.

Now that he’s finally opening up, Novak is stirring up more trouble, saying without elaboration that his recollection of his conversation with Rove about Plame differs from Rove’s. Rove’s spokesman says the difference amounts to very little.

“I have revealed Rove’s name because his attorney has divulged the substance of our conversation, though in a form different from my recollection,” Novak wrote. Novak did not elaborate.

A spokesman for Rove’s legal team, Mark Corallo, said that Rove did not even know Plame’s name at the time he spoke with Novak, that the columnist called Rove, not the other way around, and that Rove simply replied he had heard the same information that Novak passed along to him regarding Plame.

“There was not much of a difference” between the recollections of Rove and Novak, said Corallo.

Novak says he told Fitzgerald that Harlow of the CIA had confirmed information about Plame.

Harlow declined to comment Tuesday night. But a U.S. intelligence official familiar with the matter denied that Harlow had been a confirming source for Novak on the story. The official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Harlow repeatedly tried to talk Novak out of running the information about Plame and that Harlow’s efforts did not in any way constitute confirming Plame’s CIA identity.

The official spoke on condition of anonymity because Harlow may end up being a witness in a separate part of Fitzgerald’s investigation, the upcoming criminal trial of Libby.

© 2006 The Associated Press.

sotmfs · #3 (**permalink**) 07-12-2007, 02:37 PM

Well at least they have American "values" and don't lie about having illicit sex like some leaders.

cat's meow · #4 (**permalink**) 07-12-2007, 05:28 PM

So the 'values' are to cover this up and lie to the fact he is not really going to do s*it about this; the 'Decider' was going get to the very bottom of this and fire who ever did it. So he was lying?

cat's meow · #5 (**permalink**) 07-12-2007, 05:43 PM

saw it summed up like this...

Quote:

That's what passes as "accountability" in the Bush administration. "Yes. We did it. We admit we did it. We're above the law. Moving on." ... as though the rest of the country are assholes for having the audacity to want justice and what we all (the voters) know as accountability.

sotmfs · #6 (**permalink**) 07-12-2007, 05:51 PM

This administration is the most secretive,political,and self serving in our history.Why there is no accountability is something I don't understand.
I guess if you question the administration it means you don't support the troops.

I_Hate_the_Nazi_Right · #7 (**permalink**) 07-12-2007, 08:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sotmfs

Well at least they have American "values" and don't lie about having illicit sex like some leaders.

Your organizations don't have sex period... it's a dirty sin.

bluedog · #8 (**permalink**) 07-12-2007, 08:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cat's meow

saw it summed up like this...

Just which Law "exactly are they above....the one that states that the CIA falls under the umbrella and leadership of the Ex. Branch.....to manage as one of the duties of the commander in chief and administrator of all such divisions that fall under the direct leadership of the Ex. Branch by constitution....or the law that states that the Chief Ex. Officer can and does have the "authority" to "classify or declassify" any thing which falls within the jurisdiction of his authority?......Any other political rants? BD

cat's meow · #9 (**permalink**) 07-13-2007, 12:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bluedog

Just which Law "exactly are they above....the one that states that the CIA falls under the umbrella and leadership of the Ex. Branch.....to manage as one of the duties of the commander in chief and administrator of all such divisions that fall under the direct leadership of the Ex. Branch by constitution....or the law that states that the Chief Ex. Officer can and does have the "authority" to "classify or declassify" any thing which falls within the jurisdiction of his authority?......Any other political rants? BD

The guy admitted a f'ck up, what is your problem? You can stop arguing about this now it is over and he even admitted as much today...