If the Clinton administration had done this Clinton would have been convicted in his impeachment trial.  But, Republicans, as bad as they are, and that is very bad, do have the courage to take on a popular president by impeaching him.  Democrats don't even have the courage to take on an unpopular president in any way.  Sure makes me proud to be a Democrat. 

Hoppy in Sacramento

Was her outing a twofer? Get Joe for revealing the falsity of Bush's uranium claim and get Valerie for not "fixing the intelligence" for Cheney's WMD bogeyman.

Then it was a 'threefer". In addition to your two points, the outing suposedly made the CIA look bad because it looked as if the CIA endorsed "junkets" proposed by desk jockey wives and cronyism, rather than absolute analytic methods such as those used by Feith & Co. in the Pentagon's OSP.

Cheney & Rumsfeld have not hesitated to try and make the CIA look bad since their reigns as Pres. Ford's chief of staff and Sec of Defense in the 1970s.

"It is unknowable how long that conflict [the war in Iraq] will last. It could last six days, six weeks. I doubt six months."Rumsfeld-Feb.2003

I'm trying to figure how this information can inform us of the direction of Fitzgerald's investigation.

First, let's assume that all of these facts as presented by Corn are known by Fitzgerald, in which case there is a key piece of the jigsaw missing - how did Plame's name (minus any comment on her classified CIA identity) land in the secret State Department memo?

Let me first present a "benign" theory - that the various Iraq war planners in State, Pentagon, WHIG etc knew who the head of the JTFI was. However, they did not know that Valerie Plame and Joe Wilson were married. When the background checking on Joe Wilson got started in mid-2003, they connected the dots, and the State Dept memo omitted to mention that Plame was JTFI head because it was already well known among those to whom the memo was circulated.

Think back again to the "Who's Who in America" debate that caused Novak to storm off set and end his CNN career. Albeit short-lived, there was another right-wing talking point that anyone who checked the Who's Who could have deduced the Wilson-Plame connection. Of course, after a moment's thought, it is clear that looking at Who's Who would tell you nothing of particular relevance unless you already knew Plame was CIA.

But anyways, my point is that many of the Iraq War principals (and the media bag-carriers they spoke to, such as Bob Woodward) may well have known who Plame was for quite some time - in fact, given Cheney's penchant for gatecrashing Langley for WMD updates, it would be surprising if he did not know who she was. However, perhaps they only found out quite late in the day who she was married to.

So this is the benign theory of why Plame's sensitive CIA role was not covered in the secret State Dept memo.

The malignant theory is to consider that her JTFI role was deliberately airbrushed out of the memo (and Plame was not known outside of the CIA as JTFI head). I would venture however that even if Fitzgerald has a clear trail of the drafting of the memo, he'll have difficulty proving this theory.

So realistically, I think Fitzgerald is trying to determine who allowed the information in the memo to be leaked. If he hasn't indicted Rove, Libby or Armitage for leaking the information (when he knew they did), you must think he's working further up the chain of command. Because from this latest update from Corn, it is abundantly clear that the IIPA is very much in play.

One last issue from this revelation that Plame was JTFI head. It's a connection that could be entirely coincidental, but consider this. A key Iraqi WMD expert in the West was Dr David Kelly, a long-time British biological and chemical weapons inspector. He was a source for a number of leaks in the British press that the Iraqi WMD threat had been exaggerated - basically exactly the same criticism that was coming from Joe Wilson.

David Kelly died on 17 July 2003 - just 3 days after Bob Novak's fateful column. The coroner decided it was suicide (though the opinion was qualified).

Given the febrile atmosphere in DC (and London) at the time over Iraqi WMD, the proven skepticism in intelligence community on the WMD claims, and the proven sensitivity that Cheney and co had to any dissenting view, I'd question the idea of dismissing these two incidents as totally unrelated.

Is there a connection between Plame and Kelly? And has Fitzgerald stumbled across it given his key finding to date has been to establish that Cheney's office was jumping on WMD whistleblowers?

What's up with this at the NYTimes, you ask?

So... While the bottom-line remains stagnant, King Arthur at the corporate level at the Grey Lady instructs the opinion minions to compose a piece to press the issue and thereby do their best to carrier a little water for the cabal in the White House while still attempting to appear to be balanced?

I get it.

~OGD~

As I said here ... I smell King Arthur too . . .

~OGD~

I think you are getting close to what Fitzgerald is thinking.  It has to be Cheney he is after.  But the evidence has to be unassailable and not subject to Vice's invocation of official secrets or in the national security.

I for one believe Fitzgerald has integrity and won't bring a case he can't prove.

There are times to be grateful that my cable co does not carry MSNBC. This is one of them.

...Rummy doesn't blab secrets to the press...

Rummy's secrets are unknown knowns, even to him. Have you noticed that he has seldom gotten around to reading unflattering reports when asked about them? If he has read them, he disagrees with them. End of subject.

Rummy only likes stuff that he had a hand in developing at the start. Cuts down on what he has to know, known or unknown. Usually unknown. And wrong. See my sig for a good example.

"It is unknowable how long that conflict [the war in Iraq] will last. It could last six days, six weeks. I doubt six months."Rumsfeld-Feb.2003