THE CIA LEAK CASE FOR DUMMIES

First of all let me commend the Democrats for finally admitting that lying under oath and perjury are crimes. It took you a decade, but you finally did it. Kudos.

Now over the last few years it has become clear that most of the anti-Bush people who are overjoyed today at Scooter Libby’s conviction, have absolutely no clue as to what went down in the CIA leak case or how this conviction relates to Valerie Plame.

Therefore for the benefit of the Florida Supreme Court and all of our dumb troops who are “stuq in Irak”, I’m going to explain exactly what happened and what lead us to this point.

Here we go.

Joe Wilson was sent to Niger by someone to investigate whether or not Saddam Hussein had sought enriched Uranium from that nation.

He came back and told the Senate Intelligence committee that Saddam had indeed sought this Uranium, but to his knowledge had not been able to obtain it.

In the President’s State of the Union address, George W. Bush said that Saddam had sought uranium from Niger, which was consistent with Wilson’s testimony as well as with British Intelligence estimates.

Wilson then went to the New York Times and wrote an article basically accusing the President of lying about the Uranium, but omitting his testimony to the Senate intelligence committee, whom he had given contradictory testimony. The New York Times was of course, complicit in Wilson’s deception.


When the article hit newsstands, the MSM predictably latched on to it as fact despite all of the evidence to the contrary.

The administration was understandably confused as to why Wilson, who had been an outspoken critic of the administration, was sent on such an important mission in the first place, and then misled the American people about what he had found.

It came out that Wilson was most likely sent to Niger with the aid of his wife who worked for the CIA.

Several members of the administration talked to the media and explained to them what had happened and how Wilson had ended up in Africa. This included Richard Armitage, a high ranking State Department Official who was on record as being opposed to the war in Iraq.

Plame and Wilson then came out and claimed that the Administration had intentionally leaked the name of Plame in order to get revenge on Wilson for his comments to the New York Times. This was a problem, because according to them, Plame was a covert CIA agent, and knowingly leaking the name of a covert CIA agent is illegal.

So a prosecutor, Patrick Fitzgerald, was assigned by the Administration to investigate, as to whether the administration had done anything illegal.

Here’s what he found.

Fitzgerald found no evidence that anyone in the Bush Administration or the office of the Vice-President intentionally or knowingly leaked the name of a covert CIA agent, to the media.

There was no evidence that this was done as a way of getting revenge for anything that Wilson said.

It was not determined as to whether or not Valerie Plame had any kind of covert status at the CIA at the time of the leak in the first place, nor has it been determined at this point.
This has lead most intelligence scholars to conclude that she in fact, did not.

Somewhere along the line Scooter Libby gave information to Fitzgerald that did not match the established time line, which he had put together throughout the course of the trial.

Fitzgerald filed no charges in regards to the alleged leaking of Plame’s name.

When it was established that Bush's statement in the State of the Union address was factually accurate, the media clammed up. In a fashion similar to their screw ups with the Bush National Guard story and the terrorism financial tracking program, they tried to change the subject and hoped that it would go away.

Without any evidence, Karl Rove was convicted in the media, his reputation sullied for no reason.

In addition to this, the left-wing press made Joe Wilson their new darling allowing him full access to continue telling people that Bush lied, when in fact that it was Wilson who had been misleading the American people since his editorial was released.


He was invited to college campuses, and put on the cover of magazines and is now the subject of a new Hollywood film.(I wonder who the protagonist of that one will be?)

Most liberals that I have talked to have accepted as fact, what the media and the left wing bloggers have been saying about this case from the beginning, which is that Plame’s name was leaked as an act of revenge, in order to get back at Wilson for proving that the administration lied about Saddam’s intentions in Africa.

When presented with the facts about the case however, they are thrown completely off guard, and generally attempt to change the topic.

This pattern of immediate condemnation even without evidence is prevalent among anti-Bush people and even many moderates who have been mislead by liberals about this case as well as about a great many other issues, mostly surrounding the Iraq war.

It is driven by those in the media and by the Bush haters, both of whom see McCarthyism and Richard Nixon lurking in the shadows, and yet fail to see that Bush's predecessor is responsible for a great deal of the shady figures seen lurking in the wings.


I don’t know if Scooter Libby lied to the grand jury or not. I wasn’t on the jury, but I respect their decision.

It is important however that we all know exactly how this case played out, and that we are able to identify the way it was explained to us by the mainstream media and then compare and contrast that with what really happened.

I hope that this has been of some help, but trust me. I am well aware that a certain segment of the population will always believe what they want to believe, even if those beliefs are not able to peacefully coexist with facts. We have a name for these people. We call them liberals.

Sphere: Related Content