I'm reassured that you agree the White House officials who exposed Valerie Plame's identity to Robert Novak and, reportedly, at least five other journalists, have committed an inexcusable and potentially felonious violation of national security. This should truly be a nonpartisan stance. What confounds me is why you assert that there is 'no firm evidence as yet that any of this actually happened.' Actually, yes, there is. In July, the CIA's lawyers wrote a letter to the Justice Department confirming that Plame's identity was classified. That breach of a classified identity is what statutorily warrants an investigation--and obviously the Justice Department agrees, since the inquest is underway. Is that "firm enough for you?
Furthermore, you quote Robert Novak as saying, "Nobody in the Bush administration called me to leak this." But that's deeply misleading--as Novak writes in his column today, he's not saying that the Bush administration didn't leak it; his explanation is that indeed one senior Bush official told it to him as an "offhand revelation" and a second confirmed it. I suppose that's as far as he can shift his story, given that his column, which sparked this furor--i.e., before he had partisan incentive to change his tune--stated baldly that "Wilson never worked for the CIA, but his wife, Valerie Plame, is an Agency operative on weapons of mass destruction. Two senior administration officials told me Wilson's wife suggested sending him to Niger." And an unnamed senior administration official told The Washington Post on Sunday that Novak's two sources are White House people. I'd call that latter part "very strong circumstantial evidence." DoJ agrees, and so counsel Alberto Gonzalez is circulating memos telling White House staffers that they must preserve any and all communications relating to Joseph Wilson or his Niger trip. Is any of this firm enough for you?
