Does CIA Plame's "status", in any way, justify Cheney's involvement in feeding her name to the press?

Question

Libby trial revealed Cheney's direct involvement with CIA outing.

Does her covert status, or lack there of, justify Cheney's actions?

libertarian (below) Focus... If Plame was not covert (as you claim) does this justify the Vice President of the United States to feed a (non-covert) CIA agent's name to the press?

Answer 1

SHE WASN'T COVERT. When all her friends knew she worked for the CIA, then she isn't very covert.
If she was covert, then Libby (or someone else) would have been on trial for something other than perjury.

Answer 2

What are you talking about? Since when is it wrong to give some ones name to the press?

The CIA is forbidden to conduct operations inside of the U.S.. You understand so far?

Plame had been in the U.S. at Langley for five years.

If she was covert I am more worried about what the CIA is doing running covert operations inside the U.S. than the naming of any agent who would obviously be engaged in an activity explicitly illegal.


When you put things in their proper context it looks a lot different doesn't it.
Where is the investigation of this? There is none because she could not be covert by law and work at Langley!!!!

Answer 3

Point one - As you noted, she was not covert - she was a desk wonk. She "outed" herself the first day she drove to the office.
Point two - She became fair game as soon as she used her position to influence the decision to appoint her husband to a political mission with the pre-determined goal of manufacturing an anti-war statement by a known democrat activist (her loving husband)
Point three - It can be argued how widespread the knowledge was, but she was known by some of her friends to have been a CIA employee, friends who in all likelyhood did not have a security clearance to know that fact.

So as far as I am concerned, She's fair game.

And besides, VP Cheney didn't "out" her, Richard Armitage did. And he was no supporter of the war. He was just a gossip.

Answer 4

She exchange into no longer a covert op. The statute in question defines that element era in a manner that excludes Plame. somewhat, she exchange into no longer stationed foreign places and hadn't been in the process the 5 years previous the leak. Nor exchange into the CIA taking any particular steps to maintain her identity secret, yet another area of the offense, by using fact it exchange into the CIA that finally shown her prestige. hence, there have been no prosecutions for the truthfully leak and there will be none. This being the case, I would desire to ask your self approximately precisely why Libby is being prosecuted for "mendacity" to the investigators. in the event that they have been investigating something they knew exchange into no longer a contravention of the regulation, it form of feels that prosecuting Libby is hypertechnical to the area of verging on prosecutorial misconduct. Now, exchange into the leak justified? Hell no. Leaking her identity exchange into immoral if no longer unlawful.

Answer 5

Wow you just don't stop, do you hater? She was not covert, there has been no prosecution for outing a CIA agent. There is no crime and you hate that Cheney nor anyone in the administration other than Scooter is in trouble. SHE WAS NOT COVERT AS STATED BY VICTORIA TUNSTEL IN HER TESTIMONY, SHE WROTE THE DAMN LAW IN 1982. Try again libby the liberal

Answer 6

Hmmm, speaking her name in casual conversations where EVERYONE IN D.C. knew who she was and what she did (and the fact that she was only 'covert' in her own mind)........or members of congress passing on National Secrets to the New York Time in a time of war...........

The mention of her name (and job) by anyone did not put her in jeopardy--as she was NOT covert. The selling of National Secrets to the NYTs puts us all at risk........and we know who is responsible for that.....too bad the administration lacks the balls to do anything about it.

But, yeah--I'd say so. Plame should be the one on trial for perjury--she WAS instrumental in sending her hubby on a search and destroy mission. And it was probably her own big mouth that 'outed' her in the first place.

You can't have it both ways.......you can't condone information leaks which violate National security and condemn 'leaks' of conceivably public information........

Answer 7

Richard Armitage leaked her name. He confessed. He was an employee of the State Department. He was not a friend of Pres. Bush or a fan of the war. It has not been established that VP Cheney had anything to do with directly leaking the name of Ms. Plame. Get over it.

Answer 8

How dare a WIlson expose the lies of the Bush administration! I know, lets expose her as a secret agent! Brilliant Idea!

"she's fair game" Right Rove?

The actions of Cheney endangered the United States, he should be hung for treason.

Answer 9

this question has responses from right wingers that make me think they are willing to back the adminstration even if its against the cia operatives and against the this nations security..HOW does another agent know that the administration wont give out thier names..these rt. wingers are so partisan that they give the administration a pass on all the scandals..they are the most unpatriotic group of people in this nation...

Answer 10

Could of been, but no covert status their, except in her own mind. Even the CIA's internal Instruction stated she did not meet the criteria of "Covert"