Wednesday, October 01, 2003

So Much for Novak's Lies

Bob Novak claims that outing Valerie Plame was No Big Deal because she really wasn't an undercover agent. Well, two things: why would the CIA ask for an investigation if Valerie Plame was "just an analyst," and secondly, how 'bout this?:

LARRY JOHNSON: Let's be very clear about what happened. This is not an alleged abuse. This is a confirmed abuse. I worked with this woman. She started training with me. She has been undercover for three decades, she is not as Bob Novak suggested a CIA analyst. But given that, I was a CIA analyst for four years. I was undercover. I could not divulge to my family outside of my wife that I worked for the Central Intelligence Agency until I left the agency on September 30, 1989. At that point I could admit it.

So the fact that she's been undercover for three decades and that has been divulged is outrageous because she was put undercover for certain reasons. One, she works in an area where people she meets with overseas could be compromised. When you start tracing back who she met with, even people who innocently met with her, who are not involved in CIA operations, could be compromised. For these journalists to argue that this is no big deal and if I hear another Republican operative suggesting that well, this was just an analyst fine, let them go undercover. Let's put them overseas and let's out them and then see how they like it. They won't be able to stand the heat.

Larry Johnson is a former CIA analyst and a registered Republican who says that this business "sickens" him. Him and many other folks, excepting a lot of Republicans who evidently think lying about a blow job is a big deal while outing a CIA agent is OK.

Mark Kleiman had that first, and he's been continuing to cover this story extensively, so keep checking his blog regularly!


Post a Comment

<< Home