More Plame Blame

By the way, how many other people besides me noticed the fact that Valerie Plame got hosed again recently?

This story notes the following…

A federal court last week accepted a Central Intelligence Agency argument that the date on which former covert officer Valerie Plame Wilson's employment at the CIA began should remain classified even though it is irrevocably in the public domain.

The date in question appeared in a seemingly unclassified letter sent by CIA to Ms. Wilson and published in the Congressional Record. But when she sought to include the information in the manuscript of her forthcoming memoir, the CIA objected that it is still classified. Now the Court has agreed.

"To be sure, the public may draw whatever conclusions it might from the fact that the information at issue was sent on CIA letterhead by the Chief of Retirement and Insurance Services," wrote Judge Barbara S. Jones in an August 1 ruling. "However, nothing in the law or its policy requires the CIA to officially acknowledge what those in the public may think they know."

So, even though the CIA (in my humble opinion, I admit) inadvertently declassified Valerie Plame’s beginning date of employment by noting it in a letter that ended up getting published in the Congressional Record, Judge Jones asks, “Who would you trust? Bushco, or your own lying eyes?”

Articulated like a true Republican (which Jones is, as noted here).

Again, I admit that I am hardly in a position to evaluate Judge Jones’ legal qualifications. But given the fact that Valerie Plame, a covert spy tracking loose nukes and running a program responsible for that vitally important mission, was outed for political gain to punish her husband Joe Wilson, thus hopelessly compromising her as a spy, what possible difference can it make to confirm the beginning date of a job that we already knew she held?

Outside of typical Bushco pettiness and vindictiveness, why would they care if people knew when the CIA hired Valerie Plame?

Do you think it could be because they want to reinforce the narrative that she was something she wasn’t, namely, just some kind of a hanger-on with not much of a claim to anything, instead of the seasoned intelligence professional she truly was bravely serving our country for years?

I have a feeling some may be tired of watching this Bill Maher clip about her one more time, but it really does fit what I’m trying to say here (the video should still be available – I’ll test that later - never mind, we're good).



Oh, and by the way, Dubya, you should treat this matter more in accordance with how your daddy feels about it.