LAST WEEK, the final big mystery in the Valerie Plame leak case was finally solved. Casual political observers can be forgiven for not being familiar with this case, which has taken numerous twists and turns over the past two and a half years. Valerie Plame was an undercover CIA operative whose undercover status was published in July of 2003 by columnist Robert Novak. In his column, Novak cited as his source "senior administration officials," the identity of whom had remained unknown to the general public until August 29. Attempts by Bush opponents to connect the leak to the president or his inner circle were dealt a serious blow when it was revealed that the source was in fact Richard Armitage. Armitage was a former deputy Secretary of State who had little personal loyalty to Bush. In an ideal world, Armitage's admission would finally bring to end an investigation that has done little more than seek to embarrass the Bush administration.
Soon after Robert Novak's column, many critics of the Bush administration began to allege that high-ranking administration officials had leaked Plame's undercover status out of spite. In their view, the Bush administration was trying to get back at her husband, Joseph Wilson, a former diplomat who had become a major critic of the president. On Sept. 30, 2003, the Justice Department began an investigation into the affair, and two months later named Patrick Fitzgerald as special counsel. During the nearly three years since then, Fitzgerald focused most of his attention on such members of the administration as Karl Rove, Vice President Cheney, and Cheney's chief of staff I. Lewis Libby. While Cheney and Rove have not been charged with any crime, on November 28, 2005, Libby was formally indicted on charges of obstruction of justice, making false statements, and perjury.
The discovery that Richard Armitage was in fact Novak's "senior administration official" changes everything. As Bob Woodward's book "Plan of Attack" showed, Armitage was a member of the Colin Powell faction within the administration, and was never personally close to the president. Therefore, Armitage's statements to Novak could not plausibly be seen as an attempt to take revenge on a critic of the administration. The most astonishing part of this revelation is that Fitzgerald had known that Armitage was the anonymous source since the day he took over the investigation into the leak. In October of 2003, Armitage had revealed his role as Novak's source to authorities, and since then has cooperated fully with Fitzgerald's investigation. This whole matter has been revealed for what it really is -- nothing more than an attempt to disgrace the Bush administration. Fitzgerald's conduct has been particularly indefensible. He has decided not to charge Armitage or anyone else with wrongdoing for the actual leak. According to sources in a Sept. 2 Washington Post article, Fitzgerald even asked Armitage to keep his role in the case a secret. Meanwhile, Fitzgerald has charged Libby, an official much closer to the president than Armitage, and therefore a bigger headline, with five felonies in regard to his testimony in the case.
It is hard to come to any other conclusion than that Patrick Fitzgerald has been using his position as prosecutor to gain publicity for himself. He knew all along who was responsible for the leak, but declined to prosecute that man, effectively deciding that no crime had been committed in the leak. Instead, at taxpayer expense he has spent his time interviewing other people, seeking any possible material with which to bring down a more prominent public figure. It is debatable whether Fitzgerald should have prosecuted Armitage for his role in the case, but since he did not, he should have brought the case to a quick conclusion.
So in the end, the much-ballyhooed CIA leak scandal comes to this ignominious end: a federal prosecutor who knew from the beginning who was responsible for the alleged crime he was investigating, but spent two more years trying to get administration officials to give false testimony. It was an affair that tarnished to some extent the reputations of all involved, but none more so than that of the special prosecutor himself.
Stephen Parsley's column appears on Wednesdays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at sparsley@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
KURTZWEIL: What we lose in the name of efficiency
By Paul Kurtzweil | 16 hours agoPenicillin was discovered in a moldy petri dish — this government would have it thrown out because it was wasting space on the counter.
RASHID: U.Va. must empower faculty and students through transparency
By Muhammad Ali Rashid | YesterdayBy attempting to contain, or even eliminate uncomfortable narratives, the administration incrementally consolidates power and frays communal trust.
YOUNIS: Muslim students deserve a better Ramadan on Grounds
By Ayat Younis | 2 days agoRamadan at the University should not be a time in which students must choose between academic success and religious observance.
