September 2, 2006
New Questions About Inquiry in C.I.A. Leak
By DAVID JOHNSTON
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/02/washington/02leak.html?ei=5065&en=1939cd793ece790a&ex=1157774400&partner=MYWAY&pagewanted=print
WASHINGTON, Sept. 1 — An enduring mystery of the C.I.A. leak case has
been solved in recent days, but with a new twist: Patrick J.
Fitzgerald, the prosecutor, knew the identity of the leaker from his
very first day in the special counsel’s chair, but kept the inquiry
open for nearly two more years before indicting I. Lewis Libby Jr.,
Vice President ***** Cheney’s former chief of staff, on obstruction
charges.
Now, the question of whether Mr. Fitzgerald properly exercised his
prosecutorial discretion in continuing to pursue possible wrongdoing
in the case has become the subject of rich debate on editorial pages
and in legal and political circles.
Richard L. Armitage, the former deputy secretary of state, first told
the authorities in October 2003 that he had been the primary source
for the July 14, 2003, column by Robert D. Novak that identified
Valerie Wilson as a C.I.A. operative and set off the leak
investigation.
Mr. Fitzgerald’s decision to prolong the inquiry once he took over as
special prosecutor in December 2003 had significant political and
legal consequences. The inquiry seriously embarrassed and distracted
the Bush White House for nearly two years and resulted in five felony
charges against Mr. Libby, even as Mr. Fitzgerald decided not to
charge Mr. Armitage or anyone else with crimes related to the leak
itself.
Moreover, Mr. Fitzgerald’s effort to find out who besides Mr. Armitage
had spoken to reporters provoked a fierce battle over whether
reporters could withhold the identities of their sources from
prosecutors and resulted in one reporter, Judith Miller, then of The
New York Times, spending 85 days in jail before agreeing to testify to
a grand jury.
Since this week’s disclosures about Mr. Armitage’s role, Bush
administration officials have argued that because the original leak
came from a State Department official, it was clear there had been no
concerted White House effort to disclose Ms. Wilson’s identity.
But Mr. Fitzgerald’s defenders point out that the revelation about Mr.
Armitage did not rule out a White House effort because officials like
Mr. Libby and Karl Rove, the senior white House adviser, had spoken
about Ms. Wilson with other journalists. Even so, the Fitzgerald
critics say, the prosecutor behaved much as did the independent
counsels of the 1980’s and 1990’s who often failed to bring down their
quarry on official misconduct charges but pursued highly nuanced
accusations of a cover-up.
Mr. Armitage cooperated voluntarily in the case, never hired a lawyer
and testified several times to the grand jury, according to people who
are familiar with his role and actions in the case. He turned over his
calendars, datebooks and even his wife’s computer in the course of the
inquiry, those associates said. But Mr. Armitage kept his actions
secret, not even telling President Bush because the prosecutor asked
him not to divulge it, the people said.
Mr. Armitage has not publicly commented on the matter. The people who
spoke about Mr. Armitage’s thoughts and action did so seeking
anonymity on the grounds that the criminal case was still open and
that their remarks were not authorized by the prosecutor. A spokesman
for Mr. Fitzgerald declined to comment.
Mr. Fitzgerald, who has spoken infrequently in public, came close to
providing a defense for his actions at a news conference in October
2005, when Mr. Libby was indicted. Mr. Fitzgerald said that apart from
the issue of whether any crime had been committed, the justice system
depended on the ability of prosecutors to obtain truthful information
from witnesses during any investigation.
The information about Mr. Armitage’s role may help Mr. Libby convince
a jury that his actions were relatively inconsequential, because even
Mr. Armitage, not regarded as an ally of Mr. Cheney, was talking to
journalists about Ms. Wilson’s role.
But the trial, scheduled for early next year, may be focused on the
narrow questions of whether Mr. Libby’s accounts to the grand jury and
the F.B.I. were true. Judge Reggie M. Walton of Federal District
Court, who is presiding, has resisted efforts by Mr. Libby’s lawyers
to give the case a wider political scope.
Mr. Fitzgerald may also point out that Mr. Armitage knew about Ms.
Wilson’s C.I.A. role only because of a memorandum that Mr. Libby had
commissioned as part of an effort to rebut criticism of the White
House by her husband, Joseph C. Wilson IV.
Mr. Fitzgerald was named as a special counsel to investigate whether
the leaking of Ms. Wilson’s identity as a C.I.A. officer was part of
an administration effort to violate the law prohibiting the willful
disclosure of undercover employees.
Some administration critics asserted that her identity had been
disclosed in the Novak column as part of a campaign to undermine her
husband. Mr. Wilson was sent by the C.I.A. in 2002 to Africa to
investigate whether the Iraqi government had obtained uranium ore for
its nuclear weapons program.
On July 6, 2003, a week before the Novak column, Mr. Wilson wrote a
commentary in The New York Times saying his investigation in Africa
had led him to believe that it was highly doubtful that any uranium
deal had ever taken place and that the Bush administration had twisted
intelligence to justify the Iraq war.
Mr. Armitage spoke with Mr. Novak on July 8, 2003, those familiar with
Mr. Armitage’s actions said. Mr. Armitage did not know Mr. Novak, but
agreed to meet with the columnist as a favor for a mutual friend,
Kenneth M. Duberstein, a White House chief of staff during Ronald
Reagan’s administration. At the conclusion of a general foreign policy
discussion, Mr. Armitage said in reply to a question that Ms. Wilson
might have had a role in arranging her husband’s trip to Niger.
At the time of the offhand conversation about the Niger trip, Mr.
Armitage was not aware of Ms. Wilson’s undercover status, those
familiar with his actions said. The mention of Ms. Wilson was brief.
Mr. Armitage did not believe he used her name, those aware of his
actions said.
On Oct. 1, 2003, Mr. Armitage was up at 4 a.m. for a predawn workout
when he read a second article by Mr. Novak in which he described his
primary source for his earlier column about Ms. Wilson as “no partisan
gunslinger.” Mr. Armitage realized with alarm that that could only be
a reference to him, according to people familiar with his role. He
waited until Secretary of State Colin L. Powell, an old friend, was
awake, then telephoned him. They discussed the matter with the top
State Department lawyer, William H. Taft IV.
Mr. Armitage had prepared a resignation letter, his associates said.
But he stayed on the job because State Department officials advised
that his sudden departure could lead to the disclosure of his role in
the leak, the people aware of his actions said.
Later, Mr. Taft spoke with the White House counsel, Alberto R.
Gonzales, now the attorney general, and advised him that Mr. Armitage
was going to speak with lawyers at the Justice Department about the
matter, the people familiar with Mr. Armitage’s actions said. Mr. Taft
asked Mr. Gonzales whether he wanted to be told the details and was
told that he did not want to know.
One day later, Justice Department investigators interviewed Mr.
Armitage at his office. He resigned in November 2004, but remained a
subject of the inquiry until this February when the prosecutor advised
him in a letter that he would not be charged.
But Mr. Fitzgerald did obtain the indictment of Mr. Libby on charges
that he had untruthfully testified to a grand jury and federal agents
when he said he learned about Ms. Wilson’s role at the C.I.A. from
reporters rather than from several officials, including Mr. Cheney.
Mr. Libby has pleaded not guilty to all the charges and his lawyers
have signaled he will mount a defense based on the notion that he did
not willfully lie.
--
"Science is the record of dead religions." -- Oscar Wilde
"There are no absolute certainties in this universe. A man must try to
whip order into a yelping pack of probabilities, and uniform success is
impossible." -- Jack Vance
"Civilization is the interval between Ice Ages." -- Will Durant.
"War is God's way of teaching Americans geography" -- Ambrose Bierce
"Progress is the increasing control of the environment by life.
--Will Durant
Joseph R. Darancette
daranc@NOSPAMverizon.net
.
|
