{Highlight}10/2/03
The
White House, Congress and the CIA
Transcript
Mel Goodman
Senior Fellow at the Center for International Policy
Wednesday, October 1, 2003; 10:00 AM
Washington Post.com
President Bush's aides promised Sunday to cooperate with a Justice
Department inquiry into an administration leak that exposed the
identity of a CIA operative. An administration official told The
Washington Post on Saturday that two White House officials leaked
the information to selected journalists to discredit former ambassador
Joseph C. Wilson IV.
Mel Goodman, former CIA analyst and senior fellow at the Center
for International Policy, will be online Wednesday, Oct. 1 at
10 a.m. ET, to discuss the intelligence leak, the misuse of intelligence
and the need to protect CIA operatives.
The
transcript follows.
Editor's
Note: Washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over
Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions
for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions.
________________________________________________
Mel
Goodman: Good morning.....These are interesting times. We now
know that the Bush administration went to war on the basis of
fragmentary, outdated, and circumstantial evidence...and we now
know that the Bush administration is waging war against the critics
of its policies by leaking the names of CIA clandestine service
officials. These are very sordid matters and must be examined.
I look forward to your comments and questions.
_______________________
Missoula,
Montana: This incident has the smell of a White House dirty trick,
but isn't the significance of the leak being overblown? After
all, lots of people in Washington and elsewhere must have known
of Ambassador Wilson's wife's connection to the CIA.
Mel
Goodman: The incident is not being overblown because it is a violation
of a federal statute and it reveals the essential cynicism of
the Bush administration. There was no need to leak this name;
it was done only as an act of political revenge to make sure that
other critics did not come forward. Very ugly!!
_______________________
Shreveport,
La.: Why didn't the Bush administration look into this situation
before now, knowing fully well all the particulars for eight weeks
prior to the onset of the investigation? Does that in itself suggest
culpability?
Mel
Goodman: It certainly does. The administration showed no interest
in this matter whatsoever until the politics demanded an obvious
response that was carefully crafted for the president. Also, where
was the press for the past two and a half months ever since Robert
Novak (not the most savory of journalists) helped the administration
use such a vile tactic??
_______________________
Los
Angeles, Calif.: This is quite disturbing and other CIA personnel
should be quite concerned. For those who feel this is just the
Dems creating a ruckus or this is partisan politics. It is not.
These people protect us in ways we can not even imagine no matter
what our political views are. I'm amazed but not surprised that
this is trying to be made into a 'spat' between the parties. I
think Novak was wrong in providing her name especially since revealing
it did nothing for the story at all. He was used as a political
pawn and should make it up by revealing his source. We do not
need people in or administration that would do something like
this. It is a direct threat against our national security. If
people can't see that and want to take sides and spat party politics,
there is nothing to say. But I for one realize the gravity of
this story and don't care whether it was dems or repubs that were
in the house. It was WRONG!!! And it's scary to think someone
would do such a callous thing.
Mel
Goodman: Novak was not used in the classic sense....he was quite
willing to cooperate and was certainly called because the White
House knew he would cooperate. At least half a dozen journalists
refused to play this terrible game. President George Bush (the
father in this case) called such leakers the "most insidious
of traitors." Novak was merely what the Bolsheviks used to
call a "useful idiot" in this case.
_______________________
Washington,
D.C.: Why isn't this the most obvious, no-brainer, "refer-to-special-counsel"
case in the book? It's clear that the leak took place, that it
was intended to punish the dissenting Amb. Wilson, and that the
White House sacrificed his wife's career (and maybe life, if she
was in fact an Operations Officer) to silence him.
Mel
Goodman: I believe that this matter will eventually be referred
to a special counsel because it is obvious that the White House
has circled the wagons on this issue. The administration is resorting
to a policy of plausible denial, a hallmark of any covert action.
_______________________
McLean,
Va.: I don't feel that the legal statute(s) involved in the case
of the Administration leaking the name of a CIA analyst/operative
have been made sufficiently clear as it relates to what or which
events would be criminal should the allegations prove to be true.
For example, would the person who allowed the Administration official
to know Mrs. Wilson's identity have broken the law? Has Mr. Novak,
the "journalist" responsible for the publicity of the
leak, broken the law? Has his editor broken the law?
It
seems to me that all of the above should be pursued -- in addition
to the repugnant person or persons who tried to lobby the press
to out Mrs. Wilson.
Mel
Goodman: Journalists have broken no laws....Novak has broken some
ethical issues, but not laws. Any official with a security clearance
or who knew that he was providing the true identity of a clandestine
services official was breaking a 1982 statute. It is ironic that
any war on terrorism requires good clandestine collection but
that this administration has now put the life of an officer and
ALL of her sources at risk. This is beyond cynicism actually.
_______________________
Bellingham,
Wash.: Dear Mr. Goodman,
Your
comments are extremely incisive. It is a relief to read such intelligence
and candor in these unbelievably awful times.
I
just wanted to comment that the reasons for going to war that
you mentioned omitted one very important one: money. A questioner
had asked you, more or less, why have a war when it costs so much?
The sweetheart deals for corporations close to the administration
are the most transparent answers.
Because
of the huge reduction in the tax rates of the rich, the middle
class taxpayers get stuck with more of the bulk of the 87 billion
dollar bill from this bogus war, and lots of that money will go
right into the pockets of those who bankrolled the Republican's
political campaigns.
Mel
Goodman: Good points. It is noteworthy that the United States
is making sure that only American companies (all connected to
the Bush administration, by the way) will be gaining the billions
of dollars in contracts for ALL phases of the oil industry. This
smells of more than just petroleum wells.
_______________________
Easton,
Md.: I don't think any American needs to be "told" by
a former CIA operative that we need to protect the identity of
our clandestine agents whose success and safety depends on our
ability to protect their identities! What we need to talk about
is the process of turning over the investigation to the Justice
Department and whether it is, which I believe it is, another violation
of ethics to have Justice investigating the White House, where
Justice's top official is directly appointed by the President
of the United States. This is a clear and absolute violation.
We should talk about previous investigations and compare the DOJ
as investigative body vs an independent counsel. Bush should not
be given free reign to decide who investigates his staff; it should
be turned over to a non-partisan investigator with broad powers
to do the investigating.
Thanks!
Mel
Goodman: I agree....and the fact that Karl Rove was once a consultant
to Attorney General Ashcroft makes it imperative that a special
counsel be appointed as soon as possible.
_______________________
Washington,
D.C.: Please describe the restrictions on "naming names"
associated with current federal law. For example, is it a violation
of federal law to disclose the names of CIA analysts working in
open positions too, or only a violation if you disclose the name
of operatives working under cover? Was the woman named in the
article working under cover?
Mel
Goodman: There is only a violation in the case of someone under
cover. The CIA employee has been under cover her entire career.
The CIA tried to get Novak to drop her name, which was meaningless
in the context of the story, but this less than savory journalist
went ahead.
_______________________
New
York, NY: Why would the CIA wait more then 2
months to act? The fact of the violation of
a law was clear when Novak's article was
printed. What does this do to the
relationship between the White House
and the CIA?
Mel
Goodman: The CIA submitted a memo nearly two months ago and there
has been a slow but steady bureaucratic pace to events since then.
I'm puzzled that the media did not pick up the story two months
ago when Novak's column appeared on the 14th of JULY!!!
_______________________
Fort
Worth, Texas: Mr. Goodman:
AS a former CIA analyst yourself, and judging by all the 'former'
CIA analysts acting as 'talking heads' on various networks these
days, can you explain to this audience exactly when it is considered
SAFE for analyst to REVEAL themselves to the general public? How
does a 'former' CIA analyst or 'former' covert operative determine
that his sources and methods are no longer in danger if he reveals
himself/herself as such? Is there a magic number of years, say
between leaving the CIA and being able to talk openly as an 'expert
talking head' on network TV and in the national press? It would
be my opinion, that it would be impossible to ever determine fully,
whether, for instance, your OWN 'former sources and methods' are
no longer in danger now that you are public with your former position
at the CIA. Can you explain your thoughts on this matter and any
rules or regulations of the CIA on the matter that are relevant?
Thanks
Mel
Goodman: Former overt analysts of the CIA, such as myself, are
in no position to compromise sources and methods....former CIA
covert officers should use good judgment but often don't. The
CIA reviews all published materials by some CIA officials, but
allows former director Bob Gates free rein in his own publications.
There is no system for reviewing media interviews, but former
officials should use good sense.
_______________________
Salt
Lake City, Utah: I was wondering, do any of your friends in the
CIA or other intel services tell you that now they are afraid
to speak out against the administration? After the previous CIA
report on Saddam that said he was no-threat and that attacking
him would hasten the spread of WMDs was dismissed by the White
House?
Has
this intimidation worked? I have heard this is why Robert Boer
(sp?) dropped out of DHS and is now advising the Kerry Campaign...Is
this true?
Mel
Goodman: Of course, intimidation works. Senator Warren Rudman
used it successfully in the 1991 hearings on Bob Gates....and
now the Bush administration was trying to silence the entire intelligence
community that is witting of the misuse of intelligence by this
administration. There are many analysts at CIA and DIA and elsewhere
who could testify to this. I don't believe that Bob Baer can be
easily intimidated.
_______________________
Mt.
Rainier, Md.: In answer to NY NY's question about relations between
CIA and president's office - they were already getting ragged
when Bush decided that the CIA should fall on its sword over the
'16 words'. Maybe George Tenet decided he didn't want to be that
expendable. Especially since this last business makes him look
particularly bad.
Mel
Goodman: The argument should not be over the so-called sixteen
words but ALL the words used to justify the war. There was a terrible
campaign of deceit on the reasons to go to war and the intelligence
community unfortunately cooperated in some ways with the administration.
The intelligence estimate from October 2002 is a case in point.
Why is the House intelligence committee criticizing that estimate
now, when it was prepared nearly a year ago and was a terrible
example of politicization of intelligence. Where was the Congress
on the faulty intelligence?? And where was the press on the leaking
of a clandestine services officer's identity??
_______________________
Troy,
N.Y.: What about the CIA contacts or agents who may have been
put in harms way by this revelation. Is anything being done to
protect them?
Mel
Goodman: I'm sure that CIA security is doing a full-scale review
of all of the people who have been put at risk but there are few
methods of protecting the foreign assets who have been compromised.....and
these are the very people needed in any war against terrorism.
That is why "reckless" is the only word to describe
the performance of the Bush administration on this one.
_______________________
Lawrence,
Kansas: CNN and other news outlets are reporting that the CIA
is currently reviewing the status of Plame's contacts in the field.
What is the nature of this review, and if lives are in danger,
wouldn't this process have been completed by now - 11 weeks after
the leak?
Mel
Goodman: I'm sure that the agency started a damage assessment
in July (at least, I hope so), but it will be very difficult to
protect vital foreign assets. Compromised Americans will simply
not be sent overseas again in some cases, so Novak and the leakers
have compromised some of our most experienced officers.
_______________________
Wall,
NJ: Mr Goodman:
For
such an experienced guy, Novak showed extremely bad judgement
here didn't he. And rather than apologize to Joe Wilson, his wife
or any of us for any problems he may have caused, he seems to
be taking the position that he did nothing wrong while every day
the situation gets worse and worse all around him. I thought only
the President lived in that bubble.
I
know that you and the Post aren't responsible for him, but you
might want to let him know that at least some of us out here in
the reading public hold him accountable for a pretty despicable
act.
This
goes beyond politics in my view and if true, proves this White
House to be even more insidious than the Nixon White House ever
was. Something I thought I'd never live to see again.
Thank
you for your time.
Mel
Goodman: Novak is more of a polemicist than a journalist so his
transparent explanations are no real surprise. I'm sure that Bush
the Elder must be mortified by the tactics of the administration
of Bush the Younger, however.
_______________________
Charlotte,
NC: Would Robert Novak be violating journalistic ethical standards
to confirm that his source was NOT, say, Karl Rove? He wouldn't
be naming his source, only clearing the name of a prime suspect
and possibly innocent victim.
Mel
Goodman: It is unlikely that Rove was the actual caller in any
event. The question is whether any calls could have been made
without high-level political support from within the administration.
_______________________
Long
Beach, Calif.: Bob Novac has stated that an 'unofficial source'
at the
CIA told him that Wilson's wife was an analyst and not a
covert operations officer. Do you think this was the CIA
trying to protect her?
Mel
Goodman: Novak has no credibility thus far on any of his tortured
explanations. The CIA was simply trying to get him not to run
the name and he refused to oblige for his own reasons. No more,
no less.
_______________________
New
Rochelle, N.Y.: Perhaps you can explain why the Robert No-facts
article came out in July and the investigation reared its head
in September. I'm confused as to whether the CIA was doing its
own investigation or someone sat on the request at the DOJ. Thanks
in advance.
Mel
Goodman: I believe that the bureaucratic mills run slowly on these
matters....and that preliminary work started at the CIA and at
Justice in early August. At least, I hope so.
_______________________
Salt
Lake City, Utah: I thought Robert Novak said that "NO"
one from the White House called him about the leak, so that means
that it could be some one from the House or Senate or Justice
department or etc...
Kind
of curious to see where it came from
thanks
Michael
Mel
Goodman: All Novak is saying is that the call did not originate
in the White House....it does not mean that Novak wasn't returning
a White House call from someone associated with either Bush or
Cheney...there would be a great deal of anger with Wilson's oped
on Cheney's staff, for example, because Wilson undercut the spurious
reasons for going to war (the so-called reconstitution of Iraqi
nuclear capabilities).
_______________________
Washington,
D.C.: Who in the White House would (officially) have clearance
to know the names of CIA undercover operatives?
Mel
Goodman: Officially, very few people would have had access to
such names....but this was a political vendetta that was orchestrated
presumably at reasonably high levels.
_______________________
Buffalo,
N.Y.: What I want to know is the process the Justice Department
plans to go through. The most obvious action would be to have
the FBI interview as many of the top White House officials who
work near or with Karl Rove. Getting to those people quickly is
extremely important so that they don't try to cover their tracks,
isn't this correct?
Mel Goodman: I agree, but the FBI will probably go to CIA first
and determine who had access to sensitive information there, which
would be a waste of valuable time.
_______________________
Charlottesville,
Va.: What was Plame's job? Novak claims she was an "analyst,"
not too secret. An article on TomPaine.com says she ran a very
important network of clandestine agents trying to stop WMD proliferation,
like Nicole Kidman in The Peacemaker. If so, then it could be
a very nasty spat between the CIA and Rumsfeld's special Defense
intelligence unit, indeed... one in which Defense is disabling
CIA's capabilities.
Or
is the truth that her job was something more than "analyst"
and less than top spy controller?
Mel Goodman: She was a covert officer and therefore the 1982 act
applies....Rumsfeld has already quietly disbanded his Office of
Special Plans and he has too much else on his plate right now.
_______________________
Washington,
D.C.: What is the atmosphere at the CIA with this story now front
page news? It seems to me that the Bush Administration has completely
politicized that agency to the detriment of it's mission, called
into question its integrity by directing the content of it's intelligence
reports and now risking the lives of it's staff. Do you see any
future move by congress or anyone to remove the CIA from being
used in this fashion? I don't see how they can continue to function
under the current environment.
Mel
Goodman: There is a great deal of anger and frustration over the
White House pressure tactics on intelligence assessments, the
terrible handling of the Iraq-Niger story, Rumsfeld's pressure
on Tenet, etc. etc. This is worse, however, because it compromises
the careers of CIA officers and the lives of foreign assets. This
is extremely serious business, particularly in a world where human
intelligence could make all the difference.
_______________________
Minnesota:
Does this weaken National security in any way
Mel
Goodman: It weakens human intelligence, one of the most important
instruments in the war against terrorism....that is why the actions
of the administration are so reckless and despicable.
_______________________
Arlington,
Va.: I heard reports that say very few leakers are found. What
do you think the chances of ever finding the person or persons
responsible for this leak being discovered?
Mel
Goodman: Leakers are often found when there is a will to do....usually
there is a coverup to avoid embarrassment, but an eventually special
counsel could avoid derailing this investigation.
_______________________
Philadelphia
PA: I have seen 2 conflicting reports on Mr.
Wilson's wife. One said she was a covert
agent for the CIA for 30 years. The other
said she is 40 years old. Do you know
which statement is true?
Mel
Goodman: The age is probably correct, but the length of service
obvious isn't.....
_______________________
Hamburg,
Germany: What is the best way now to achieve the
appointment of an independent
investigator, to actually prosecute the
perpetrators of these treasonous acts?
What should our government be doing,
not just the Dems but all of Congress,
what should the media be doing, what
should the public be doing?
Mel
Goodman: This is a time for bipartisan and select handling of
a sensitive national security matter. The posturing must stop
immediately and the stonewalling must end as well. An independent
investigation is obviously needed.
_______________________
Paris
France: Hello and thank you for this live and very informative
chat Mr. Goodman. Do you believe this outting of a CIA operative
is a big enough scandal to bring down the Bush White House? Or
at least, kill any chances for "reelection"? Matthew
Mel
Goodman: This is an issue that goes directly to the character
and moral compass of this administration. The anger in the country
is real and palpable, and professional Republicans who believe
that this is a typical Washington foodfight are missing the point.
I hope that it leads to an independent investigation of all intelligence
problems that deal with how this country went to war in the first
place.
_______________________
Charlotte,
NC: Some Bush apologists claim that the status of Wilson's wife
as a CIA operative was well known in Washington. Do you have any
specific information on this? Do you know of other instances where
other operative's identities and work was well known?
Mel
Goodman: I've worked in Washington for the past 38 years, including
24 years at the CIA...and I know Ambassador Wilson....and I did
not know that his wife was an agency employee. Let's face it....this
was targeted information as part of a political vendetta....a
pure act of revenge...again, no more and no less.
_______________________
Boston,
Ma: Mr. Goodman -
I'm
wondering why the CIA is choosing now to bring this matter (back)
into the spotlight, after months of no word on it. It seems that
top CIA officials are putting a lot on the line to get this matter
investigated... if the administration survives this relatively
unscathed, I can see there being some repercussions on Tenet &
Co. Do you see this as a CIA response to White House attempts
to pawn the WMD "intelligence failures" off on them
(ie, Tenet preemptively fighting to keep his job), or is there
more to it than that?
Mel
Goodman: The CIA has done nothing wrong here. It tried to stop
Novak from his terrible error, and it reported the consequences
to the Justice Department. This is exactly what we would want
from the CIA.
_______________________
Atlanta
Georgia: Mr. Goodman,
This
article was released in July, and over 75 days later, it is now
being investigated. Isn't one of the most plausible, albeit cynical,
explanations of this is to give the administration time to cover
their tracks and destroy any "paper trails" as to who
the leaker(s) were?
Mel
Goodman: The congress and the media had 75 days to investigate
this matter and both institutions failed the American people.
I'm sure that the White House believed that the period of damage
was over.
_______________________
Hyattsville,
MD: Good Morning Mr. Goodman,
I
have two questions. First, are there any precedents that you know
of regarding the type of disclosure that happened to Ambassador
Wilson's wife? Second, if this does turn out to be a political
dirty trick, how do you think it will affect morale in the CIA?
Mel
Goodman: There is no precedent I am aware of since the law was
passed in 1982. But the law was required because a former CIA
agent named Philip Agee deliberately outed as many CIA clandestine
officers as possible in order to put their careers on hold and
perhaps their lives at risk. Agee was probably getting foreign
funding to support his efforts. Hence, the law.
_______________________
Washington,
DC: I understand that there were other reporters that were offered
the same information about the CIA agent. What is keeping the
other reports from divulging the source of the leak? It doesn't
seem like they would have any reason to protect the source since
they didn't run the story.
Mel
Goodman: At least six journalists had the story and refused to
use the name. But journalists must protect their sources or freedom
of the press will wither. The lawbreakers are the administration
officials and not the journalists. Novak's transgressions are
of the ethical variety and presumably he can live with what he
did.
_______________________
Sacramento,
CA: Thanks for your time today. Personally, I am concerned about
the safety of the Ops Officer and her assets in the field. When
something like this happens (i.e., compromise), how does CIA ensure
the safety of its human assets?
I
would assume that the Ops Officer is already stateside?
Mel
Goodman: It is relatively easy to protect the American officers
of the CIA, but it is very difficult to protect foreign assets.
The leaders and Novak have done great damage here.
_______________________
Christopher,
Decatur, GA: Do you see Attorney general Ashcroft appointed by
the Bush White House and now asked to investigate the alleged
White House - Wilson leak as a definite conflict of interest.
Shouldn't there be a independent council formed so there will
be no conflict of interest investigating this important matter
of National Security?
Mel
Goodman: A terrible conflict of interest, particularly because
Ashcroft has been such a "political" AG and Rove was
a former consultant to Ashcroft.
_______________________
Concord,
NH: Can you elaborate as to how many people should have known
the identity and function of Ms. Plame? If someone in the White
House (or at Langley for that matter) who did not have both the
clearance for and a need to know this information but still had
it, does that in itself mean that there was a violation of the
1982 Act even without subsequent public disclosure? I believe
it does, and it puts the White House in a bind because either
the leaker was someone very high up, or it was someone who never
should have had this information in the first place (and it is
hard to imagine, for instance, how Rove or someone in his office
could ever have a need to know this sort of highly sensitive,
operational information).
Mel
Goodman: There is no question that the people with the information
did not have any need to know such information....again, the worst
form of politics was responsible for this terrible national security
transgression.
_______________________
Manassas,
VA: You're all wrong on this. Joseph Wilson has committed the
high crime of slander and thus treason against Karl Rove and President
George W. Bush. In doing so, Wilson has undermined the war on
terrorism, effectively putting a gun to the head of each CIA agent
and each soldier fighting against Saddam Hussein and Osama bin
Laden. It's time for Wilson to be investigated and sent to Guantanamo
so he can't do any more damage to President Bush's war on terrorism
and reelection. Thank you.
Mel
Goodman: You have put the wrong end of the binoculars to your
eyes and thus can not see anything that is in front of you. Turn
your binoculars around and refocus. Thank you.
_______________________
Bethesda
Maryland: Can you give us your best guess as to how this whole
incident will end? Will the White House "get away with it"?
Mel
Goodman: The "incident" will end when the leakers are
identified. The White House will make the matter worse by dragging
it out, which is the lesson of every political coverup in history.
I don't think that the Bush administration will "get away"
with it. The anger out there is palpable and bipartisan.
_______________________
Little
Rock, Arkansas: Would the NSA be a plausible place to look to
as the original source of the leak? or that someone from that
shop passed it along to someone else within the White House, who
passed it along to the press for political reasons?
Mel
Goodman: The NSA would be the last place to look, so let's not
waste more time than necessary.
_______________________
Chicago,
IL: Mr. Goodman,
last night on "Nightline", Wilson asserted
that he would reveal to anyone
questioning him (I believe he said F.B.I..)
the names of the journalists who called
him with their info on the leak. Do you
think he assumes that this could flush
them out - forcing their hand, and hoping
that they'll conclude that to come forward
voluntarily with information (perhaps
including the leaker's name) is better
than being revealed by an investigation
as "accomplices", if you will?
Mel
Goodman: I believe that Ambassador Wilson wants this matter resolved
as soon as possible and that he will contribute what he can. What
he is doing is far more difficult than the average person can
realize because the entire warchest of the White House can be
brought to bear against him. He is fighting a battle for all of
us.
_______________________
Angers,
France: As an American, I am simply outraged by the leaks that
outed a CIA operative putting our national security at risk. Further,
I am outraged at the cynicism of so many pundits that leakers
don't get caught and this whole investigation is a waste of time
and just fun politics. Is there no way to bring justice to this
horrible affair?
Thank you for your service to the country!;
Mel
Goodman: I completely agree with you about the cynicism that has
dominated our political landscape for too long. I believe that
a special counsel will get this execrable matter on the right
track.
_______________________
London,
UK: If more than one person planned to leak the information, i.e.
commit a felony, wouldn't that amount to conspiracy which can
greatly increase penalties?
Mel
Goodman: The penalties already include ten years in jail and $50,000
in fines regardless.
_______________________
Hanover,
NH: Ambassador Wilson has said that journalists contacted him
in July and told him that White House Officials were outing his
wife for revenge. They told him that Karl Rove had declared his
wife "fair game". Ambassador Wilson says that he will
provide his notes of these conversations and the identity of the
journalists to the FBI. Wouldn't a thorough investigation be able
to use these notes and contacts to definitively tie Karl Rove
to this sordid outing?
Mel
Goodman: I have not seen any factual evidence that ties Rove to
this deed, but there are certainly visceral and intuitive connecting
tissues at work here. We need to be patient at this point.
_______________________
Nevada,
Texas: Can we expect this investigation to be fair?
Will the CIA be investigated to further silence them and make
this go away for the White House.
Mel
Goodman: The public searchlight is now so bright that it will
become increasingly difficult to stonewall and certainly to compromise
the CIA any further. The CIA has already done the nation some
harm in its handling of intelligence materials on the runup to
war and needs to regain its credibility and integrity by being
cleaner than a hound's tooth on this matter.
_______________________
Pittsburgh,
PA: Can you shed some light on the historical clashes between
the CIA, DIA, FBI, & DOJ that might be relevant to what's
going on right now?
Mel
Goodman: The creation of the CIA was opposed by the FBI and the
Pentagon in 1947......that explains much of the bureaucratic tension
that we see today, but key personalities have worsened the atmosphere,
such as J. Edgar Hoover in his day and SecDef Rumsfeld currently.
_______________________
Kansas
City, MO: Why are you only answering questions from people who
agree with you? Are there no dissenters from your opinion?
Mel
Goodman: Not yet. I'm just running down the list, not cherry-picking
as you infer.
_______________________
honolulu,
hawaii: Mr. Goodman. How much damage does this incident to the
recruitment of people to work for the CIA in positions similar
to Ambassador Wilson's wife?
Mel
Goodman: It will definitely inhibit people from stepping forward
but the dog that doesn't bark doesn't always provide a clue, despite
what Sherlock Holmes believed.
_______________________
Alexandria,
VA: Re. Paris: No, this won't bring down the Bush Administration.
Along with control of the government, the campaign war chest insures
against that. The campaign money provides more than enough resources
to smear any threat and to carry Bush through the election next
November.
Mel
Goodman: Too cynical, just as Paris feared.
_______________________
Indianapolis,
IN: Hi Mel:
As
as a former agency employee, would you say the majority opinion
at the agency is for the Department of Justice to take over the
investigation or an independent appointed official from outside
the Department of Justice to handle this investigation?
Mel
Goodman: The people I have talked to strongly are in favor of
a special counsel.
_______________________
Atlanta,
GA: How will the CIA determine the damage that this "outing"
has caused?
Mel
Goodman: Investigations in the field by counterintelligence experts
and seasoned operatives will go a long way to determine the security
implications....but even reports officers will record any decline
in reporting from the field on key issues.
_______________________
Prague,
Czech Republic: Hi, Mr. Goodman -
I've
been reading that leakers are never caught, because both parties
have a natural interest in not identifying the other. Is there
any legal problem in Wilson simply telling everybody everything
he knows and not worrying about tracking down the White House
officials from their telephone logs?
Mel
Goodman: You are right to note the fear of further political embarrassment
to one and all to get in the way of a complete investigation.
But there is a national security imperative on this one that will
dominate. Ambassador Wilson appears ready and willing to provide
important factual materials.
_______________________
Berkeley,
CA: The President states that "if" there was a leak,
he wants to know who it is. Shouldn't he and the rest of his administration
know by now? Can this be what is known as "a coverup"?
Mel
Goodman: Let's face it....the Bush administration demonstrated
no interest whatsoever in this matter until the political firestorm
really erupted. We were seeing the beginning stages of a coverup.
_______________________
Columbia
Maryland: Whoever leaked this information to the press, obviously
felt it was worth the personal risk to intimidate others from
bringing forward more information that would discredit the Bush
administration regarding the reasons for going to war with Iraq.
The Bush administration must really have something to hide if
this person would willingly take such a risk as to out a CIA agent.
It's reprehensible and yet I'm afraid we may never know the truth
since any reputable journalist would never reveal their sources.
But to me it has shades of Watergate written all over it. What
do you think about this comparison? Do you think we'll ever know
who the culprit really is?
Mel
Goodman: We are all waiting for Deep Throat to be announced....there
will be a shorter wait to see who gets frog-marched out of the
White House, I believe.
_______________________
Brooklyn,
N.Y.: How certain do people in the intelligence community feel
that it is Karl Rove who is behind the outting of this CIA operative?
Mel
Goodman: The intelligence community is not speculating on specific
names....there is too much anger over the deed itself and the
obvious organization of such an effort to damage one of its own.
_______________________
Gambrills,
Md.: What is the likelihood of having a special counsel appointed?
Who is in charge? DOJ? Congress? If Congress, would that recommendation
have to come from both the Senate and the House? Presumably, some
Republicans in the Senate would cross to vote with Democrats,
but I seriously doubt any Republicans in the House would do likewise.
Mel
Goodman: It is currently up to Ashcroft to name a special counsel
and this could be done immediately. If Bush continues to circle
the wagons on this issue, then it will be very tough for Democrats
to get Republicans to cross the line. But moderates and pragmatists
such as Hagel and Chaffee presumably understand the larger equities
that are at stake here.
_______________________
Kennewick,
WA: Why didn't the the Administration initiate an internal investigation
sometime in the past two weeks? Couldn't they see which way the
wind was blowing? And does this further suggest that they, at
some level, had a more "active" role in the leaks than
they are currently admitting?
Mel
Goodman: The White House investigation should have begun on July
14th, the day of the Novak column. The fact that it didn't is
circumstantial evidence in this case.
_______________________
New
York City: Intimidation is a motive, I suppose, but if that was
the purpose of disclosing the agents name, isn't it just plain
dumb? The downside risk is enormous, and the upside questionable,
right? So, are the people running the Administration up to the
task?
Mel
Goodman: I believe that we have learned over the past two years
that this administration sorely needs adult supervision, but where
is it going to come from. I'm sure that Bush the Elder is appalled
over the behavior of his son's administration, particularly that
now includes the weakening of an agency that is named after George
Bush. How do these things happen??
_______________________
Stockholm,
Sweden: Recent articles about this issue insist that the reporters
cannot be prosecuted for their role in releasing the name of Joe
Wilson's wife. But wasn't this law written following the assasination
of a CIA station chief in Athens Greece following publication
of his name in a magazine called Covert Action Information Bulletin?
Therefore, wasn't the law at least in part meant specifically
to cover the actions of journalists who might publish the names
of intelligence operatives?
Mel
Goodman: The law was more in response to Philip Agee's book that
probably had the back of foreign intelligence services. The Walsh
assassination was complicated by many factors, but there is no
doubt that his "outing" was one of the factors.
_______________________
Roanoke,
Virginia: Do you think the journalists will reveal their source(s)?
Do you think these journalists would go to jail to protect their
source(s)? Can the journalists claim first amendment rights to
protect their source(s)? Will the person or persons who leaked
this information ever be identified?
Mel
Goodman: Journalists can use their constitutional rights to avoid
naming sources, although genuine national security imperatives
could put incredible pressure on such journalists. We will eventually
learn the identities of those involved because too many people
already have the information and the White House is already at
war with itself on this terrible matter. Remember it was an administration
source that provided essential information to the media.
_______________________
New
York, N.Y.: Can the White House erase phone logs
and emails so that the person who did
this will not be caught. As a person who
lives in Downtown New York and lived
through 9/11 this makes me very worried
for my friends and family , that the
members of white house would put
people at risk who try to protect our
country. Does Mr Novak have any morals
I think not.
Mel
Goodman: One of the lessons of Iran-contra was that people who
think they erase computers really haven't and ironically the CIA
has wonderful capabilities for calling up "erased" materials.
Novak's partner, the late Rowland Evans, was the moral compass
of the partnership; Novak is a polemicist.
_______________________
Champaign,
IL: You don't seem to buy the "everyone knew anyway"
defense. Is it true that many in Washington would have known Ms.
Plame was an operative? What about Novak's defense that CIA didn't
object strongly enough to deter him from printing her name?
Mel
Goodman: Again, Novak is dissembling here. The CIA made more than
one attempt to get him to drop the name that at least six professional
journalists refused to cite. Journalists are a chatty lot and
I'm sure that dozens of Washington correspondents had the information.
_______________________
Washington,
DC: If Mr. Wilson was so concerned about protecting his wife's
identity, then why did he reveal himself as the ambassador that
the CIA sent to Niger? Wasn't he the one who opened this can of
worms?
Mel
Goodman: The can of worms was packaged and opened by an administration
that lied about the reasons for going to war. Ambassador Wilson
was doing the work of a citizen of a democracy who wanted to debate
to include serious factual matters. You are aiming at the wrong
target.
_______________________
Arlington,
Virginia: Given that Valerie Plame's career was probably damaged
by Robert Novak's revealing her occupation do you personally think
Robert Novak should jeopardize his career and reveal his source
for the story?
Mel
Goodman: Novak's conscience will determine the outcome here....
_______________________
Columbia,
Maryland: While it certainly speaks volumes about the "honesty
and integrity" of the Bush White House, what does it say
about Robert Novak who could have easily told his story with equal
impact without revealing the name of Wilson's wife? After all
none of the other six or more journalists who were given the same
information chose to divulge her name. Why is he not being charged
for illegally releasing this information like the person who gave
him this information will be charged if he/she is ever revealed.
Surely he was aware of the law!;
Mel
Goodman: The law is not aimed at the Novaks of the world...but
the professional leakers who have access to sensitive materials.
Again, Novak's moral compass is the issue.
_______________________
Salisbury,
MD: You noted that the "outing" did in fact serve its
purpose of intimidating intelligence community folks. My question
is what might the consequences be of stirring up such hostility
among the intelligence. community? This would seem to me to be
a group with ample ability to retaliate in undetected ways or
otherwise make life difficult for the would-be intimidators. Are
some of the career intelligence. people upset enough to play hard
ball? ANd if so, what sorts or responses should we look for from
them? This may have the makings of an epic clash...
Mel
Goodman: Do not expect intelligence officers to come forward into
the light of public scrutiny. They have their own ethical codes
regarding intelligence materials and they also have a fear of
being polygraphed on a regular basis.
_______________________
New
York, N.Y.: What are the chances of actually finding out who all
the players are?
Mel
Goodman: The chances are far better than the current conventional
wisdom has it.
_______________________
Arlington,
Va.: In the end, won't this just end with a relatively low-level
administration official being used as a scapegoat? i don't think
any of the high ups would have gotten their hands dirty actually
making the call or the leak, but would have put a foot soldier
to the task.
In addition, there seems to be a general antipathy in the general
public. those attending this chat seem to be in the minority in
that they are outraged at such an abuse of power and of the public
trust.
Mel
Goodman: The typical response is to sacrifice a low-ranking political
operative, but there may be too much congressional and public
focus right now for that.
_______________________
Burke,
Va.: Dr Goodman, Mr Novak said on CNN that the CIA person was
an analyst and not an operator, and thus not one that fits in
to the rules of not disclosing identities. He says the controversy
is a big to-do about nothing as she was an analyst.
Is
this true?
Mel
Goodman: It is not true....and, more importantly, even Novak knows
that it is not true. He seems to be standing in a hole but refusing
to stop shoveling on this one.
_______________________
Topanga,
Calif.: Hi Mel,
Despite what has been publicly stated, an obvious
'circling of the wagon's' mentality at the White
House will shift into high gear about now...I have
heard people suggest "well just check the White
House phone logs and that will tell you who made
the calls".
It appears unlikely that if one were going to make
a potentially incriminating call, it would eminate
from such an easily accessed location.
In addition, can we expect the Justice Department
under Ashcroft to be the impartial investigators in
this matter? It seems impossible in light of the
potential outcome. Your thoughts?
Mel
Goodman: I share your concerns.....this has all the hallmarks
of a covert action that includes plausible denial....so it will
be difficult to get to the real offenders here....but not impossible.
_______________________
Los
Angeles, Calif.: What's our opinion on the president directly
calling for information regarding breaking the cover of a covert
CIA agent?
It strikes me as disingenuous: like complaining about the problem
of betrayal to the person who betrayed you.
Anita
Mel
Goodman: I agree....there was no White House interest at all until
the flashpoint situation was reached....
_______________________
West
Virginia: I think anyone who would print the name of any CIA,FBI,
or etc. without that persons
permission should be held for treason the people of the world
do not need this info
Mel Goodman: President George. H.W. Bush agrees with you completely.
_______________________
Santa
Fe, N.M.: Mr. Goodman
What
an enriching experience this format brings to
the issue.
Using
the experience your background provides, can
you unravel for us some of the logic which might
have driven these event - is this one more sign those
in this administration believe will the American
people will sit idly by?
Mel
Goodman: Yes, this is a classic example of hubris and the arrogance
of power.
_______________________
Nashville,
Tenn.: Last night on the Newshour with Jim Lehrer there was a
former CIA agent on with Gen. Zinni. I was shocked at his anger
at the administration for this even though he was a registered
Republican and had voted for the president. Do you believe this
reaction is common among those in the intelligence community?
Mel
Goodman: People seem skeptical that intelligence professionals
would act so passionately about the misuse of intelligence information
and putting lives at risk.....the fact is that we care mightily
about these things and terrible lines have been crossed. That
is why a special counsel is essential.
_______________________
Alexandria,
Va.: Needs adult supervision?
Guess
we know your politics, Mel.
Mel
Goodman: This has nothing to do with politics....It concerns two
vital national security matters: how we use or misuse intelligence
information to go to war...and how we protect the courageous Americans
in the field who are trying to collect sensitive information to
help with such judgments. Why is that so difficult to understand,
Alex.
_______________________
Mel
Goodman: I'm afraid we are out of time. Please watch for my book
"Bush League Diplomacy: How the Neoconservatives are Putting
the Nation at Risk," which will be published in March and
go into more details on these and other issues. Thank you for
your comments and questions. Mel Goodman