Plane was I intentionally outed. It was a crime. Your point?
I respectfully disagree.
There are many people, including many legal experts, who don't believe any crime was committed by disclosing Valerie Plame's name and her former work as a covert agent. It is important to note that no one was convicted of any crime involving the release of information about Valerie Plame. In fact no one was even charged with such crime.
“Libby was convicted in March of lying to a grand jury and to FBI agents investigating the leak, and was sentenced in June to 2 1/2 years in prison. President Bush commuted Libby's sentence this month, eliminating the prison time.
No one was charged with the crime of intentionally disclosing Plame's covert identity” (emphasis my own).
Plame's Suit Against Top Officials Dismissed
Does anyone know WHY no one was ever charged? Although I cannot be absolutely certain, I suggest it's because there was no violation of any law. The law does not prohibit disclosing the names of ALL covert agents, only those who meet certain criteria. Here's a link that explains it in layman's terms:
“In The Politics of Truth, former ambassador Joseph Wilson writes that he and his future wife [Valerie Plame] both returned from overseas assignments in June 1997. Neither spouse, a reading of the book indicates, was again stationed overseas. They appear to have remained in Washington, D.C., where they married and became parents of twins (explanatory insertion [Valerie Plame] my own).
“Six years later, in July 2003, the name of the CIA officer — Valerie Plame — was revealed by columnist Robert Novak. The column's date is important because the law against unmasking the identities of U.S. spies says a 'covert agent' must have been on an overseas assignment 'within the last five years.' The assignment also must be long-term, not a short trip or temporary post, two experts on the law say. Wilson's book makes numerous references to the couple's life in Washington over the six years up to July 2003.
"Unless she was really stationed abroad sometime after their marriage," she wasn't a covert agent protected by the law, says Bruce Sanford, an attorney who helped write the 1982 act that protects covert agents' identities.”
USATODAY.com - CIA 'outing' might fall short of crime
In the 1982 act (Intelligence Identities Protection Act, 50 U.S.C) referred to in the above link, Section 426(4) defines “covert agent” to mean:
(A) A present or retired officer or employee of an intelligence agency or a present or retired member
of the armed forces assigned to duty with an intelligence agency—
(i) whose identity as such an officer, employee, or member is classified information, and
(ii) who is serving outside the United States or has within the last five years served outside the United States; or
(B) A United States citizen whose intelligence relationship to the United States is classified information, and—
(i) who resides and acts outside the United States as an agent of, or informant or source of operational assistance to, an intelligence agency, or
(ii) who is at the time of the disclosure acting as an agent of, or informant to, the foreign counterintelligence or foreign counterterrorism components of the Federal Bureau of Investigation; or
(C) An individual, other than a United States citizen [this section not relevant]
https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/intel/RS21636.pdf
It appears that Valerie Plame may not have been a covert agent – as that term is defined at law – when her information was released. In my humble opinion, that is the only thing which would explain why no charges were ever filed against anyone for the disclosure. If there is another reason, I can't even imagine what it was.
As far as I know this was the only time in American judicial history when someone was convicted of perjury in a case where no other criminal charges were filed.
Correct?
