The Leak and the ‘Truth’

The Leak and the ‘Truth’

If President Bush wants to tell the truth to the American public, he can make Cheney, Rove and Libby come clean about their role in the Plame affair.

Copy Link
Facebook
X (Twitter)
Bluesky
Pocket
Email

“I wanted people to see the truth.”

That’s how George W. Bush explained his decision to authorize the selective dissemination of portions of a classified National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Iraq’s WMD in the summer of 2003, when the main rationale for his war in Iraq was unraveling. But this was no exercise in full disclosure. It was a political operation. With former Ambassador Joseph Wilson and others raising questions about Bush’s overstatement of the prewar intelligence–none of the promised unconventional weapons, after three months, having been found–the Bush gang was beginning to worry. News reports at the time were carrying leaks from unnamed intelligence officials indicating that the President and his team had hyped the WMD threat. And a much noticed Wilson op-ed in the New York Times had made it seem that the White House had used one charge–that Saddam Hussein had been uranium shopping in Iraq–after the Administration had reason to know it was bunk.

So it was fight-back time. That meant discrediting Wilson as a critic. Top White House aides Karl Rove and Scooter Libby told reporters that Wilson’s wife was in the CIA and had been responsible for sending him to Niger to check out the report that Baghdad had acquired uranium there–a report based on sloppy forgeries that was easy to rebut. Their point was to make Wilson’s mission seem like a silly junket born of nepotism, which it wasn’t. (Wilson, an Africa expert with knowledge of the uranium industry, was qualified for the task.) But in this frenzy to undercut Joe Wilson, Rove disclosed Valerie Wilson’s CIA employment–which was classified information–to conservative columnist Bob Novak, who then outed her in print as a CIA operative. Libby passed the information on her CIA connection to two reporters, Time magazine’s Matt Cooper and the Times’s Judith Miller.

The recent twists in the Libby case show that Cheney was in the weeds, huddling with Libby about how to respond to Wilson and other critics. Special counsel Patrick Fitzgerald’s most recent legal filing notes that Cheney “specifically selected” Libby “to talk to the press about the NIE and Mr. Wilson.” That suggests that when Libby disclosed information about Valerie Wilson’s CIA employment, he did so under Cheney’s direction. As part of this Cheney-managed counterattack, Libby shared slices of the NIE with Miller–after Bush had told Cheney it was OK to release those portions. But Libby did not tell Miller about the parts of the NIE that raised serious questions about the Niger allegation. He only cited the passages that supported the Administration’s position.

Which brings us back to the truth. Had Bush, Cheney and Libby been interested in spreading the full story, they could have declassified the entire NIE (with redactions where needed) and tossed out copies in the White House press room. (The Administration did later release parts of the NIE to the press.) Instead, they tried to deploy pieces of the NIE as ammunition in a spin attack. And once the Valerie Wilson story broke, the White House covered up the involvement of Rove and Libby in the leak and said nothing about Cheney’s hands-on participation in the anti-Wilson efforts. After all, it was Cheney who first told Libby that Valerie Wilson–a k a Valerie Plame–worked in a division of the agency’s clandestine service.

So if Bush is sincerely interested in putting the truth before the American public, he can ask the Vice President, Rove, Libby and all his aides to come clean about the Wilson leak. And he can declassify–on his own–hundreds of prewar intelligence reports and memos in CIA, NSC, State Department and Pentagon files that cover Iraq’s supposed WMDs and the operational link between Baghdad and Osama bin Laden that Bush claimed existed. The Bush-backed, Cheney-approved, Libby-arranged misleading leak to Judith Miller was a first step–but a false one.

Support The Nation’s June Fundraising Campaign

With the midterm elections now firmly upon us, the question is whether Democratic candidates will do more than merely occupy ballot lines as mild alternatives to the red-hot crisis that is Donald Trump.

As Trump spends over $1 billion a day on a globally destabilizing war on Iran and admits that he doesn’t “think about Americans’ financial situation,” millions across the country are struggling with the surging costs of essentials. Democrats must seize this moment and advance bold, small-“d” populist ideas—not settle for cynical caution that once again snatches defeat from the jaws of victory.

The Nation elevates progressive ideas, movements, and elected officials achieving real change across the country into the national conversation. At the same time, our journalists are exposing how crypto and AI-funded super PACs are spending hundreds of millions of dollars to knock out candidates they oppose, reporting on the devastating impact of the Supreme Court’s evisceration of the Voting Rights Act, and sounding the alarm on attempts by red states to quickly redraw electoral maps, disenfranchising Southern Black voters.

We can play this critical role because of support from readers like you. This June, we’re raising $20,000 to power The Nation’s independent journalism in the run-up to November’s immensely consequential elections.

It’s in our power to build a more just society, and your support at this critical moment brings us closer to that bold vision. I hope you’ll donate today.

Onward,

Katrina vanden Heuvel
Editor and Publisher, The Nation

Ad Policy
x