Is Plame WINPAC?

by emptywheel

The assertion--supported by three anonymous people--that Plame didn't work for WINPAC is getting both right and left blogosphere in a tizzy.

Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, never worked for WINPAC, an analysis unit in the overt side of the CIA, and instead worked in a position in the CIA's secret side, known as the directorate of operations, according to three people familiar with her work for the spy agency.

The right believes they've got evidence now that Libby didn't know Plame was covert, since he believed she worked on the Director of Intelligence (analysis) side of the agency. The left believes Fitzgerald is going to have an easier time of nailing the original source, since it is faulty.

Me, I'm not so sure this assertion is correct. I say that for two reasons. There is evidence (including from one named source) saying she was in WINPAC. And this story apparently first appeared on GOPUSA, an almost surefire sign it's disinformation.

I laid out the evidence for and against Plame's involvement with WINPAC in a post on Fleitz (it's a critical issue in the question of whether Fred Fleitz was the original source of her NOC status). Here's a quick overview of that evidence:

• Vincent Cannistraro, Plame's former boss in Counter-terrorism, says she works in WINPAC

Contrary to the Senate Intelligence Committee’s reporting, former CIA official Vincent Cannistraro said that Plame worked undercover for the Center for Weapons Intelligence, Nonproliferation, and Arms Control, or WINPAC. (Wilson xl)

• This Carnegie Endowment piece appears to imply that the CIA officer currently suing for wrongful discpline was kicked out of WINPAC; we know this guy ran assets (making him DO). If it's true the way they retaliated was by reassiging him, it means at least one DO person was associated WINPAC (this is a little associative--I'm not 100% confident in this).

• This all-important September 2003 WaPo article sourced to the SAO who is likely Fitz' best witness implies she wears two hats, analysis and operations.

She is a case officer in the CIA's clandestine service and works as an analyst on weapons of mass destruction.

Now like I said, I think the Carnegie Endowment connection is sketchy. And the CIA site doesn't really help--it clearly shows WINPAC is on the Directorate of Intelligence (analysis) side of the agency. But it doesn't say how it's organized. Alan Foley (head of WINPAC) made an offhand reference in his Bolton testimony to its formation, which makes it sound like it's one big umbrella organization that includes everyone having to do with non-proliferation.

But, you remember, WINPAC was put together early in the Administration, and I think Fred was with the Nonproliferation Center, one of the -- John Lauder's old organization -- and we were all, sort of, reorganized into one group then. That's what I remember. (7)

Basically, though, there's not much on WINPAC's organization. No big surprise there.

The other two bits of evidence I find more compelling. Vincent Cannistraro is a damn good source on CIA. He used to work with Plame when he was the head of counter-terrorism. Compare that to the quality of the sources in the AP story: anonymous and not even identified as having any affiliation with CIA (and even if they're in the CIA, the Porter Goss CIA has been stripped of many, if not most, of its independent thinkers). Hell, AP's sources could include the omnipresent Luskin! It strikes me that Cannistraro is a more credible source, at least until we learn more about the AP sources.

And I find the formulation in the WaPo piece quite intriguing. Plame was working in both clandestine services and working as an analyst, it says. If I had to guess, I'd say this is accurate. Plame has been back from overseas assignment for a few years (although still within the time limit stipulated by IIPA). But the Brewster-Jennings front company was clearly still active. Which suggests Plame likely still played a role in it, an operative role. But she may have been used in an analytical role, as well, since she was located at Langley.

In any case, I doubt this is the big news either the right or the left blogosphere thinks it is. Fitz clearly already knows where Plame worked. Sure, Libby may claim to be ignorant of her specific role. But it seems like Fitz has a good idea of the chain of the leak. Which means he is likely to be able to refute this defense, if that's what Libby is planning on using.

Comments

[dj moonbat]

This may be helpful in the short term to the 'wingers, stanching the bleeding after the indictments come out. But it won't do Scooter even a tiny little bit of good in court, where the prosecutor is free to hammer home the details to a captive audience. And of course, it would only help him with IIPA charges, not espionage; conspiracy; obstruction; or any of the other good stuff Scooter's up against.

[Kagro X]

Even with IIPA charges, Libby still has to convince a jury that this isn't a backfilled cover story.

An if it's true that Libby really did think she was DI and not DO, it's both shockingly bad form for a high-level aide not to double check her status when she's working in what was ostensibly an area of critical importance to the "administration," and probably pretty good evidence for Fitzgerald's wider-ranging probe into the systematic rigging of intelligence and the destruction of the existing intelligence infrastructure.

[DemFromCT]

Kagro,this is more of the "are they just incompetent or are they evil" debate. A lose-lose for the WH.

[Mimikatz]

I think your analysis of her "dual" status is correct. Valerie married and had twins. At that point she was shifting to working at Langley rather than in the field, but she still had contacts and occasional assignments in the field. And WINPAC does seem to have been a loose organization of people from different parts of the agency.

There are some interesting tidbits in this WaPo story. The story says that early on Fitz's office was told about the conflicts between Cheney's office and the CIA.

Two items stand out. First, "one former CIA official told prosecutors early in the probe about efforts by Cheney's office and his allies at the [NSC] to obtain information about Wilson's trip as long as two months before Plame was unmasked in July 2003, according to a person familiar with the account."

And later in the article: "A former CIA official told investigators that Cheney's office was seeking information about Wilson in May 2003, but it's not certain that officials with the vice president learned of the Plame connection then." This second reference is not sourced, and reflects the line emanating from the VP's office, or at least Libby's camp.

But Libby was the one who went over to the CIA to press them about WMD intel. He had to have more than a passing familiarity with the organization and the people who worked there. Put this together with Hersh's "stovepipe" article. There has definitely been CIA pushback here, and we still don't know how much was in the CIA's original referral. Clearly, Tenet and/or his people are exacting their revenge.

I think Libby is akmost certain to be indicted. Cheney at most would be an unindicted co-conspirator. As for the rest of WHIG, it depends on who talked and how early in the game.

And on the aspens--Laura Rozen, probably the only person ever to have actually read Libby's novel, said in a column right after the letter became public that that florid style is how he writes. I do think there was a bit of a message in there, but maybe not as much as some speculations. Maybe he's just a weird guy.

[aiko]

WHIG after PLAME not Wilson. She was threat and had to be taken down.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/10/18/6535/5141

I got this via kid oakland. it really makes sense to me.

[Squeaky]

Great detective work on Fleitz, Bolton, and Plame. I agree that Cannistraro would know about Plame's status and the 'anonymous sources' most likely include Luskin trying to spin. One thing though the Mike Allen WaPo article came up with only the headline without the body of the article, it seems to be unavailable. Do you have another link for the article? I would love to read it again.

[Squeaky]

Great detective work on Fleitz, Bolton, and Plame. I agree that Cannistraro would know about Plame's status and the 'anonymous sources' most likely include Luskin trying to spin. One thing though the Mike Allen WaPo article came up with only the headline without the body of the article, it seems to be unavailable. Do you have another link for the article? I would love to read it again.

[eriposte]

The original CIA referral (among other things) makes it clear that Plame was covert. There is significant evidence that she was covert in DO. The issue of whether she worked for WINPAC or not then becomes moot because if WINPAC had covert operatives from other divisions (DO included) working there part time, it didn't make them any less covert. Their cover obviously could not have changed just because they helped out at WINPAC. What it does mean is that not everyone who worked for WINPAC was necessarily "overt".

So, to sum up. I don't see Fitzgerald having wasted 2 years without establishing that Plame was covert. Since she was covert, whether or not she worked at WINPAC made no difference. Which means that working at WINPAC does not mean you lose your cover or that you become "overt". Which means that Libby doesn't have a prayer with this latest spin.

There's also a bigger issue here. The fact that *Plame worked for the CIA* was THE secret. Not her name or her relationship to Wilson or any other BS that the jokers on the Far Right pull out of their ***** on a given day. No one outside of classified circles knew she was working in the CIA. That means, regardless of where she worked in the CIA, she was covert.

[Swopa]

Sheesh, I have to do everybody's fact-checking for them. :-)

Newsday, July 22, 2003:

A senior intelligence official confirmed that Plame was a Directorate of Operations undercover officer who worked "alongside" the operations officers who asked her husband to travel to Niger.

In other words, on the organizational chart she's in the Directorate of Operations, but her actual desk was with the analysts -- which would make it easy for someone who didn't know the org chart to assume she was an analyst, too.

[park]

What timing. I was going to post a link back to swopa with more about that GOPUSA "article" from yesterday:
Right here. Cliff Kincaid. What a guy!

[Curiouser and curiouser]

Perhaps Judith copied her original notebook from June of 2003 while adding and deleting from her original notes. It would be interesting to see the Fitzgerald's forensic analysis report of the June notes which she "found". What if the paper on which the notes were written had not been manufactured until after 2003, the same for the ink as well as the time since the ink was applied to the paper, was it recently applied or does it have a consistency of ink which was applied in 2003? Do Judith's June notes contain a watermark which indicates the date of manufacture of the paper?

[DemFromCT]

raw story is reporting the 'flipper' is John Hannah, with ties to Cheney and Bolton. Hmmm.

[Kagro X]

I should've guessed! Back when I was saying that Watergate taught us that the indictments go to alliterative names -- Howard Hunt, Fred Fleitz -- and people with first initials and rhyming names -- G. Gordon Liddy, I. Lewis Libby -- we should have figured out that "Johns" always flip.

[johncook]

BUSH's Born aGAIN SCAM??

THE GREATEST scam EVER...?

We all know that what is called the democratic or rep. party is really just a lose federation of groups that may or may have competing goals. This is seen on the DNC web site that lists various interest groups and not much on core values... It is also seen on the right.

That said, real vaules can be deduced by one's actions. MY HAT goes off the ROVE/BUSH, and cast... on defining BUSH as a borm again christian. THIS allowed Bush's past behavior to be ignored since he had been saved. IT also gave them leaway to attach others that did not have this get out of jail free card... a TRUELY amazing coop.

[DemFromCT]

Juan Cole on John Hannah, 2/04.

[DemFromCT]

TalkLeft on the stakes:

This is the week that all of the subjects facing Indictment will be faced with their "come to Jesus" moment. Spouses will be telling them to cut their losses and think of the family. They will be forced to juxtapose their loyalty to the Administration with their loyalty to their families and their interest in self-preservation.

My experience tells me that only those who truly believe they are innocent -- and those whom Fitzgerald advises are looking at felonies and jail time even with a deal -- will hold out.

Update: The Velvet Revolution computes the guidelines and says life in prison is possible for RoveGaters.

[antiaristo]

As ever with this bloody war, the Brits are the clue.
Do you remember what happened with David Kelly? At exactly the same time?

When Campbell and Blair wanted to "out" Kelly they played a game with the press. They gave out enough clues for an educated pundit to narrow the field down to a few names. They then said they would confirm the name if any journalist found it. Richard Norton-Taylor guessed three, and the third was David Kelly.

The plame conspirators were facing the identical situation across the water. They wanted to get a name into the public domain. But unlike Kelly, Plame had committed no infraction. So they went about it in a different way.

They broke the basic information down into pieces and gave different pieces to different people at different times. They put in some slight variations of the name and exactly what she did in order to cover themselves against the IIPA. But they knew these people gossip, and they knew there were enough clues that only an idiot would fail to work it out.

[Meteor Blades]

After the indictments, no, scratch that, after the trial(s), I hope that everyone who has been saying THIS is what happened and WHY will go back over all their posts for the past two years and claim credit for when they were right and 'fess up to when they were wrong.

This doesn't apply to those like my blogmate, emptywheel, whose public comments are always couched in the conditional voice, but rather to those folks who put every TraitorGate speculation they make into concrete, then, when new evidence comes to light casually move on to their next certainty without so much as a nod in the direction of their past error.

[DemFromCT]

MB, not just bloggers. Nadagate writers like Tierney, Cohen etc are right up at the top of the list. If they don't do it, someone else will.

[park]

Cohen will just explain that whatever he wrote back then he didn't really mean it. He felt the opposite way the whole time.

[emptywheel]

Swopa

I don't understand that passage. It ALL says Plame was covert.

A senior intelligence official confirmed that Plame was a Directorate of Operations undercover officer [that is, she worked in DO, the covert side] who worked "alongside" the operations officers [that is, the people who made the decision were ALSO DO, that is covert--and we knew this from SSCI] who asked her husband to travel to Niger.

In other words, it says repeatedly that she's DO. That passage doesn't mention analysts at all.

[John Lopresti]

It is measured public speech we are seeing now, as E appropriately observes; divide the charges, lessen the seriousness of the multiple likely charges; and who knows how wide a camouflage cover KR provided in four hours of testimony Friday.
Although a pastorale is nice, it is wonderful E has located squirrel powered internet during this time.
Sunday's articles in the NY Times notably lacked the anticipated report by Jehl on the embed timeframe. The Judy self-authored with her attorneys article, and the Times duo interview of Judy with text approved by NY Times attorneys were a bit stilted as journalistic prose goes, though quaint enough. There remained for me a gothic overtone to Judy's description in carefully selected phrasing about its being impossible behind bars for her to have a telephone call personally from Libby, so she could testify, rather, the arrangement had to include conferencing in of each's attorney; some reminiscence about the rodeo chance encounter that would have been.

[Swopa]

emptywheel,

I understand your confusion -- I assumed that the latter "operations officers" was a flubbed way of talking about the WINPAC analysts, since saying "alongside" (and quoting it, all by itself) makes no sense unless Plame was working with people outside her native department. I didn't know what was in the SSCI, and if I'm lucky I'll never have to. :-)

Also, Jeralyn Merritt says Plame's boss was Alan Foley of WINPAC, which would make sense if she was "on loan" or otherwise assigned indefinitely there -- which would mean she was working in the midst of analysts.

[emptywheel]

Sorry Swopa, I forgot it was eRiposte who trodded through the damn thing, and not you. It's fun, if you consider it fiction, which is probably close to right.

I take it as saying they're DO officers. The SSCI is clear that Counter Proliferation in DO was the organization behind inviting Wilson. And it appears, at least, that that is Plame's primary affiliation.

There have been a number of assertions that Foley was Plame's boss. I've never seen any SOURCING to that claim. It'd be interesting if true, because Foley is either a giant space cadet or a willing idiot for Fleitz and Bolton.

[the exile]

Key question: we're breathless about indictments, but how is it possible that any of this will go to a public trial? Won't the DC Circuit accept the Bushies' inevitable argument that any trial would compromise vital national security secrets and thus endanger America? Wouldn't the Roberts SCOTUS uphold the DC circuit and refuse to hear the case? Isn't the fix in? Or if Bush issues blanket pardons with the explanation that any trial would compromise national secrets and make us less safe, are there enough honest Republicans to prevent him from getting away with it?