Constant's pations

If it's more than 30 minutes old, it's not news. It's a blog.

Friday, July 15, 2005

Rove: What efforts were done to identify those seeking to confirm classified information?

Requested action: Brad, please forward this link to Ambassador Wilson

Joe Wilson,

Thank you for your service.

Something just occurred to me and I thought I would bring it to your attention.

I was reading this article and came across something rather curious:

IN the 11 July 2003 e-mail, Rover confirmed a discussion about matters: "Bush confidant Karl Rove alerted the president's No. 2 security adviser about the interview".


As you well know, anytime that a security matter like this is raised, the question should be: "Who is trying to get access to classified information?"

In other words, the attention that should have been raised was, "Is there an effort underway to identify a CIA agent and then have her compromised, targeted, or otherwise watched?"

In other words, once the effort is made to confirm classified information, I would like the Administration to report to Congress:

  • what type of review was done to determine who was attempting to gather this classified information?

  • how was NSA and other intelligence officials notified of this apparent breach?

  • How was the information about the "effort to confirm classified information" handled?

    In other words, it appears that [not knowing who was asking the questions] someone should have been alerted in both the intelligence and security services of "hay, we've got someone who is trying to confirm classified information: Who are they; what is their objective; what organization are they with; and how are they connected to other efforts underway?"

    Based on what I'm reading in the apparently "yawn" approach to this entire affair, is the apparent "we don't' care who is trying to find this out" kind of attitude.

    In other words, if there are other efforts underway to access, confirm, or identity other agents, or glean classified information [using methods that are actually called spying], I would like to know what effort has been made to identify those personnel who are engaged in this activity to ensure that their efforts to confirm classified information are known to the security services; and that appropriate acting is taken to stop these efforts.

    From where I am standing, it appears as though "this part" of the post-leak-review never took place. Perhaps it has and there is a report that is available through FOIA or for classified-review by the Committees.

    If not, why not; and what is the plan to review this?

    Bottom line: either way, you're one step closer to truth

    Both options are not good for RNC/White House and significantly throw a monkey wrench into the current White House defenses. Either,

    A. They looked at this, and there's a report that can be subpoenaed; and they can explain why this information-report-post-action information isn't available for your review; or

    B. They didn't look at it, and failed to timely act on a known security issue, and this is the basis for another investigation into "Why didn't you do what you were supposed to do when this fair notice there was an external intelligence gathering effort going on-activity occurred".

    This should have sent alarm bells going off that there was an effort to not simply confirm information for a news story, but that there potentially wider efforts underway to gather/confirm information.

    In many cases people may "blow off" these kinds of questions. But think where we are: This is the White House.

    If the White House is getting incoming indicators of intelligence/alleged spying going on, and doesn't timely act, document, report, and forward lessons learned [per OPSEC requirements], then what's going on in the White House when there are more compelling intelligence gathering efforts going on that are more subtle?

    This who "new information" that I've run across leaves a very bad taste in my mouth for the following reason:

    Supposedly during pre-9-11-stuff, indicators were coming in that there were problems. Overseas intelligence, local, and nothing done.

    Now, in the wake of WMD-Iraq-and-CIA-agent-name outing, I'm walking away with the conclusions that this "oh, don't bother us with reality" approach continues.

    Moreover, if the "post-9-11-lessons" were actually implemented, would we not expect there to be greater vigilance and faster government action to investigate the scope of the possible intelligence gathering acrtivity from an unknown spy as this was going on in the wake of the Niger-editorial-agent-name-outing?

    I can't answer that. But I do see the WH asserting "we're taking care of it," but now it appears that despite the intelligence-gathering effort, there was no effort to really identify who was driving the initial notifications/alerts about the CIA officer; nor was there sufficient effort by Security to document the lessons learned and find out/communicate/alert others to the efforts going on.

    If there is no report, then I fear that the FBI counter-intelligence efforts have been compromised: Because it would mean that the White House didn't timely alert the FBI of the apparent wider intelligence-gathering-effort on this specific, identifiable, and clear security breach.

    If the White House can't do this right, how much other stuff is falling through the cracks; who knows about it; and how many people on the Joint Congressional Committees on intelligence have either done nothing to point a laser at this problem; or have been fed non-sense to make them believe that the issues are resolve in the wake of 9-11?

    Either there is a report that can be looked at; or there is no report and FBI Counter Intelligence has a problem with their White House-liaison.

    Perhaps it is both.

    Thank you for considering my remarks. Good luck in your continued efforts.