Here is a sample of the sort of self—serving hooey the Special Prosecutor dished at his press conference following the indictment:
FITZGERALD: The fact that she was a CIA officer was not well— known, for her protection or for the benefit of all us. It's important that a CIA officer's identity be protected, that it be protected not just for the officer, but for the nation's security.
It's a far cry from his January 9 response to Libby's counsel, responding to a discovery request (Exhibit B to Libby's last filing):
Request D A formal assessment has not been done of the damage caused by the disclosure of Valerie Wilson's status as a CIA employee, and thus we possess no such document, In any event, we would not view an assessment of the damage caused as relevant to the issue of whether or not Mr. Libby intentionally lied when he made the statements and gave the grand jury testimony which the grand jury alleged was false.
Request E We have neither sought, much less obtained 'all documents, regardless of when created, relating to whether Valerie Wilson's status as a CIA employee, or any aspect of that status, was classified at any time between May 6, 2003 and July 14,2003'
Aside from the dishonesty of suggesting facts not borne out by his investigation made the indictment significant, the answer to this discovery request draws into question the very materiality of Libby's responses. For if the Special Prosecutor had no evidence that Valerie was a "classified" employee at the CIA why did he even proceed with the investigation? He was selected to determine whether there had been a violation of the law relating to classified information——in this case——the "outing" of a covert agent.
And he proceeded without even seeking to establish whether Plame was one?
Clarice Feldman 2 02 06
Share