Here we go again.  It is nothing short of amazing how much libidinal cathexis American liberals, even the most widely respected and eminently rational, have invested in the delusion that Joe Wilson and Valerie Plame are the victims--rather than the perps--in the Plame-Wilson "scandal."  It is actually surprising to find Kevin Drum figuring prominently among the still deluded and ever-hopeful.  The well-known Calpundit, whose column "Political Animal" appears regularly in the Washington Monthly, attempts to breathe life into the cadaver of the Plame scandal in the August 28th issue. Under the bold-face heading Plame and Armitage one reads this, whch is a real eye-opener into the delusional character of this liberal meme.  Drum asks "Who gave Novak the name 'Valerie Plame?'"  He correctly dismisses both Armitage and Karl Rove, and goes on to write:

So it's somebody else. But who? Judith Miller wrote Plame's name in her notebook weeks before Novak's column appeared, but says she can't remember who gave it to her. Novak isn't talking either. But it's a key part of the mystery. Whoever gave up Plame's name not only knew about the Niger trip, but also knew that she used her maiden name when she was engaged on CIA business and deliberately leaked that name. There was malice of some kind involved in that.

There it is. It had to be malice. In fact, at the time that Novak's column appeared, anyone equipped with minimal googling skills needed only the name "Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV" to discover his wife's maiden name.

Before getting to the question of the public availability of Mrs. Wilson's maiden name, one must take into account the following astonishing passage from Kevin Drum's article, which underlies his accusation of malice:

Armitage apparently learned about Joe Wilson's trip to Niger on July 7 from a State Department memo that (incorrectly) suggested he had gotten the assignment because his wife, a CIA analyst, had recommended him. But that memo referred to Wilson's wife as "Valerie Wilson," not Valerie Plame.

Drum seems to have plucked the parenthetic qualifier "incorrectly" from his own bosom.  Apparently, he still clings to Joe Wilson's version of events, in spite of conclusions to the contrary by both the Senate Committee on Intelligence and the 9-11 Commission.  That is an enigma, but let us move on to the purported confidentiality of Mrs. Wilson's maiden name.

After his retirement from the Foreign Service in 1998, one of Ambassador Wilson's principal activities was his association with a consulting and lobbying firm called "Corporate & Public Strategy and Advisory Group," CPS for short.  On their web page Our Team, he is listed as one of two "Strategic Advisors."  The last line of his CPS  biography speaks volumes:

He is married to the former Valerie Plame and has two sons and two daughters.

Linking the name "Valerie Wilson" to "Valerie Plame" is no great feat of detective work. It is absurd to attribute the linkage to malice when its principal source is none other than Mr. Wilson, whose famous dictum that Karl Rove should be frog-marched out of the White House in handcuffs is seared, seared into the brain of all the nation's liberals. Unlike the eminent staight-arrow prosecutor, Mr. Patrick Fitzgerald, I rest my case.

Contributed by John Werntz on August 28, 2006 at 11:26 PM in Current Affairs, John "72nd TCS" Werntz | Permalink

Comments

Posted by: 1st Cav

Joey & Val need to be frog marched back to Africa where they have numerous ties. BTW, wasn't it Joey boy who set up Klinton's 26 USAF plane trip/vacation ($50M) to Africa to promote trade? Maybe that trip was multi-purpose trip. Was it to run from Monica and set the $graft$ hook for Congressman William Jefferson and Joey?

Probably more to this than meets the eye. Although many may wish it were, several are not so sure this revelation is really the end of story. Could Armitage be falling on his own sword for someone else?

Posted by: 1st Cav | Aug 29, 2006 12:07:28 AM

Posted by: Bill Faith

John, I corrected what I hope was really an error in your post. You had the first paragraph blockquoted but it read like something you'd write and you didn't attribute it to anyone else. My apologies if I did wrong.

Posted by: Bill Faith | Aug 29, 2006 12:27:52 AM

Posted by: John

1stCav:

Sorry, William, I can't see it. Armitage hasn't fallen on any sword. He has skulked around for years behind the protection of Novak's refusal to name him. He still hasn't fessed up. When he and Powell sent the Taft guy to clue in Gonzales, they pulled the wool over his head, mentioning only State officials, without IDing Armitage. Meanwhile, he has kept silent for years, allowing the left to crap all over the White House. Pretty shabby IMHO.

Posted by: John | Aug 29, 2006 12:11:38 PM

Posted by: 1st Cav

Maybe I'm just not seeing the forest for the trees. That said, my gut still tells me there is something else to this story that isn't coming out. Maybe it involves too many from both sides of the aisle?

Posted by: 1st Cav | Aug 29, 2006 9:51:49 PM