Summary

VALERIE PLAME House Oversight and Government Reform Committee holds a hearing with Valerie Plame Wilson, Mark Zaid, attorney and Victoria Toensing Also, Dr, James Knodell the Director of the Office of Security, the White House has been invited to attend 11:00:00 COVERT THERE WAS NO DOUBT ABOUT IT 11:00:02 BY THE WAY, THE CIA HAS AUTHORIZED US TO BE ABLE TO SAY 11:00:08 THAT AND I UNDER THAT CHAIRMAN 11:00:12 WAXMAN SENT HIS OPENING STATEMENT OVER TO THE CIA TO 11:00:15 BE CLEARED AND IN IT HE SAID MISS WILL SOP WAS A COVERT, AND 11:00:22 MISS WILSON WAS UNDER COVER THE CIA CLEARED THESE 11:00:27 STATEMENTS I EMPHASIZE THIS, BECAUSE THERE 11:00:29 ARE PEOPLE STILL TRYING TO SUGGEST THAT WHAT SEEMS 11:00:34 ABSOLUTELY CLEAR ISN'T REALLY TRUE AND YOU WEREN'T COVERT 11:00:37 I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS WE NEED TO DO IN THIS HEARING IS 11:00:41 MAKE SURE THERE ISN'T ANY AMBIGUITY ON THIS POINT 11:00:45 11:01:21 YOU WERE A COVERT CIA EMPLOYEE, AND WITHIN THE PAST FIVE YEARS 11:01:25 FROM TODAY YOU WENT ON SECRET MISSIONS OUTSIDE THE UNITED 11:01:30 STATES IS THAT CORRECT? 11:01:31 >> THAT IS CORRECT, CONGRESSMAN >> I WANT TO THANK YOU AND I 11:01:35 HOPE THIS COMMITTEE NOW CLEARED UP THE ISSUE OF COVERT, WHETHER 11:01:38 THIS PLAME WAS A -- MRS PLAME WAS A COVERT AGENT 11:01:46 I YIELD BACK >> THANK YOU, MR CHAIRMAN 11:01:48 I AM GLAD MR CONYERS ASKED THESE QUESTIONS BECAUSE I WAS ON 11:01:52 TO ASK THEM, TOO MISS WILSON, I WANT TO THANK YOU 11:01:56 FOR YOUR SERVICE TO OUR COUNTRY, AND IF I SEEM OF LITTLE NERVOUS, 11:02:00 I'VE NEVER QUESTIONED A SPY BEFORE 11:02:05 >> I'VE NEVER TESTIFIED BEFORE >> I'M SORRY? 11:02:09 >> I NEVER TESTIFIED UNDER OATH BEFORE 11:02:12 I WAS HERE DURING THE STEROID HEARINGS, TOO, AND I DO NOT 11:02:15 THINK ANY OF THE BASEBALL STARS GOT THE MEDIA ATTENTION YOU ARE 11:02:19 GETTING TODAY WHEN THE CHAIRMAN HAS HIS 11:02:23 OPENING STATEMENT HE USED THREE TERMS -- COVERT, UNDER COVER, 11:02:27 AND CLASSIFIED WERE YOU ONE OF THOSE IN 11:02:31 PARTICULAR OR ALL OF THEM OR THREE DIFFERENT TERMS TO 11:02:36 CATEGORIZE I GUESS YOUR SERVICE TO THE COUNTRY? 11:02:38 >> FOR THOSE OF US WHO WORK UNDER COVER IN THE CIA WE TENDED 11:02:45 TO USE COVERT AND UNDERCOVER INTERCHANGEABLY 11:02:49 WE TYPICALLY WOULD NOT SAY OF OURSELVES THAT WE WERE IN A 11:02:54 CLASSIFIED POSITION WE WERE UNDER COVER OR OVER 11:02:59 EMPLOYEE >> DID YOU JUST DISCUSSED THIS 11:03:01 AMONG YOURSELVES WITH YOU WERE CLASSIFIED OR COVERT -- BECAUSE 11:03:05 I AM ASSUMING YOU COULD NOT DISCUSS IT WITH ANYONE OUTSIDE 11:03:08 THE AGENCY IS IT AROUND THE BREAK ROOM 11:03:12 WHERE YOU SAY I AM COVERT OR CLASSIFIED, OR IF I WAS GOING 11:03:15 TO TELL SOMEBODY, WHAT I WOULD TELL SOMEBODY? 11:03:17 >> WITHIN YOUR COLLEAGUES EITHER WITHIN THE FIELD OR IN 11:03:22 HEADQUARTERS IN WASHINGTON, IF YOU WERE WORKING ON A PROJECT 11:03:26 SOMETIMES YOU NEED TO KNOW IF YOU ARE UNDERCOVER OR OVERT, LET 11:03:29 ME KNOW, THEN YOU KNOW HOW TO TREAT THEM ACCORDINGLY IN THE 11:03:33 SENSE OF HOW CAREFUL TO BE IN YOUR ASSOCIATION AND SO FORTH 11:03:37 >> RIGHT, SO YOUR FELLOW CIA EMPLOYEES WOULD HAVE KNOWN THAT 11:03:42 YOU WERE COVERT >> ABSOLUTELY 11:03:44 >> DID YOU EVER TELL ANYONE THAT YOU WORKED FOR THE CIA, OR WAS 11:03:52 THAT COMMONLY KNOWN THAT YOU WORKED FOR THE CIA OR DID YOU 11:03:55 TELL THEM THAT YOU WERE SOMETHING ELSE? 11:03:58 >> NO, CONGRESSMAN, I COULD COUNT ON ONE HAND THE NUMBER OF 11:04:05 PEOPLE WHO KNEW WHERE MY TRUE EMPLOYER WAS THE DAY MY NAME AND 11:04:12 TRUE AFFILIATION WAS EXPOSED IN JULY OF 2003 11:04:15 >> OK AND I AM ASSUMING ONE OF THOSE 11:04:20 WAS YOUR HUSBAND >> HE DID KNOW 11:04:23 >> DID HE KNOW IF YOU WERE COVERT OR CLASSIFIED OR -- 11:04:27 >> HE DID UNDERSTAND AS A FORMER AMBASSADOR AT 11:04:35 HAVING HELD SECURITY CLEARANCES AND WORKED WITH MANY AGENCY 11:04:40 EMPLOYEES, HE UNDERSTOOD THAT WORLD TO A CERTAIN POINT AND HE 11:04:42 CERTAINLY UNDERSTOOD BUT I WAS UNDERCOVER AND HE PROTECTED 11:04:46 THAT -- THAT I WAS UNDERCOVER AND SHE PROTECTED THAT 11:04:50 DILIGENTLY >> ARE WE GOING TO HAVE ANOTHER 11:04:53 ROUND OF QUESTIONS, MR WAXMAN, I THINK? 11:04:57 >> WE DO HAVE SOME OTHER PANELS >> HOW MUCH TIME? 11:05:04 >> ONE MINUTE AND 48 SECONDS >> OK 11:05:09 ON OCTOBER 5, 2003, WHILE BEING INTERVIEWED ON MEET THE PRESS 11:05:16 YOUR HUSBAND STATED THAT MY WIFE WILL NOT ALLOW HERSELF TO BE 11:05:20 PHOTOGRAPHED IN RESPONSE TO THE PICTURE YOU 11:05:22 TOOK FOR VANITY FAIR YOUR HUSBAND WAS QUOTED IN THE 11:05:26 WASHINGTON POST, THE PICTURE SHOULD NOT BE ABLE TO A IDENTIFY 11:05:29 HER AND ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO, SHE IS STILL AND VOID BY THE CIA AND 11:05:34 HAS OBLIGATIONS TO HER EMPLOYER -- EMPLOYED BY THE CIA 11:05:37 I GUESS THIS WAS AFTER THE INCIDENT WHERE EVERYBODY KNEW 11:05:41 THAT YOU WORKED FOR THE CIA, THAT THIS WAS DONE? 11:05:44 >> YES, CONGRESSMAN AT THE TIME THAT PICTURE CAME 11:05:48 OUT MY COVERT STATUS WAS LONG GONE AND I WILL SAY THIS, HAVING 11:05:54 LIVED MOST OF MY LIFE A VERY MUCH UNDER THE RADAR, MY 11:05:58 LEARNING CURVE WAS STEEP AND IT WAS MORE TROUBLE THAN IT WAS 11:06:01 WORTH >> BUT WHEN THE PHOTOGRAPH WAS 11:06:05 ACTUALLY TAKEN IN VANITY FAIR, THAT WAS NOT PUBLIC KNOWLEDGE, 11:06:11 ALL THIS WAS NOT OUT OF THEM? >> CONGRESSMEN, THE PICTURE CAME 11:06:15 OUT IN LATE 2003, MY COVERT STATUS WAS BLOWN 11:06:22 >> IF YOUR STATUS WAS EITHER COVERT AND CLASSIFIED AND IF YOU 11:06:26 DID IN FACT MEET WITH THE SENATE DEMOCRATIC POLICY COMMITTEE, MR 11:06:32 CHRISTOPH, IF YOU VIEW IT AS PART OF YOUR COVERT OR 11:06:35 CLASSIFIED WORK TO MEET WITH POLITICAL GROUPS AND A COLUMNIST 11:06:40 WITH THE THE NEW YORK TIMES TO DISCUSS MATTERS WITHIN YOUR 11:06:43 PURVIEW AT THE CIA -- I DON'T KNOW IF YOU SAW THE LIST OF 11:06:49 THINGS THAT WE COULD OR COULD NOT ASK YOU 11:06:55 DID THIS DEMOCRATIC POLICY COMMITTEE AND A COLUMNIST THE 11:07:02 NEW YORK TIMES HAVE OF THESE SAME RULES THAT THEY COULD OR 11:07:05 COULD NOT ASK YOU OR DID YOU VOLUNTEER OTHER INFORMATION? 11:07:08 >> CONGRESSMEN, I ATTENDED THAT CONFERENCE SIMPLY AS A SPOUSE OF 11:07:16 MY HUSBAND WHO WAS INVITED TO SPEAK 11:07:18 HE HAD BEEN INVITED TO SPEAK BECAUSE HE HAD QUITE A BIT OF 11:07:23 EXPERIENCE ON IRAQ HAVING SERVED THE FIRST PRESIDENT BUSH AS THE 11:07:28 CHARGES AFFAIRS IN THE EMBASSY OF BAGHDAD AND A GOOD SHOOTER 11:07:34 RELEASES -- HOSTAGES WITH SADDAM HUSSEIN AND SO FORTH 11:07:38 HE WAS ASKED TO ATTEND IN THAT CAPACITY 11:07:42 I HAD NO DISCUSSIONS OTHER THAN PURELY SOCIAL IN NATURE 11:07:48 >> YOUR TIME IS EXPIRED MR KUCINICH? 11:07:53 >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MISS WILSON, AND BEFORE YOUR SERVICE 11:07:58 TO OUR COUNTRY -- FRANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE 11:08:02 TO OUR COUNTRY BRIEFLY WENT TO PICK UP ON MY 11:08:07 COLLEAGUE'S QUESTIONS WHEN YOU LOOK AT THIS CHART AND 11:08:14 YOU SEE THE EXTRAORDINARY EFFORTS THAT WERE MADE TO 11:08:20 DISCLOSE YOUR IDENTITY, -- AND MOST OF THIS INFORMATION CAME 11:08:28 OUT OF THE LEAD TRIAL, THE -- LIBBY TRIAL 11:08:37 THIS WAS NOT JUST A LEAK, WAS IT? 11:08:40 WAS THIS SIMPLY A LEAK? >> QUITE A BIT OF EVIDENCE CAME 11:08:48 OUT IN THE COURSE OF THE LIBBY TRIAL, AND I WAS REALLY DEEPLY 11:08:53 DISMAYED BECAUSE IT JUST SHOWED A RECKLESSNESS AND A POLITICAL 11:09:02 PATH THAT IS VERY, VERY UNFORTUNATE 11:09:05 >> IN YOUR JUDGMENT WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE CHART DOESN'T SHOW A 11:09:08 VERY -- A FAIRLY ORGANIZED APPROACH TO DISCLOSE OR A 11:09:13 DEVOTEE? >> IT IS CERTAINLY WIDE 11:09:14 REACHING >> BECAUSE, MR CHAIRMAN, DO 11:09:20 LEAKS OCCUR OF AGENTS IDENTITY, IT DOES HAPPEN? 11:09:26 -- I'M SORRY, CONGRESSMAN? >> HAVE THERE BEEN IN THE PAST 11:09:31 LEAKS OF AN AGENT'S IDENTITY? >> NONE THAT I AM A BEAR -- 11:09:37 AWARE OF BY THE VERY OWN GOVERNMENT 11:09:40 >> AND YOU HAVE NEVER IN YOUR EXPERIENCE AS AN AGENT SEEN THIS 11:09:43 KIND OF COORDINATED EFFORT TO BUY ONE ON GOVERNMENT COME IN 11:09:47 THIS CASE, OUR GOVERNMENT, TO DISCLOSE THE IDENTITY OF AN 11:09:51 AGENT? >> NO, CONGRESSMAN, I AM NOT 11:09:54 AWARE OF AN >> TO WHAT EXTENT DOES THE 11:09:57 AGENCY GO TO PROTECT THE IDENTITIES OF WHICH -- ITS 11:10:01 AGENTS? >> IS SIGNIFICANT EFFORT 11:10:06 TAXPAYERS' MONEY PARTICULARLY IN THIS DAY AND AGE 11:10:12 OF GOOGLED AND INTERNET THE EFFORTS HAVE TO BE EVEN MORE 11:10:17 VIGILANT AND EVER MORE CREATIVE BECAUSE IT IS EXTREMELY EASY TO 11:10:21 FIND OUT A LOT OF INFORMATION ABOUT SOMEONE IF YOU REALLY WANT 11:10:24 TO SO, WE ARE CONSTANTLY -- THE CIA 11:10:29 CONSTANTLY HAS TO BE ONE STEP AHEAD TO PROTECT THEIR 11:10:33 OPERATIONS OFFICERS >> SO, WHEN THERE IS AN 11:10:37 EXTRAORDINARY EFFORT MADE TO DISCLOSE THE IDENTITY OF AN 11:10:41 AGENT, IS DESTRUCTIVE OF THE AGENCY AND IT IS DESTRUCTIVE OF 11:10:46 THE TAXPAYERS' INVESTMENT IN THE CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY 11:10:49 >> ABSOLUTELY >> AND, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT 11:10:53 KEEPS RUNNING THROUGH MY MIND IS WHY? 11:10:56 WHY DID THIS HAPPEN TO YOU? WAS IT AN UNINTENTIONAL MISTAKE 11:11:00 OR IS IT PART OF A LARGER PATTERN? 11:11:03 IN RECENT WEEKS WE HAVE LEARNED THAT YOU AS ATTORNEYS AND ALL 11:11:06 PARTS OF THE COUNTRY WERE FIRED DESPITE ITS SOME THREE SERVICE 11:11:09 AND SEVERAL OF THESE TESTIFIED TO CONGRESS THAT THERE WAS THE 11:11:14 IMPRESSION TO PURSUE CASES AGAINST DEMOCRATIC OFFICIALS, 11:11:17 OTHERS BELIEVE THAT THEY WERE FIRED BECAUSE THEY WERE PURSUING 11:11:19 CASES AGAINST REPUBLICAN OFFICIALS 11:11:21 HAVE YOU FOLLOW THIS? >> YES, I HAVE, CONGRESSMAN 11:11:27 >> WHEN I THINK WHAT HAPPENS TO THESE ATTORNEYS I CAN'T HELP BUT 11:11:30 THINK OF YOUR CASE BECAUSE THESE COULD BE ISOLATED INSTANCES BUT 11:11:34 THEY SEEM TO BE PART OF A LARGER PATTERN 11:11:36 DO YOU KNOW WHAT HAPPENED, FOR EXAMPLE, WITH FORMER TREASURY 11:11:39 SECRETARY MR O'NEILL WHEN HE WROTE HIS BOOK? 11:11:41 >> YES, I AM AWARE OF THAT >> AND AFTER SECRETARY O'NEILL 11:11:46 WROTE THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION WAS PLANNING TO OVERTHROW SADDAM 11:11:49 HUSSEIN IN A MUCH EARLIER TIME FRAME THAN ANYONE KNEW, 11:11:52 SECRETARY O'NEILL WAS FALSELY ACCUSED OF LEAKING CLASSIFIED 11:11:56 INFORMATION DID YOU KNOW THAT SECRETARY 11:11:58 O'NEILL WAS INVESTIGATED BY THE TREASURY DEPARTMENT FOR CROWN 11:12:02 THIS ACCUSATION? >> I BELIEVE I HAVE READ THAT, 11:12:05 YES >> AND ANOTHER INSTANCE GENERAL 11:12:09 XU ZAGACKI -- LOOKED AT THE US WOULD BE SEVERAL THOUSAND TROOPS 11:12:12 IN IRAQ YOU REMEMBER WHAT HAPPENED TO 11:12:13 HIM? >> YES, I DO, CONGRESSMAN 11:12:16 >> HE WAS DISMISSED >> I AM ALSO REMINDED OF THE 11:12:20 CASE OF RICHARD FOSTER, THE GOVERNMENT'S CHIEF MEDICARE 11:12:23 ACTUARY WHO WAS -- TOLD CONGRESS THE TRUTH ABOUT HOW MUCH THE 11:12:29 ADMINISTRATION'S PROPOSED DRUG BENEFIT WOULD COAST -- COSTS 11:12:32 YOU'RE AWARE OF THAT, MISS WILSON? 11:12:34 >> YES, I AM >> AGAIN, THESE ALL BE ISOLATED 11:12:38 INSTANCES BUT IT SEEMS TO BE PART OF A LARGER PATTERN 11:12:41 I AM STRUCK BY WHAT YOUR HUSBAND, JOE WILSON, WAS QUOTED 11:12:46 IN A BOOK JOLSON WAS UPSET AND REGARDED 11:12:51 THE LEAGUE AS A WARNING TO OTHERS 11:12:53 STORES LIKE THIS ARE NOT INTENDED TO INTIMIDATE ME SINCE 11:12:55 I OF OUR CRITICAL MY STORY BUT IT IS PRETTY CLEARLY 11:12:59 INTENDED TO INTIMIDATE OTHERS WHO MIGHT GO FORWARD 11:13:02 YOU NEED ONLY TO LOOK AT THE STORIES INTELLIGENCE ANALYSTS 11:13:06 WHO SAY THEY HAVE BEEN PRESSURED 11:13:09 THEY MAY HAVE KIDS IN COLLEGE, MAYBE ALL MOBILE TO THESE TYPES 11:13:12 OF SENIORS IS THIS WHAT YOU THINK WAS GOING 11:13:13 ON HERE? >> WHEN YOU LOOK AT -- I WILL 11:13:18 SPEAK ONLY TO THE REALM OF INTELLIGENCE AND THE 11:13:24 POLITICIZING OF THAT, CERTAINLY VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY'S 11:13:27 UNPRECEDENTED NUMBER OF VISITS TO CIA HEADQUARTERS IN THE RUN- 11:13:30 UP TO THE WAR MIGHT BE ONE EXAMPLE 11:13:32 THE LAW THAT IS EXACTLY THE POINT 11:13:36 -- THAT IS EXACTLY THE POINT WHAT HAPPENS WHEN SOMEONE IS 11:13:41 WORKING AT THE AGENCY LEVEL THAT PEOPLE WORKING -- THE VICE 11:13:47 PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES COMES OVER AND STARTS LOOKING 11:13:48 OVER THEIR SHOULDER IS THAT INTIMIDATING? 11:13:51 >> YES, IT IS >> MR KUCINICH, YOUR TIME HAS 11:13:56 EXPIRED >> MISS WATSON? 11:13:58 >> MR CHAIRMAN, I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR THIS HEARING 11:14:06 IT SHOWS OUR DETERMINATION TO BRING OUT INTO THE OPEN THE 11:14:11 MALFEASANCE IN OFFICE I AM AND AMBASSADOR 11:14:17 I HAVE GONE THROUGH THE TRAINING 11:14:20 I HAVE BEEN BLINDFOLDED, PUT ON A C-130, TAKEN TO A SITE, TAKEN 11:14:26 INTO A ROOM WITH MY COLLEAGUES, JUST LIKE -- HANDED A RED 11:14:35 FOLDER, HIGHLY CLASSIFIED WITH A GENERAL STANDING OVER MY 11:14:39 SHOULDER READ IT, AND GIVEN BACK TO ME 11:14:44 ANY INFORMATION THAT CAME OUT OF THAT TOTAL WAS MADE PUBLIC BUT 11:14:48 HAD TO COME FROM TWO SOURCES -- THE GENERAL ON MYSELF 11:14:53 I WAS THE ONLY WOMAN IN THE ROOM 11:14:55 THE MEN -- I CAN TELL YOU BUT I WILL HAVE TO KILL YOU 11:15:01 I AM VERY SENSITIVE TO HOW IT WORKS 11:15:04 AND I AM FURIOUS THAT YOUR CLASSIFIED INFORMATION WAS -- 11:15:13 OF ALL PEOPLE I AM GOING TO GUESS YOU SOME 11:15:18 QUESTIONS THEY MIGHT APPEAR TO BE 11:15:21 REPETITIVE BUT YOU ARE SWORN AND I WANT 11:15:25 THIS FOR THE RECORD SPECIAL PROSECUTOR PATRICK 11:15:29 FITZGERALD FOUND THAT AT THE TIME OF ROBERT NOVAK'S JULY 14, 11:15:37 2003,, YOUR EMPLOYMENT STATUS WAS CLASSIFIED 11:15:43 AND YOUR AFFILIATION WITH THE CIA WAS NOT COMMON KNOWLEDGE 11:15:48 OUTSIDE THE INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY 11:15:51 THE CIA HAS CONFIRMED TO THIS COMMITTEE THAT AT THE TIME OF 11:15:55 MR NOVAK ARTICLE YOUR EMPLOYMENT STATUS WAS COVERT AND 11:16:02 THAT INFORMATION WAS CLASSIFIED BUT SOME PEOPLE ARE STILL 11:16:06 TRYING TO MINIMIZE YOUR SERVICE BY SUGGESTING YOU REALLY WEREN'T 11:16:11 AT RISK AND THAT YOUR POSITION WAS NOT CLASSIFIED BECAUSE YOU 11:16:18 WORKED AT A DESK JOB AT THE CIA HEADQUARTERS AT 11:16:23 LANGLEY, VIRGINIA LET ME GIVE YOU AN ACTUAL 11:16:28 EXAMPLE REPRESENTATIVE WARNED IT BLUNT 11:16:32 SAID IT WON THE TELEVISION PROGRAM FACE OF THE NATION -- 11:16:36 ROY BLUNT -- >> -- THIS IS A JOB THE AMBASSADORS WENT TO 11:16:46 EVERY DAY, THIS WAS A DESK JOB I THINK MANY PEOPLE IN 11:16:50 WASHINGTON UNDERSTOOD THAT HURT EMPLOYMENT WAS AT THE CIA AND 11:16:55 SHE WENT TO THAT OFFICE EVERY DAY 11:17:00 MRS WILSON, IS IT FAIR TO SAY THAT BASED ON YOUR SERVICE FOR 11:17:05 OUR GOVERNMENT, YOU ARE WELL VERSED IN THE RULES GOVERNING 11:17:10 THE HANDLING OF CLAIFIED INFORMATION 11:17:13 >> ABSOLUTELY, CONGRESSWOMAN AND I'D LIKE TO JUST ADD THAT 11:17:20 WENT OPERATIONS OFFICER, WHETHER THEY ARE POSTED ON THE FIELD OR 11:17:23 BACK AT HEADQUARTERS, WE ARE GIVEN TRAINING TO UNDERSTAND 11:17:27 SURVEILLANCE DETECTED IN -- DETECTION TRAINING SO THAT WE 11:17:31 UNDERSTAND VERY CAREFULLY THAT WE ARE NOT BEING FOLLOWED AND 11:17:38 THAT WE FEEL VERY COMFORTABLE THAT OUR STATUS WOULD BE 11:17:41 PROTECTED >> THAT IS THE REASON WHY I 11:17:43 STARTED OFF WITH MY OWN SCENARIO 11:17:46 IS IT YOUR UNDERSTANDING THAT THE EXECUTIVE ORDER GOVERNING 11:17:51 THE SAFEGUARDING OF CLASSIFIED INFORMATION PROHIBITS THE 11:17:55 DISCLOSURE OF CLASSIFIED INFORMATION TO PERSONS WHO ARE 11:17:59 NOT AUTHORIZED TO RECEIVE THIS INFORMATION 11:18:03 >> YES, CORRECT >> YES IS THE ANSWER 11:18:07 >> YES, CONGRESSWOMAN >> AND IS IT YOUR UNDERSTANDING 11:18:12 THAT WHILE AN EMPLOYEE EX-CIA IS UNDER COVER OF THAT INDIVIDUAL'S 11:18:16 EMPLOYMENT STATUS AT THE CIA IS CONSIDERED CLASSIFIED 11:18:20 INFORMATION -- EMPLOYMENT AT THE CIA IS UNDER COVER 11:18:24 ARE YOU AWARE OF ANY DESK JOB ACCEPTANCE OF THE RULES 11:18:29 PROHIBITING THE RELEASE OF CLASSIFIED INFORMATION ONE OF 11:18:32 THE EMPLOYMENT STATUS OF A SEAT BY A OF FOR YOU? 11:18:36 >> NO, CONGRESSMAN -- CONGRESSMAN 11:18:41 >> SO I THINK YOUR TESTIMONY UNDERSCORES THAT THE ATTEMPT TO 11:18:47 MINIMIZE THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE DISCLOSURE OF YOUR EMPLOYMENT 11:18:50 SYSTEM -- STATUS ARE IN AFFECT MINIMIZING THE IMPORTANCE OF THE 11:18:55 CLASSIFIED INFORMATION RULES DESIGNED TO PROTECT OUR NATIONAL 11:19:01 SECURITY AND I AM INFURIATED TO CONTINUE 11:19:09 TO HEAR SHE DOES HAVE A DESK JOB BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND, I HAVE 11:19:12 BEEN THERE, I HAVE HAD THE TRAINING, AND I WANT TO FINE 11:19:16 TUNE KHANSON SIRLEAF THE WORK THAT YOU HAVE DONE -- THANK YOU 11:19:20 SINCERELY FOR THE WORK YOU HAVE DONE WHAT PROTECTION, HOMELAND 11:19:24 SECURITY, AND SHOWING A LOW FOR THIS COUNTRY 11:19:27 THANK YOU VERY MUCH THANK YOU, CONGRESSMAN 11:19:30 >> MR LYNCH? >> THANK YOU 11:19:34 FIRST OF ALL, I WANT TO THANK YOU, MRS PLAME -- MRS PLAME 11:19:39 FOR COMING TO THE COMMITTEE AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR WORK 11:19:41 I HAVE TO SAY, THIS HEARING HAS BEEN A LONG TIME COMING 11:19:45 THE CHAIRMAN AND I AND MEMBERS OF THIS COMMITTEE HAVE SIGNED A 11:19:49 FIVE OR SIX REQUEST OVER THE LAST FOUR YEARS TO GET YOU 11:19:51 BEFORE US AND TO GET TO THE BOTTOM OF THIS 11:19:56 WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO YOU AT LEAST CAN BE TAKEN IN A WIDER 11:20:01 CONTEXT NOW -- THE TAV ON MAJOR ISSUES ARE, NUMBER ONE, THE 11:20:08 PROCESS BY WHICH CONGRESS RECEIVES INFORMATION RELATIVE TO 11:20:12 NATIONAL SECURITY AS YOU KNOW, YOUR OUTING IF YOU 11:20:18 WILL OR DISCLOSURE OF COVERT STATUS WAS, I THINK, A 11:20:23 DELIBERATE ATTEMPT TO DISCOUNT THE STATEMENTS OF YOUR HUSBAND 11:20:27 WITH RESPECT TO THE SUPPOSED ATTEMPT BY SADDAM HUSSEIN TO 11:20:32 PURCHASE URANIUM OR PLUTONIUM N ORIGER 11:20:39 -- THROUGH NIGER EVIDENTLY IN THIS CHARTER 20 11:20:47 OCCASIONS IN WHICH PEOPLE DELIBERATELY, I THINK, 11:20:52 ATTEMPTED TO DESTROY YOUR CREDIBILITY AND ALSO TO IT 11:20:58 DESTROYED YOUR EFFECTIVENESS WITHIN THE ORGANIZATION, WITHIN 11:21:00 THE CIA I KNOW YOU HAVE BEEN CAREFUL 11:21:05 WITH YOUR WORDS ONCE OR TWICE MIGHT BE CARELESS, 11:21:09 FIVE OR SIX MIKE RECKLESS, BUT 20 TIMES, I'LL SAY IT, 20 11:21:14 TIMES IS A DELIBERATE ATTEMPT TO DESTROY YOUR STATUS AS A COVERT 11:21:19 AGENT AND THE ONLY OTHER MAJOR CASE IN 11:21:22 WHICH WE HAVE HAD THE ACCOUNTING OF A CIA AGENTS, THE SUPREME 11:21:28 COURT SAID IT IS OBVIOUS AND INARGUABLE THAT NO GOVERNMENTAL 11:21:33 INTEREST IS MORE COMPELLING THAN THE SECURITY OF THE NATION 11:21:38 GOING TO THOSE COUPLE OF ISSUES, FIRST OF ALL, THE INTEGRITY OF 11:21:47 THE PROCESS BY WHICH WE GET OUR INFORMATION WAS AFFECTED 11:21:50 GREATLY, I THINK, IN THE TERMS OF OTHER AGENTS WHO MAY HAVE 11:21:55 BEEN VERY DISHEARTENED AND TROUBLED BY WHAT HAPPENED TO 11:21:58 YOU AND IN AN EFFORT TO DISCOUNT 11:22:01 YOUR HUSBAND'S CREDIBILITY, THE QUESTION WAS RAISED -- AND IT 11:22:04 HAS BEEN ROUTINELY RAISED -- WHETHER YOU WERE INVOLVED IN THE 11:22:10 DECISION BY THE CIA TO ACTUALLY SEND YOUR HUSBAND, AMBASSADOR 11:22:14 JOSEPH WILSON, TO NIGER IN FEBRUARY OF 2002 TO OBTAIN 11:22:19 INFORMATION ON ALLEGATIONS THAT IRAQ'S OF URANIUM FROM NIGER 11:22:24 THEY SORT OF SAID, OH, HIS WIFE SENT HIM, LIKE MY WIFE SENDS ME 11:22:30 OUT TO PUT OUT THE CRASH, TRY TO DISCOUNT THE IMPORT OF THAT, AT 11:22:35 LEAST I SUBMIT IT NOW, I WANT TO ASK YOU, THE 11:22:41 SUGGESTION THAT YOU WERE INVOLVED IN SENDING YOUR HUSBAND 11:22:44 SEEMED TO DRIVE THE LEAKS IN AN EFFORT TO DISCOUNT HIS 11:22:47 CREDIBILITY I WANT TO ASK YOU NOW UNDER 11:22:50 OATH, DID YOU MAKE THE DECISION TO SEND AMBASSADOR WILSON TO 11:22:53 NIGER >> NO, I DID NOT RECOMMEND HIM, 11:22:56 I DID NOT SUGGEST HIM, THERE WAS NO NEPOTISM INVOLVED 11:23:00 I DIDN'T HAVE THE AUTHORITY CONGRESSMAN, IF YOU WILL ALLOW 11:23:04 ME BRIEFLY TO LAY OUT A SEQUENCE OF EVENTS 11:23:06 >> THAT WAS MY NEXT QUESTION, IF YOU WOULD 11:23:09 I SORT OF DOUBT IT -- IF I WERE TO SEND MY WIFE SOMEWHERE IT 11:23:13 WOULD NOT BE NIGER NOTHING AGAINST NIGER -- PLEASE, 11:23:21 IF YOU COULD WALK US THROUGH EVERYTHING YOU DID THAT MAY HAVE 11:23:24 BEEN RELATED TO AROUND THE TIME OF THE DECISION TO SEND 11:23:28 AMBASSADOR WILSON TO NIER >> THANK YOU, CONGRESSMAN, I AM 11:23:34 DELIGHTED AS WELL THAT ITEM UNDER OATH AS I REPLIED TO YOU 11:23:38 IN FEBRUARY OF 2002 A YOUNG JUNIOR OFFICER WHO WORKED FOR ME 11:23:41 CAME TO ME VERY CONCERNED, VERY UPSET 11:23:45 SHE HAD JUST RECEIVED A TELEPHONE CALL ON HER DESK FROM 11:23:49 SOMEONE, I DON'T KNOW WHO, IN THE OFFICE OF THE VICE 11:23:53 PRESIDENT, A ASKING ABOUT THIS REPORT OF THIS ALLEGED SALE OF 11:23:58 YELLOWCAKE URANIUM FROM NIGER TO IRAQ 11:24:03 SHE CAME TO ME AND AS SHE WAS TELLING ME WHAT HAD JUST 11:24:07 HAPPENED, SOMEONE PASSED BY AND ANOTHER OFFICER HEARD THIS, HE 11:24:11 KNEW THAT JOE HAD ALREADY, MY HUSBAND, ALREADY GONE ON SOME 11:24:18 CIA MISSIONS PREVIOUSLY TO DEAL WITH OTHER NUCLEAR MATTERS 11:24:22 AND HE SUGGESTED, WHY DON'T WE SEND JOE? 11:24:28 HE KNEW THAT JOE HAD MANY YEARS OF EXPERIENCE ON THE AFRICAN 11:24:31 CONTINENT HE ALSO KNEW THAT HE HAD SERVED 11:24:36 WELL AND HEROICALLY IN THE BAGHDAD -- EMBASSY IN BAGHDAD 11:24:40 DURING THE FIRST GULF WAR AND I WILL BE HONEST, I WAS 11:24:44 SOMEWHAT AMBIVALENT AT THE TIME WE HAD TO YOUR OLD TWINS AT 11:24:48 HOME, AND ALL I COULD ENVISION WAS THE BOND MYSELF AT A TIME 11:24:52 WITH A COUPLE OF TO YOUR OLD, SO I WASN'T -- WITH A COUPLE OF TWO 11:24:59 YEARS OLD SO I WAS NOT OVERJOYED 11:25:01 NEVERTHELESS WE WENT TO MY BRANCH CHIEF, OUR SUPERVISOR, MY 11:25:05 COLLEAGUES SUGGESTED THIS IDEA, AND MY SUPERVISOR TURNED TO ME 11:25:09 AND SAID, WELL, WHEN YOU GO HOME THIS EVENING, WOULD YOU BE 11:25:13 WILLING TO SPEAK TO YOUR HUSBAND AND ASK HIM TO COME INTO 11:25:16 HEADQUARTERS NEXT WEEK AND WE WILL DISCUSS THE OPTIONS AND SEE 11:25:20 WHAT WE CAN DO OF COURSE 11:25:23 AND AS I WAS LEAVING HE ASKED ME TO DRAFT A QUICK E-MAIL TO THE 11:25:28 CHIEF OF OUR COUNTER PROLIFERATION DIVISION LETTING 11:25:32 HIM KNOW THAT THIS MIGHT HAPPEN I SAID, OF COURSE 11:25:38 YOU KNOW, CONGRESSMAN, THAT WAS TAKEN OUT OF CONTEXT IN A 11:25:43 PORTION OF WHICH YOU SEE IN THE SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON 11:25:46 INTELLIGENCE REPORT OF JULY 2004 11:25:49 THAT MAKES IT SEEM AS THOUGH I HAVE SUGGESTED OR RECOMMENDED 11:25:52 HIM >> MR CHAIRMAN, IF I COULD JUST 11:25:55 FOLLOW UP -- A 30 SECONDS >> WITHOUT OBJECTIONS 11:26:00 >> THANK YOU I WANT TO GO BACK TO THAT SENATE 11:26:03 INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE HEARING THERE WERE THREE REPUBLICAN 11:26:11 SENATORS WOULD INCLUDE A MORE DEFINITIVE STATEMENT WHICH -- 11:26:14 VISIT THE THE PLAN TO SEND A FORMER AMBASSADOR TO NIGER WAS 11:26:19 ADJUSTED TO THE FORMER AMBASSADOR'S WIFE, A CIA 11:26:23 EMPLOYEE WHAT IS YOUR REACTION TO THE 11:26:27 STATEMENT IN THE SENATE REPORT ABOUT THE GENESIS OF YOUR 11:26:29 HUSBAND'S TRIP IN 2002? >> CORDESMAN, IT'S INCORRECT 11:26:34 IT HAS BEEN BORN -- CONGRESSMAN, IT'S IN COURT 11:26:37 IT HAS BEEN BORNE OUT OF THE TESTIMONY IN THE LIBBY TRIAL AND 11:26:42 THAT DOES NOT SQUARE IN THE FACT 11:26:45 THE ADDITIONAL VIEWS WERE WRITTEN EXCLUSIVELY BY THREE 11:26:48 REPUBLICAN SENATORS >> THANK YOU, MR LYNCH 11:26:51 MR YARMOUTH? >> THANK YOU, MR CHAIRMAN, I 11:26:54 WOULD YIELD MY TIME TO MR VAN HOLLEN 11:26:56 >> MR VAN HOLLEN IS RECOGNIZED >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH 11:27:03 MS PLAME BY YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE TO OUR COUNTRY AND 11:27:09 TESTIMONY JUST TO REMIND US ALL OF THE 11:27:11 LARGER CONTEXT IN THE LEAD UP TO WHERE YOU 11:27:15 REMEMBER STATEMENTS FROM THE PRESIDENT OF THE NINE STATES, 11:27:18 VICE PRESIDENT, SECRETARY OF STATE, CONDOLEEZZA RICE AND 11:27:21 OTHERS ABOUT MUSHROOM CLOUDS, INVOKING THE IMAGE OF THAT 11:27:25 SADDAM HUSSEIN WAS GOING TO BE OBTAINING NUCLEAR WEAPONS AND 11:27:30 USING THEM IN TERRORIST ATTACKS AND SO WHEN AMBASSADOR WILSON 11:27:35 WROTE HIS ARTICLE IN THE THE NEW YORK TIMES THAT BEGAN WITH THIS 11:27:41 STATEMENT, DID THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION MANIPULATE 11:27:44 INTELLIGENCE ABOUT SADDAM HUSSEIN'S WEAPONS PROGRAMS TO 11:27:46 JUSTIFY AN INVASION OF IRAQ, AND ANSWER THAT QUESTION IN THE 11:27:51 FOLLOWING SENTENCE, BASED ON MY EXPERIENCE WITH THE 11:27:53 ADMINISTRATION THE MONTHS LEADING UP TO THE WAR I HAVE 11:27:55 LITTLE CHOICE TO CONCLUDE A SOME OF THE INTELLIGENCE RELATED TO 11:27:59 IRAQ'S NUCLEAR WEAPONS PROGRAM WAS TWISTED TO EXAGGERATE THE 11:28:02 IRAQI THREAT THAT POSED A DIRECT THREAT TO 11:28:06 THE ADMINISTRATION'S CREDIBILITY 11:28:09 CLEARLY THEY UNDERSTOOD THE DANGER OF THAT BECAUSE IT 11:28:12 UNDERCUT ONE OF THE MAIN UNDERPINNINGS AND JUSTIFICATIONS 11:28:15 THE AUTMAN STATION BEFORE THE WAR 11:28:18 YOU SEE FROM THE CHART HERE THAT THE WHITE HOUSE DID SPRING INTO 11:28:22 ACTION AND BEGIN TO TRY AND DISCREDIT YOUR HUSBAND, AND THAT 11:28:27 IS HOW YOU WERE DRAWN INTO THIS WEB 11:28:33 MR MCCLELLAN, THEN WHITE HOUSE SPOKESMAN, SAID ON BEHALF OF THE 11:28:38 ADMINISTRATION AND BEHALF OF THE PRESIDENT, IF ANYONE IN THIS 11:28:40 ADMINISTRATION WAS INVOLVED -- MEANING, THE RELEASE AND 11:28:44 DISSEMINATION -- THEY WOULD NO LONGER BE IN THIS 11:28:49 ADMINISTRATION DO YOU BELIEVE THERE CONTINUES 11:28:50 TO BE PEOPLE, INDIVIDUALS IN THIS ADMINISTRATION WHO WERE 11:28:53 INVOLVED IN LEAKING INFORTION ABOUT YOU? 11:28:55 >> YES, CONGRESSMAN AS YOU KNOW, AGAIN, FROM THE 11:29:01 EVIDENCE THAT WAS INTRODUCED AT THE TRIAL OF VICE PRESIDENT 11:29:05 FORMER CHIEF OF STAFF, FOR ONE, KARL ROVE CLEARLY WAS INVOLVED 11:29:10 IN THE LEAKING OF MY NAME AND HE STILL CARRIES A SECURITY 11:29:13 CLEARANCE TO THIS DAY DESPITE THE PRESIDENT'S WORDS TO THE 11:29:17 CONTRARY THAT HE WOULD IMMEDIATELY DISMISS ANYONE WHO 11:29:19 HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITH THIS >> END OF THE CIA SPOKESMAN MADE 11:29:24 A STATEMENT AND OTHER -- AND THE CIA SPOKESMAN RESTATEMENT AND 11:29:29 OTHERS SAID THE FAILED TO HOLD PEOPLE ACCOUNTABLE FOR LEAKING 11:29:33 THIS KIND OF INFORMATION SENDS A VERY TERRIBLE MESSAGE TO OTHERS 11:29:37 IN THE INTELLIGENCE FIELD DO YOU THINK A FAILURE OF A 11:29:41 PRESIDENT TO FIRE PEOPLE IN HIS ADMINISTRATION WHO WERE 11:29:46 INVOLVED WITH THIS MESSAGE CENTS A CHILLING MESSAGE TO THOSE IN 11:29:52 THE INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES THAT THE WHITE HOUSE IS NOT WILLING 11:29:55 TO STAND UP BEHIND THOSE PEOPLE PUTTING THEIR LIVES IN DANGER 11:29:59 EVERY DAY? >> YES, I BELIEVE IT UNDERMINES 11:30:03 THE PRESIDENT'S WORDS >> LET ME ASK YOU THIS -- AND I 11:30:08 WOULD JUST SAY ONE OF RECORD THAT THE STATEMENTS THAT WERE 11:30:13 MADE AT TRIAL WITH RESPECT TO KARL ROVE'S INVOLVEMENT, JUST 11:30:19 STAY THE TESTIMONY GIVEN BY MR COOPER AT THE TIME MAGAZINE, WHO 11:30:23 SAID THAT HE WAS TOLD BY KARL ROVE DON'T GO TOO FAR OUT ON 11:30:28 THE WILSON, BUT MR WILSON'S WIFE WORKED AT THE AGENCY AND 11:30:34 THE CONCLUSION ACCORDING TO MR COOPER MR ROH SAID I HAVE 11:30:39 ALREADY SAID TO MUCH CAN YOU THINK OF ANY REASON WHY 11:30:42 MR KARL ROVE WOULD MAKE THE STATEMENT IF HE DID NOT KNOW 11:30:44 THAT HE WAS ENGAGED IN WRONGDOING 11:30:47 >> CONGRESSMEN, I CANNOT BEGIN TO SPECULATE ON MR KARL ROVE'S 11:30:53 INNT, I JUST KNOW HIS WORK AND THE EFFECTS 11:30:55 >> THANK YOU LET ME JUST FOLLOW UP BRIEFLY ON 11:30:59 MR LYNCH'S LINE OF QUESTIONING REGARDING THE SENATE REPORT AND 11:31:04 WHO HAD AMBASSADOR WILSON SENT TO NIGER AND WHO WAS THE 11:31:14 INSTIGATOR OF THAT UNCLASSIFIED SENATE REPORT 11:31:20 ASSERTS THE COUNTER PROLIFERATION DIVISION OF 11:31:24 REPORTS OFFICER TOLD THE COMMITTEE STAFF THAT THE FORMER 11:31:28 AMBASSADOR'S WIFE, YOU, OFFERED UP HIS NAME 11:31:32 YOU FAMILIAR WITH THAT STATEMENT IN THE UNCLASSIFIED 11:31:35 REPORT COURSE OF THE >> YES, I AM 11:31:36 >> I DID NOT WANT YOU TO REVEAL ANY CLASSIFIED INFORMATION OR 11:31:42 ANYONE TO ATTEND TO BUT MY QUESTION IS, HAVE YOU 11:31:44 TALKED TO THAT CPD REPORTS OFFICER INTERVIEWED BY THE 11:31:48 SENATE COMMITTEE? >> YES, CONGRESSMAN, AND I CAN 11:31:51 TELL YOU THAT HE CAME TO ME ALMOST WITH TEARS IN HIS EYES, 11:31:58 HE SAID HIS WORDS HAVE BEEN TWISTED AND DISTORTED, HE WROTE 11:32:03 A MEMO, AND HE ASKED A SUPERVISOR TO ALLOW HIM TO SPEAK 11:32:08 WE INTERVIEWED -- REINTERVIEWED THE MEMO WENT NOWHERE AND THE 11:32:17 REQUEST WAS DENIED >> SO THERE IS A MEMO WRITTEN BY 11:32:20 THE CPD OFFICER UPON WHOSE ALLEGED TESTIMONY THE SENATE 11:32:27 ROAD ITS REPORT THAT CONTRADICTS THE CONCLUSIONS -- 11:32:29 >> ABSOLUTELY YES, SIR 11:32:33 >> MR CHAIRMAN, IT SEEMS TO ME THIS COMMITTEE SHOULD ASK FOR 11:32:37 THAT MEMO IT BEARS DIRECTLY ON THE 11:32:40 CREDIBILITY OF THE SENATE REPORT WHEN THIS VERY IMPORTANT ISSUE, 11:32:44 BUT THEY HAVE ATTEMPTED TO USE DISCREDIT AMBASSADOR WILSON'S 11:32:48 VISION >> I THINK THE GENTLEMAN MAKES 11:32:50 AN ESCO -- EXCELLENT POINT AND WE WILL INSIST ON GETTING THAT 11:32:53 MEMO >> THANK YOU 11:32:55 THANK YOU FOR YOUR TESTIMONY >> MR HOLMES -- THE GERMAN 11:33:13 RESERVES AS TIME -- THE GENTLEMAN RESERVES HIS 11:33:19 TIME >> THANKS FOR BEING HERE TODAY 11:33:21 I KNOW THIS CAN'T BE EASY FOR YOU 11:33:25 IF YOU PUT THIS AFFAIR IN CONTEXT, WHAT HAS HAPPENED WITH 11:33:31 YOU, WITH ALL THE OTHER ABUSES, FRANKLY, MR CHAIRMAN, THAT WE 11:33:36 HAVE BEEN INVESTIGATING OVER THE LAST SEVEN WEEKS, I THANK YOU 11:33:41 FOR THE THE DILIGENCE OF YOUR INQUIRY AND FAIRNESS OF YOUR 11:33:44 INQUIRY INTO A NUMBER OF THINGS THAT HAVE OCCURRED, IT PAINTS A 11:33:48 PICTURE OF AN ADMINISTRATION OF BULLIES 11:33:53 IN MY VIEW THAT THINKS THAT IN ORDER TO 11:34:00 ACHIEVE WHATEVER THE END OF DAY ARE SEEKING, ANY MEANS CANNOT BE 11:34:04 JUSTIFIED -- ANY MEANS CAN BE JUSTIFIED 11:34:10 AND THAT PEOPLE CAN JUST BE PUSHED AROUND 11:34:14 WE SAW IT WHEN WE HAD TESTIMONY OF PEOPLE IN THE WHITE HOUSE WHO 11:34:21 BULLIED THE SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY BY OFFERING TESTIMONY -- 11:34:27 ALTERING TESTIMONY ON GLOBAL WARMING 11:34:28 WE HAVE SEEN THIS ON THE INVESTIGATIONS YOU HAVE THE MR 11:34:32 CHAIRMAN WITH RESPECT TO THE TREATMENT OF OUR CIVIL SOURCE -- 11:34:35 CIVIL SERVICE NOW RECEIVE IN THE CONTEXT OF 11:34:38 OUR INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY -- WE SEE IT IN THE CONTEXT 11:34:42 TO ME WHAT YOU HAVE EXPERIENCED IT'S REALLY THE RESULT OF THIS 11:34:46 SYNDROME THAT'S DEVELOPED IN THIS ADMINISTRATION WHICH 11:34:52 REFLEX THE ARROGANCE OF POWER RUN AMOK 11:34:58 I HAVE JUST A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS THAT I WANTED TO ASK 11:35:00 YOU IN THAT VEIN 11:35:04 FIRST OF ALL, I GATHER YOU BELIEVE THAT THE OUTING OF YOUR 11:35:15 STATUS, THE BLOWING OF THE COVERT STATUS WAS AS A CARRIZO 11:35:22 TO OF SOME OF THE STATEMENTS -- AS A RESULT OF SOME OF THE 11:35:26 STATEMENTS AND CHALLENGES HE WAS BRINGING COME IS THAT RIGHT? 11:35:29 >> YES, I BELIEVE THAT IS ONE OF THE CONSEQUENCES 11:35:32 >> OK BUT AT THE POINT THAT THEY WERE 11:35:39 PREPARED TO SURRENDER YOUR COVERT STATUS TO THE PUBLIC, 11:35:43 WHAT WAS TO BE GAINED BY THAT? WAS IT TO APPLY FURTHER 11:35:49 LEVERAGED? REALLY IT WAS SORT OF AFTER THE 11:35:51 FACT >> MY THINKING, CONGRESSMEN, IS 11:35:59 BACKED BY CONTINUING TO ASSERT -- IS THAT BY CONTINUING TO 11:36:05 ASSERT FALSELY THAT I SOMEHOW SUGGESTED HIM OR RECOMMENDED HIM 11:36:08 FOR THIS MISSION, IT WOULD UNDERCUT THE CREDIBILITY OF WHAT 11:36:12 HE WAS SAYING AND THAT IS WHAT I THINK WHAT 11:36:18 HAS HAPPENED, AND IT JUST GOT A LITTLE OUT OF HAND 11:36:23 >> IT STRIKES ME AS PETULANT BEHAVIOR ON THEIR PART 11:36:28 SECONDLY, THERE IS THIS SUGGESTION BEING MADE THE THAT 11:36:33 YOUR STATUS HAD BEEN THE OLD SORT OF ACCIDENT LEE 11:36:37 BUT YOU DESCRIBE -- DEVOLVED ACCIDENTLY 11:36:41 BUT YOU DESCRIBE STRUCTURAL EFFORTS THAT ARE DESIGNED TO 11:36:45 MAKE SURE THAT THIS DOESN'T HAPPEN ACCIDENTALLY 11:36:49 AND SO COULD YOU COMMENT ON THAT? 11:36:52 IT SEEMS TO ME THAT AN ORDER FOR YOUR STATUS TO HAVE BEEN 11:36:56 DISCLOSED SOMEBODY WOULD HAVE HAD TO WANT THAT TO HAPPEN 11:36:59 THE WAY THINGS WERE SET UP, IT IS HIGHLY UNLIKELY THAT YOUR 11:37:05 STATUS WOULD BE PASCO'S BY ACCIDENT 11:37:08 -- BE DISCLOSED AND BY ACCIDENT 11:37:12 IT WOULD HAVE TO BE AN ORCHESTRATED EFFORT 11:37:15 COULD YOU TALK ABOUT STRUCTURALLY WHETHER THAT IS THE 11:37:17 CASE? >> I CAN'T SPEAK TO INTENT, BUT 11:37:22 I CAN SPEAK TO SIMPLY WHAT ACTIONS WE CAN RESERVE -- 11:37:28 OBSERVED AND THAT, AGAIN, THEY OWN KNEW 11:37:31 THAT I WORKED IN THE CIA THEY MIGHT NOT HAVE KNOWN WHAT 11:37:36 MY STATUS WAS, BUT THAT ALONE, THE FACT WORKED AT THE CIA 11:37:40 SHOULD HAVE PUT UP A RED FLAG THAT THEY ACTED MUCH MORE 11:37:46 PROTECTIVE WAY OF MY IDENTITY AND TRUE EMPLOYER 11:37:50 >> LASTLY, AGAIN, TRYING TO GET -- THIS IS MORE THAN A STORY 11:37:55 ABOUT VALERIE PLAME WILSON AND WHAT HAPPENED TO YOU 11:37:59 WHAT IS -- WHAT DEVASTATING IS WHAT IT'S BEEN TO YOUR LIFE IN 11:38:07 THIS PAST MONTHS IT IS ABOUT THE INTELLIGENCE 11:38:11 COMMUNITY AND YOU SPOKE TO YOURSELF HOW THIS KIND OF 11:38:14 CONDUCT CAN AFFECT THE INTEGRITY AND EFFECTIVENESS OF 11:38:17 OUR INTELLIGENCE APPARATUS CAN YOU COMMENT ON THE CHILLING 11:38:24 EFFECT, IF YOU WILL, WHAT THE MESSAGE ITS SENSE TO PEOPLE? 11:38:29 TO THOSE, FOR EXAMPLE, THOSE SENT ON A MISSION TO COLLECT 11:38:33 INTELLIGENCE ABOUT A SUBJECT THAT THE WHITE HOUSE MIGHT 11:38:37 ALREADY HAVE A VERY STRONG OPINION ABOUT? 11:38:40 HOW WOULD IT AFFECT THE WAY THAT AGENT, THE WEIGHT THAT PERSON 11:38:45 WOULD COLLECT THAT INFORMATION -- OF THE WAY THAT PERSON WOULD 11:38:49 COLLECT INFORMATION AND GET IT BACK UP THE CHAIN? 11:38:52 >> INTELLIGENCE COLLECTION IS CERTAINLY MORE OF AN ART THAN A 11:38:56 SCIENCE BUT IF THERE IS ANY TAINT OF 11:39:00 BIAS, THEN IT UNDERMINES ITS USEFULNESS 11:39:04 THE PRIMARY CUSTOMER OF OUR INTELLIGENCE IS OF COURSE THE 11:39:08 PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES AND IF THE PRESIDENT OF THE 11:39:11 UNITED STATES THINKS SOMEHOW OR DOESN'T BELIEVE THAT HIS 11:39:16 INTELLIGENCE HE BELIEVES -- RECEIVES ON HIS DESK EVERY 11:39:21 MORNING IS FREE OF IDEOLOGIES, POLITICS, A CERTAIN VIEWPOINT, 11:39:27 HOW THEN CAN THE THAT PRESIDENT MAKE THE MOST IMPORTANT 11:39:31 DECISIONS OF ALL ABOUT THE SECURITY OF OUR COUNTRY? 11:39:35 I DO FEEL PASSIONATELY ABOUT THAT 11:39:38 YOU HAVE TO GET THE POLITICS OUT OF OUR INTELLIGENCE PROCESS 11:39:42 >> I APPRECIATE THAT CAPRI -- APPRECIATE THE PASSION YOU 11:39:46 BROUGHT YOUR JOB AND YOU REPRESENT HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS 11:39:48 OF PEOPLE THAT GO TO WORK AND TRY TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE FOR 11:39:52 THIS COUNTRY AND I THINK ARE BEING BULLIED BY 11:39:57 THIS ADMINISTRATION YOU WON'T GET THE APOLOGY FROM 11:40:00 THEM THAT YOU DESERVE BUT WHAT YOU TO KNOW THAT 11:40:02 EVERYONE HERE AND APPRECIATE YOUR SERVICE 11:40:05 I GIVE OR MUCH >> THANK YOU, MR SARBANES 11:40:11 WE'VE GONE BACK AND FORTH, AND RATHER THAN A SECOND ROUND, MR 11:40:16 DAVIS AND I AGREE THAT WE WILL HAVE FIVE MINUTES TO WRAP UP, 11:40:22 CONTROLLED BY THE CHAIRMAN OF THE RANKING MEMBER AND I WILL 11:40:25 YIELD FIVE MINUTES TO MR DAVIS AT THIS POINT 11:40:27 >> MR WESTMORELAND CAMILLE THIS MUCH TIME AS YOU MAKE OF SOME 11:40:31 >> -- I YIELD AS MUCH TIME AS YOU MAY CONSUME 11:40:40 >> I REGRET WE CANNOT STAY HERE TO GET ALL OF OUR QUESTIONS 11:40:43 ANSWERED BY MISS WILSON BECAUSE I HAVE SO MANY TO ASK BECAUSE 11:40:47 THERE IS SO MUCH CONFLICTING REPORTS CUFF AND I THINK THAT 11:40:52 SOMETHING OF THIS IMPORTANCE -- BUT, MS WILSON, THE COUNTER 11:41:00 PROLIFERATION DIVISION OF THE CIA, THAT SOUNDS LIKE A PRETTY 11:41:05 IMPORTANT PLACE WHERE A BUNCH OF SMART PEOPLE WOULD WORK AND KEEP 11:41:09 GOOD RECORDS WOULD I BE OK IN THINKING ABOUT? 11:41:13 >> YES, CONGRESSMAN >> BUT IN THE SENATE INTEL 11:41:21 REPORT THAT I'VE GOT, IT SAYS,CPD OFFICIALS COULD NOT 11:41:26 RECALL HOW THE OFFICE DECIDED TO CONTACT THE FORMER AMBASSADOR 11:41:34 WASN'T THIS A VOLUNTARY LACK OF MEMORY OR WERE THERE -- WAS THIS 11:41:39 A VOLUNTARY LACK OF MEMORY OR NO NOTES ON IT? 11:41:43 HOW COULD THEY FORGET HOW THEY CAME ABOUT IN NAME THAT THEY 11:41:47 WERE FIXING TO SEND IT TO A FOREIGN COUNTRY TO CHECK ON THE 11:41:51 INTELLIGENCE OF IRAQ GETTING MATERIAL TO BUILD NUCLEAR BOMBS? 11:41:55 IT SEEMS A LITTLE BIT FAR- FETCHED TO ME 11:41:58 >> CONGRESSMEN, PLEASE REMEMBER THAT INHIS PERIOD, IN THE RUN- 11:42:03 UP TO THE WAR, WE IN THE COUNTRY PROLIFERATION DIVISION OF THE 11:42:07 CIA WERE WORKING AS A FLAT OUT AS HARD AS WE COULD TO TRY TO 11:42:13 FIND GOOD, SOLID INTELLIGENCE FOR OUR SENIOR POLICY MAKERS 11:42:18 WANT THESE PRESUMED PROGRAMS MY ROLE IN THIS WAS TO GO HOME 11:42:24 THAT NIGHT WITHOUT REVEALING ANY CLASSIFIED INFORMATION OF COURSE 11:42:28 AND ASK MY HUSBAND WOULD HE BE WILLING TO COME IN TO CIA 11:42:31 HEADQUARTERS THE FOLLOWING WEEK AND TALK TO THE PEOPLE THERE 11:42:36 AT THAT MEETING I INTRODUCED HIM AND I LEFT BECAUSE I DID HAVE 11:42:41 101 DIFFERENT THINGS I NEEDED TO DO 11:42:44 >> BUT WHAT I AM TRYING TO SAY IS, DO YOU THINK THERE WOULD NOT 11:42:47 HAVE BEEN A PAPER TRAIL OF HOW HIS NAME CAME ABOUT, WHO WOULD 11:42:53 HAVE MENTIONED IT FIRST -- I MEAN, TO ME, THIS IS A PRETTY 11:42:58 IMPORTANT ASSIGNMENT TO GIVE SOMEBODY AND MAYBE SOMEBODY WILL 11:43:03 WANT TO SAY, THAT WAS MY IDEA, THAT WAS MY GUY THAT I WAS 11:43:07 SENDING OVER THERE AND WHAT TO TAKE CREDIT FOR IT, BUT IT SEEMS 11:43:11 LIKE EVERYBODY IS RUNNING FROM IT 11:43:12 >> CONGRESS MAN, I BELIEVE ONE OF THE PIECES OF EVIDENCE 11:43:17 INTRODUCED IN THE LIBBY TRIAL WAS A MEMO OF THAT MEETING WHERE 11:43:23 IT STATES -- IN FACT, MY HUSBAND WAS NOT PARTICULARLY LOOKING 11:43:29 FORWARD -- HE DIDN'T THINK IT WAS NECESSARY 11:43:31 THERE HADEEN AT LEAST TWO OTHER REPORTS, ONE BY A THREE- 11:43:36 STAR GENERAL AND ONE AND BEST ON THE GROUND WHO SAID THERE WAS 11:43:39 REALLY MUCH TO THIS ALLEGATION AND THE INR FOLKS AT THE MEETING 11:43:45 SAID, WELL, I'M NOT SURE THIS IS REALLY NECESSARY 11:43:48 BUT IT WAS ULTIMATELY DECIDED THAT HE WOULD GO, USE HIS 11:43:52 CONTACTS, WHICH WERE EXTENSIVE IN THE GOVERNMENT, TO SEE IF 11:43:55 THERE WAS ANYTHING MORE TO THIS IT WAS A SERIOUS QUESTION ASKED 11:44:00 BY THE OFFICE OF THE VICE PRESIDENT AND IT DESERVES A 11:44:03 SERIOUS ANSWER >> AREN'T YOU FAMILIAR WITH A 11:44:06 CHARLES GRANIER, A FORMER DIRECTOR MISSION MANAGER FOR THE 11:44:13 CIA? >> I KNOW OF HIM, SIR, YES 11:44:16 >> TESTIFIED AT THE LEAD TRIAL -- LIBBY TRIAL THAT ALL HE KNEW 11:44:23 YOU WERE WORKING FOR THE COUNTER PROLIFERATION DIVISION, AND IT 11:44:27 COULD HAVE MEANT A NUMBER OF THINGS, DIFFERENT PEOPLE I 11:44:30 GUESS WORK AT THIS, SOME COVERT, SOME CLASSIFIED, SOME 11:44:34 UNDERCOVER, SOME DIFFERENT NAMES -- IS THAT TRUE THERE ARE 11:44:39 DIFFERENT CLASSIFICATIONS OF PEOPLE THAT WORK IN THIS COUNTRY 11:44:41 WITH RATION DIVISION? >> WHAT I WOULD SAY IS MOST 11:44:44 ACCURATE IS THAT MOST OF THE EMPLOYEES AND THE COUNTER 11:44:48 PROLIFERATION DIVISION ARE UNDER COVER OF SOME SORT 11:44:51 >> OK >> BUT HE DID WORK FOR THE CIA, 11:44:55 SO HE SHOULD HAVE KNOWN ALL OF THAT 11:44:57 IS THAT TRUE? ARE YOU SAYING HE SHOULD HAVE 11:45:00 KNOWN THAT YOU WERE UNDERCOVER OR CLASSIFIED? 11:45:04 >> I AM SAYING THAT THE FACT WAS THAT MOST PEOPLE ON THE COUNTER 11:45:11 PROLIFERATION DIVISION WAS UNDERCOVER 11:45:13 I AM NOT SPEAKING TO WHAT HE SHOULD HAVE OR SHOULD HAVE 11:45:16 KNOWN, AS AN EMPLOYE HE HE WAS PROBABLY COGNIZANT OF THAT 11:45:20 >> OK, AND YOU MENTIONED TAKING POLITICS OUT OF INTELLIGENCE 11:45:28 AND YOUR HUSBAND -- WOULD YOU SAY HE WAS A DEMOCRAT OR 11:45:31 REPUBLICAN? >> ALTHOUGH MY HUSBAND COMES 11:45:36 FROM A REPUBLICAN FAMILY WITH DEEP ROOTS IN CALIFORNIA, I 11:45:40 WOULD SAY HE IS A DEMOCRAT NOW, CONGRESSMAN 11:45:43 >> OK, AND JUST TO KIND OF KEEP SCORE, NOT THAT YOU WOULD PUT 11:45:47 YOURSELF IN ANY POLITICAL CATEGORY, WHICH YOU SAY YOU ARE 11:45:51 A DEMOCRAT OR REPUBLICAN? >> CONGRESSMAN, I AM NOT SURE 11:45:56 THAT THAT -- >> I KNOW, BUT THERE WAS A LIST 11:46:03 I COULD ASK YOU AND THAT WAS NOT ONE OF THEM, SO I WOULD NOTE -- 11:46:07 >> YES, CONGRESSMAN, I AM A DEMOCRAT 11:46:12 >> SO BY THE VICE PRESIDENT, WHO IS A REPUBLICAN, WHO EVIDENTLY 11:46:17 THOUGHT FROM HIS CIA BRIEFING THAT HE HAD GONE ONE DAY FELT 11:46:22 LIKE THAT THIS NEEDED TO BE LOOKED AT FURTHER, THE REPORT 11:46:30 THAT NIGER WAS SELLING THIS YELLOW CAKE URANIUM TO IRAQ, 11:46:40 BACKED -- THAT HE WOULD GET SOME FURTHER INTEL ON IT 11:46:47 BECAUSE THE, FRUSTRATION AND A LEASE SOMEBODY IN THE CIA -- 11:46:51 THEY CALLED A COUNTER PROLIFERATION OF THE SOMEBODY IN 11:46:54 THE CIA, BUT A DEMOCRAT, OR IN THE SOMEONE WHO MAY BE 11:46:58 AFFILIATED IN THE DEMOCRATIC SIDE, PRESENT OR SUPPOSEDLY 11:47:03 PRESENT OR AT LEAST VOUCHED FOR HER HUSBAND WHO HAS COME FROM A 11:47:09 GOOD REPUBLICAN FAMILY WHO HAVE LOST HIS WAY AND BECOME A 11:47:13 DEMOCRAT, BUT -- MY POINT IS, BUT IN THIS PIECE TITLED WHAT I 11:47:19 DIDN'T FIND IN AFRICA, HE DISPUTES THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION 11:47:23 CLAIMS THAT THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT NIGER WAS SELLING IT 11:47:28 BUT YOU, COMING FROM AN INTELLIGENCE BACKGROUND, YOU 11:47:33 DON'T JUST DEPEND ON ONE REPORT FROM ONE COUNTRY FOR ONE SOURCE 11:47:42 TO BASE ALL OF YOUR INTELLIGENCE ON, DO YOU? 11:47:48 WOULDN'T YOU GATHERED FROM A BUNCH OF DIFFERENT SOURCES AND 11:47:51 THEN KIND OF PUT TOGETHER AND LOOK AT IT AND NOT JUST ONE FROM 11:47:56 -- ONE PARTICULAR? >> MUNTARI, CONGRESSMAN 11:48:02 >> DEGENERES TIME HAS EXPIRED LAST QUESTION 11:48:04 I GUESS, MR CHAIRMAN, MY LAST COMMENT WOULD BE TO YOU IS THAT 11:48:08 I STILL THINK IT IS A SHAME THAT WE BROUGHT MRS WILSON HERE AND 11:48:12 THE PRESS CAME AND ALL THESE GOOD PEOPLE CAME TO WITNESS ALL 11:48:16 OF THIS AND THERE HAS BEEN QUITE A SPECTACLE THAT WE WOULD NOT 11:48:19 GET TO ESCO THE QUESTIONS THAT WE HAVE 11:48:21 >> THANK YOU MR CHAIRMAN, LET ME JUST SAY, I 11:48:25 THINK WHAT IS CLEAR HERE, FIRST OF ALL, IT IS A TERRIBLE THING 11:48:32 THAT ANY CIA OPERATIVE WOULD BE ALTERED 11:48:34 BUT WHAT IS DIFFICULT AND WHAT WE HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO 11:48:37 ESTABLISH HERE IS WHO KNEW WHO WAS UNDERCOVER AND HE WAS AN A 11:48:41 COVERT STATUS I THINK WE WILL HAVE TO LOOK OF 11:48:44 THIS BUT IF THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT 11:48:45 THE PEOPLE OUT IN THIS OR PURSUING THIS HAD KNOWLEDGE OF 11:48:48 THE COVERT STATUS SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE THAT 11:48:51 POINT THINK OF VERMONT 11:48:53 MRS PLAME, THANK YOU VERY MUCH TO BE HERE 11:48:56 >> THANK YOU, MR CONGRESSMAN >> THANK YOU, MR DAVIS 11:49:00 I WANT TO YIELD TO MISS NORTON FOR FIVE MINUTES 11:49:08 >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, THANK YOU, MRS WILSON, AS OTHERS HAVE 11:49:13 SENT YOU FOR YOUR EXTRA RESOURCE TO OUR COUNTRY 11:49:18 -- EXTRAORDINARY SERVICE TO OUR COUNTRY 11:49:23 I AM TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE EFFECT OF THE EXECUTIVE ORDER 11:49:30 BECAUSE THERE IS AN EXECUTIVE ORDER, IT IS THE EXECUTIVE 11:49:35 ORDER 12958 IT IS AN EXECUTIVE ORDER, 11:49:44 PRESIDENTIAL EXECUTIVE ORDER THAT INDICATES WHAT THE 11:49:58 REQUIREMENTS ARE TO PREVENT UNAUTHORIZED DISCLOSURES 11:50:06 IN SUMMARY, THEY ARE BACKGROUND CHECK, OFFICIAL NEED TO KNOW, 11:50:21 AND I AM PARTICULARLY INTERESTED IN THE OFFICIALLY NEED TO KNOW 11:50:25 AND ASK YOU TO LOOK AT THE MIDDLE CHART, THE MIDDLE PART OF 11:50:31 THE CHART WHERE THE WHITE HOUSE AND OTHER OFFICIALS, STATE 11:50:42 DEPARTMENT OFFICIALS, ARE LISTED 11:50:47 CAN YOU THINK OF ANY REASON THAT ANY OF THOSE OFFICIALS WOULD 11:50:53 HAVE HAD A REASON TO KNOW IN YOUR IDENTITY, AND IN 11:50:57 PARTICULAR, AS A COVERT AGENT? >> CONGRESSWOMAN, THERE WAS NO 11:51:06 NEED TO KNOW MY SPECIFIC IDENTITY OTHER BAND THAT I WAS A 11:51:10 CIA OFFICER, ACCORDING -- OTHER THAN THAT I WAS A CIA OFFICER 11:51:15 ACCORDING TO THE CHART NONE WHATSOEVER 11:51:25 COULD I ASK YOU WHETHER THERE IS ANY DIFFERENCE IN YOUR REVIEW 11:51:31 BETWEEN DISCLOSING THE IDENTITY OF A COVERT AGENT AND DISCLOSING 11:51:37 CLASSIFIED INFORMATION? WHAT IF ANY DIFFERENCE WOULD 11:51:41 THERE BE? >> I THINK THE IMAGE IN EITHER 11:51:48 CASE COULD BE EQUALLY DEVASTATING, IT WOULD SIMPLY 11:51:52 DEPEND ON WHAT THE CLASSIFIED INFORMATION OF -- WAS, BUT 11:51:57 CERTAINLY REVEALING OPPORTUNIST TRUE IDENTITY IS A DEVASTATING 11:52:05 -- I OPERATIVES TRUE IDENTITY IS DEVASTATING 11:52:08 I WAS WORKING TO TRY TO FIND THE IRAQ WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION 11:52:13 PROGRAMS AND WHAT THEY WERE UP TO 11:52:14 >> I SUPPOSE WE COULD ALL THINK OF CLASSIFIED INFORMATION 11:52:17 INVOLVING OUR COUNTRY THAT WOULD HAVE A DEVASTATING AFFECT ON ALL 11:52:21 OF US DISCLOSING THE NAME OF A 11:52:30 CLASSIFIED AGENT MIGHT HAVE A DEVASTATING AFFECT ON THE MORE 11:52:34 THAN THAT AGENTS CAREER, IS THIS NOT THE CASE? 11:52:36 >> ABSOLUTELY, CONGRESSWOMAN THE RIPPLE EFFECT GO OUT WORD, 11:52:45 -- OUT WORD IN QUITE WIDE CIRCLES 11:52:50 ALL THE CONTACTS THROUGH THE YEARS, EITHER INNOCENT OR IN A 11:52:55 PROFESSIONAL MANNER, THE AGENTS, THE NETWORKS, MUCH IS TAKEN OUT 11:52:59 >> ARE THERE CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER WHICH IT DISCLOSING THE 11:53:05 IDENTITY OF A COVERT AGENT COULD RESULT IN THE DEATH OF A THAT 11:53:12 AGENT, AND HASN'T OCCURRED BEFORE IN OUR COUNTRY'S HISTORY 11:53:15 COURSE #>> YES, IT HAS >> IF IN FACT A OFFICIAL OF ANY 11:53:29 KIND DID NOT HAVE AN OFFICIAL REASON TO KNOW YOUR STATUS, IN 11:53:37 YOUR VIEW, WITHOUT BE A VIOLATION OF THE EXECUTIVE ORDER 11:53:41 WHICH LISTS THE NEED TO KNOW, OFFICIAL NEED TO KNOW AS A 11:53:45 REASON -- AS A REASON FOR HAVING CLASSIFIED OF PERMISSION? 11:53:51 >> YES, CONGRESSMAN AND, I WOULD THINK SO 11:53:54 IT WOULD BE A VIOLATION >> ONE OF MY COLLEAGUES 11:54:06 QUESTIONED YOU REGARDING THE ACCUSATION THAT OVER AGAIN WAS 11:54:13 REPEATED IN THE PRESS AND FOR THAT MATTER BY A NUMBER OF 11:54:18 PUBLIC OFFICIALS, THAT IT WAS YOU WHO WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR 11:54:24 HUSBAND'S BEING SELECTED TO GO ON THE CONTROVERSIAL TRIP AT 11:54:29 ISSUE >> AS -- 11:54:34 >> -- AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THIS PERSON HAS INDEED THAT HE WAS 11:54:39 NOT THE PERSON WHO INDICATED THAT YOU HAD BEEN RESPONSIBLE 11:54:47 FOR THE SELECTION OF YOUR HUSBAND TO GO TO NIGER 11:54:55 IF THAT IS THE CASE, WOULD YOU SAY THAT IT WOULD BE 11:55:00 INAPPROPRIATE FOR US OR OTHERS TO RELY ON THE INFORMATION THAT 11:55:11 A CIA OFFICIAL HAD SAID THAT YOU WERE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE 11:55:16 SELECTION OF YOUR HUSBAND TO GO? >> THAT'S INCORRECT 11:55:23 A SENIOR AGENCY OFFICERS SAID SHE HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH HIS 11:55:27 TRIP AND I WOULD JUST LIKE TO ADD 11:55:31 THAT CERTAINLY I HAD NO POLITICAL AGENDA AT THE TIME OF 11:55:34 MY HUSBAND'S TRIP, JOE HAD NO POLITICAL AGENDA, WE WERE BOTH 11:55:39 LOOKING TO SERVE OUR COUNTRY >> MR CHAIRMAN, I UNDERSTAND 11:55:45 THAT THE CIA OFFICIAL TO WHICH I REFER HAND IN FACT SAID THAT 11:55:51 IN WRITING AND I ASK THAT YOU TRY TO GET THE MEMORANDUM OF 11:55:57 THAT OFFICIAL THAT WOULD MAKE IT CLEAR THAT HE OR SHE WAS NOT 11:56:02 RESPONSIBLE FOR DISINFORMATION >> WE WILL TRY TO GET THAT 11:56:06 INFORMATION FENN A THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR 11:56:10 CHAIRMAN >> MR DAVIS? 11:56:11 >> AMIS AS BEST YOU TO CLARIFY ONE THING 11:56:14 YOU NOTED THAT WHEN YOU LEARNED ABOUT THIS YOUR HUSBAND PICKED 11:56:16 UP THE PAPER AND SAID HE DID IT -- YOU REMEMBER THE TESTIMONY, 11:56:21 HE DID IT WAS HE REFERRING TO BOB NOVAK, 11:56:25 THE IN THE STATION, AND DID YOU KNOW IT WAS PERCOLATING? 11:56:27 >> HE WAS REFERRING TO MR BOB NOVAK 11:56:32 WE HAD INDICATIONS IN THE WEEK PRIOR THAT MR NOVAK KNEW MY 11:56:35 IDENTITY AND MY TRUE EMPLOYER AND I, OF COURSE, ALERTED MY 11:56:43 SUPERIORS AT THE AGENCY AND WAS TOLD, THE WARWICK, WE WILL TAKE 11:56:46 CARE OF THIS AND IT WAS MUCH TO OUR SURPRISE 11:56:50 THAT HE READ ABOUT THIS JULY 14 >> DO YOU KNOW IF YOUR SUPERIORS 11:56:54 AT THE AGENCY DID ANYTHING AT THAT POINT TO STOP THE OUTING? 11:56:57 YOU THINK IT WOULD PICK UP THE PHONE AND SAID THIS WAS A 11:57:01 SERIOUS MATTER, THIS WAS A CRIME 11:57:04 >> ABSOLUTELY I BELIEVE, AND THIS IS WHAT I 11:57:07 READ, THAT THE THEN SPOKESMAN, MR HARLOW SPOKE DIRECTLY WITH 11:57:11 MR NOVAK AND SAID TO ALONG THE LINES OF, DON'T GO WITH THIS, 11:57:15 DON'T DO THIS I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT HE 11:57:18 SAID, BUT CLEARLY COMMUNICATE THE MESSAGE THAT MR NOVAK 11:57:22 SHOULD NOT PUBLISH MINING >> YOU DON'T KNOW IF HE SAID 11:57:25 THIS COULD BE A VIOLATION OF LAW, SHE IS COVERT -- 11:57:29 >> I HAVE NO IDEA >> ONE OF THE LONG-TERM 11:57:33 CONCERNS OUTSIDE -- THAT AUDI OF AN AGENT IS A VERY SERIOUS 11:57:37 BUSINESS THAT I THINK HAS DISTRESSED BY BOTH SIDES, BUT 11:57:41 IF NO ONE KNOWS THAT YOU ARE COVERT IT IS HARD TO SHOW ANY 11:57:45 VIOLATION OF LAW, BUT IF YOU HAVE NOTICED, THAT IS A 11:57:48 DIFFERENT ISSUE YOU DID THE APPROPRIATE THING OF 11:57:51 NOTIFYING YOUR SUPERIORS THAT THIS WAS PERCOLATING IN THE ONE 11:57:54 NOT ABLE TO STOP IT IS THAT YOUR TESTIMONY? 11:57:56 >> THAT IS CORRECT >> MRS WILSON, YOU COULD BE A 11:58:09 DEMOCRAT BECOME A BEACON THE REPUBLICAN, NO ONE ASKS OUR 11:58:11 SERVICEMEN OR CIA OPERATIVES WHAT THEY BELIEVE IN IN TERMS OF 11:58:15 THE POLITICS THEY GO OUT AND SERVE OUR 11:58:17 COUNTRY THEY ARE NOT ACTING AS DEMOCRATS 11:58:21 AS -- OR REPUBLICANS, THEY WERE ACTING AS AMERICAN 11:58:27 FACTS ARE NOT REPUBLICAN OR DEMOCRAT 11:58:31 YOUR HUSBAND REVEAL THE THE FALSEHOOD OF THE REASON THE 11:58:37 PRESIDENT LEAVES TO GO TO WAR AGAINST SADDAM HUSSEIN IN IRAQ 11:58:43 AND THE REASON HE GAVE, EVEN IN HIS STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS, 11:58:46 WAS THAT A WEAPON OF MASS DESCRIPTION THAT SADDAM HUSSEIN 11:58:52 -- DISCRETION THAT SOME OF THE ST WOULD HAVE OR COULD SOON 11:58:55 HAVE IS A NUCLEAR BOMB THAT WAS VERY SOBERING, BUT IT 11:59:00 WAS FALSE AND WHEN YOUR HUSBAND WROTE THE