Senator pushes for revokation of Rove's security clearance And Henry Waxman is calling for a Congressional investigation of Rove's handling of classified information. (See update at bottom)
Senator pushes for revokation of Rove's security clearance
Even though attorneys for Karl Rove have announced that he will not be facing charges relating to the outing of undercover CIA operative Valerie Plame Wilson, Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) still wants to see Rove's security clearances revoked, according to a letter acquired by RAW STORY.
"The criminal investigation of Mr. Rove may be over, but serious questions remain about his misuse of classified information," Lautenberg said in a statement.
Rove, as "Official A" in the Libby indictment, is fingered in court filings as having disclosed Plame's name to reporters on multiple occasions.
And Howard Dean Says Even Though He Will Not Be Indicted He Still May Be Involved In Leaks Of Classified Information
Raw Story has a developing story that appears that a prominent Congressman will soon announce calls for a Congressional Investigation. Not only is there the legitimate questions of whether or not it is appropriate for Karl Rove to retain his security clearence given the evidence of his mishandling of intelligence that has come to light as part of Fitzgerald's investigation, but we also have the question of the misuse of intelligence for political purposes.
I call on Senator Edward Kennedy to repeat his call for Dick Cheney to appear before Congress and explain any role and knowledge he has in the misuse of intelligence for political purposes.
In both a press release and in television news appearances, DNC chair Howard Dean has pressed the case that, while Rove has been cleared of perjury relating to the matter, he may still have been involved in the leak of classified information.
Lautenberg reiterates this point: "The President said he would not tolerate classified leaks from his staff, but there is no evidence he is willing to hold Mr. Rove accountable."
In a letter acquired by RAW STORY, Lautenberg asks the Presidential Security Officer Mark Frownletter to reconsider Rove's security clearance and launch an investigation:
I'm afraid too many people, including myself, fell silent on this other matters that warrant congressional investigation because we hoped Fitzgerald was taking care of everything for us.
I acknowledge, many others here, did occassionally remind us that the focus of the Fitzgerald investigation was far more narrow than the oversight responsibilities that Congress has here. We need to lift our eyes to this bigger picture before this sad episode of US history can be declared over.
RawStory Run's This Copy of the Lautenberg letter.
June 13, 2006
Mark Frownfelter Security Officer Executive Office of the President 725 17th Street, NW, Rm. 4101 Washington, DC 20503
Dear Mr. Frownfelter:
Despite having written to you on November 14, 2005, I have not yet received an assurance that you are treating the information disclosed in the indictment of I. Lewis Libby (a.k.a. "Scooter Libby") in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia as an adverse information report on Karl C. Rove, Deputy Chief of Staff to the President of the United States, thereby invoking the appropriate investigation and reevaluation of Mr. Rove's security clearances. Today's announcement that the criminal investigation of Mr. Rove has ceased makes the need for your review more urgent.
According to the indictment, a White House official identified as "Official A" disclosed the identity of an undercover CIA agent to columnist Robert D. Novak, who published the information. White House officials have confirmed that "Official A" is Mr. Rove. In addition, Mr. Rove has been identified in media reports as disclosing the identity of the agent to another reporter, Matthew Cooper of Time magazine.
As you know, such activity is prohibited under Federal regulations governing access to classified information:
Classified information may be made available to a person only when the possessor of the information establishes that the person has a valid "need to know" and the access is essential to the accomplishment of official government duties. The proposed recipient is eligible to receive classified information only after he/she has been granted a security clearance by the EOP Security Officer.
As EOP Security Officer, when the possibility of a violation of these standards becomes evident, you are required to take "prompt action to investigate alleged violations of security, and recommen[d] appropriate administrative action with respect to violators."
The actions described in the indictment led to the publication of the name of a CIA operative whose employment status was classified. This revelation of classified information damaged national security by destroying an operative's covert cover, compromising intelligence gathering operations, and endangering the safety of other CIA employees and their contacts.
I would like your assurance that you are taking prompt action on this case, and that you will follow up with appropriate administrative actions regarding Mr. Rove's access to classified information.
Sincerely,
[Signature]
United States of America v. I. Lewis Libby, Criminal No. 05-394, (D.D.C. Filed Oct. 28, 2005) Id. at 8 Jim VandeHei and Carol D. Loennig, Rove's Future Role is Debated, The Washington Post, November 3, 2005, at A1, A10. 5 C.F.R. 1312.23, Access to Classified Information 5 C.F.R. 1312.22 (a)(3)
I know there will be pressure by some to let the Karl Rove affair drop if Patrick Fitzgerald has has indeed decided not to seek indictment of Karl Rove.
However, I support Senator Lautenberg's call for a review of Karl Rove's security clearence as well as other Congressional investigations into this leak. The Congress has a far larger purview of responsibilities including but not limited to the oversight responsibilities about the inappropriate use of intelligence for political purposes.
While, perhaps, not obstruction of justice, such political uses of intelligence might still be highly innappropriate.
I believe Congress has waited far to long to start these investigations.
Update
Waxman asks for Congressional investigation of Rove
Congressman Henry Waxman (D-CA) is requesting a Congressional investigation into Karl Rove's involvement in the CIA leak scandal, RAW STORY has learned.
A release issued by Waxman follows:
#
In light of reports that Special Counsel Fitzgerald will not pursue criminal charges against Karl Rove -- and does not appear likely to file a report or make other public statements about findings -- Rep. Waxman renewed his request to Chairman Davis for a congressional investigation that would provide public accountability and address unanswered questions. The text of the letter follows:
June 13, 2006
The Honorable Tom Davis
Chairman
Committee on Government Reform
U.S. House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20515
Dear Mr. Chairman:
Over the past several years, I have made five separate requests for a Committee investigation of the White House leak of former CIA agent Valerie Plame Wilson's identity.[1] From the outset, I expressed my view that the criminal investigation by Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald criminal inquiry could not be a substitute for a congressional inquiry because of the "narrow focus" of the criminal investigation and the possibility that the criminal investigation could be closed without any "public accounting" of what transpired. [2]
Your consistent response was that you did not want to open a congressional investigation while the Special Counsel was conducting his investigation, but that "if a need for a separate congressional investigation becomes evident" you would "not hesitate to act."[3]
In light of today's reports that Special Counsel Fitzgerald will not pursue criminal charges against Karl Rove - and does not appear likely to file a report or make other public statements about his findings - I renew my request for congressional hearings and a public accounting of Mr. Rove's actions.
By all accounts, Mr. Fitzgerald has conducted a thorough investigation into whether Mr. Rove committed a crime by leaking Ms. Wilson's identity or lying to federal investigators. But these are not the only questions that need to be answered about Mr. Rove's conduct.
As I have recounted in my previous correspondence, there are important regulatory requirements for safeguarding classified information that applied to Mr. Rove. Like other officials with security clearances, Mr. Rove was prohibited from making both intentional and negligent disclosures of classified information,[4] confirming classified information obtained by a reporter,[5] or repeating classified information he heard from a reporter.[6] Violations of these rules would not necessarily be criminal actions, but they would be reprehensible and should be a matter of great public and congressional concern.
Moreover, there remain questions (1) whether Mr. Rove was part of a coordinated White House effort to discredit and retaliate against Ms. Wilson's husband, former Ambassador Joe Wilson, (2) whether Mr. Rove was part of an effort to mislead the public about White House involvement in the leak, and (3) whether reforms are needed in White House procedures to prevent future leaks of classified information.
I am mindful that there is an on-going criminal trial involving I. Lewis (Scooter) Libby, the Vice President's former chief of staff, and I would not want efforts by our Committee to interfere with that prosecution. But given that Mr. Fitzgerald appears to have completed his inquiry of Mr. Rove, it should be possible for the Committee to initiate an effort to examine Mr. Rove's actions without jeopardizing Mr. Libby's trial. A good first step would be to schedule a meeting with Mr. Fitzgerald in which he can brief us about his findings regarding Mr. Rove and we can discuss with him the best way to proceed.
As I have written in my previous correspondence, Congress has a constitutional obligation to provide a check and balance on the executive branch. Providing a public accounting of the actions of Mr. Rove is an important part of fulfilling this obligation.
Sincerely,
Henry A. Waxman Ranking Minority Member