Valerie Plame testified before the House Committee on Government Oversight and Reform, stating that the Bush administration waged a war to discredit her husband and to destroy her career. She also briefly mentioned her role in assigning her husband as an investigator of the Niger yellowcake issue.
So when will Ms. Plame be charged with perjury? If Mr. Libby is facing decades in prison for lying before a grand jury (lies of no significance, as they pointed away from the Bush administration), why is Ms. Plame not being brought up on charges for distorting the truth to Congress? It is a well-known fact that the White House did not leak Ms. Plame’s name to the press; Richard Armitage, a Democrat, was the one who first mentioned her connection to Joseph Wilson. Ms. Plame, as a CIA operative, presumably has no knowledge of the inner workings of the White House; she was not a frequent visitor to the Oval Office.
“Rep. Harry Waxman (D. Calif.), who chairs the committee that sought Plame’s testimony, has said that today’s session will give Plame a chance to talk about the impact of the disclosure, but that his real aim is to determine the White House’s role in leaking her name to columnist Robert Novak and other journalists.”
The role of the White House has been well known for several years: nonexistent. Ms. Plame state, emphatically, that she was a covert agent. (Perhaps she neglected to mention the time period?) She also stated that the Bush administration worked to discredit her. If either of those things are untrue, she should be charged with the same crimes brought against Mr. Libby: perjury and obstruction of justice.