[House Report 109-225]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
109th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
1st Session 109-225
======================================================================
DIRECTING THE SECRETARY OF STATE TO TRANSMIT TO THE HOUSE OF
REPRESENTATIVES NOT LATER THAN 14 DAYS AFTER THE DATE OF THE ADOPTION
OF THIS RESOLUTION DOCUMENTS IN THE POSSESSION OF THE SECRETARY OF
STATE RELATING TO THE DISCLOSURE OF THE IDENTITY AND EMPLOYMENT OF MS.
VALERIE PLAME
_______
September 16, 2005.--Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be
printed
_______
Mr. Hyde, from the Committee on International Relations, submitted the
following
ADVERSE REPORT
together with
DISSENTING VIEWS
[To accompany H. Res. 419]
The Committee on International Relations, to whom was
referred the resolution (H. Res. 419) directing the Secretary
of State to transmit to the House of Representatives not later
than 14 days after the date of the adoption of this resolution
documents in the possession of the Secretary of State relating
to the disclosure of the identity and employment of Ms. Valerie
Plame, having considered the same, reports unfavorably thereon
without amendment and recommends that the resolution not be
agreed to.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Purpose and Summary.............................................. 2
Background and Need for the Legislation.......................... 2
Hearings......................................................... 3
Committee Consideration.......................................... 3
Vote of the Committee............................................ 3
Committee Oversight Findings..................................... 4
New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures........................ 4
Performance Goals and Objectives................................. 4
Constitutional Authority Statement............................... 4
New Advisory Committees.......................................... 4
Congressional Accountability Act................................. 4
Federal Mandates................................................. 4
Dissenting Views................................................. 5
Purpose and Summary
House Resolution 419 directs the Secretary of State to
transmit to the House of Representatives not later than 14 days
after the date of the adoption of this resolution documents in
the possession of the Secretary of State relating to the
disclosure of the identity and employment of Ms. Valerie Plame.
Background and Need for the Legislation
House Resolution 419 is a resolution of inquiry, which
pursuant to Rule XIII, clause 7 of the Rules of the House of
Representatives, directs the Committee to act on the resolution
within 14 legislative days, or a privileged motion to discharge
the Committee is in order. H. Res. 419 was introduced and
referred to the Committee on International Relations on July
29, 2005, and was ordered reported adversely by the Committee
on September 14, 2005.
Under the rules and precedents of the House, a resolution
of inquiry is one of the methods used by the House to obtain
information from the executive branch. According to Deschler's
Procedure it is a ``simple resolution making a direct request
or demand of the President or the head of an executive
department to furnish the House of Representatives with
specific factual information in the possession of the executive
branch.''\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Deschler's Precedents, H. Doc. No. 94-661, 94th Cong., 2d Sess.,
vol. 7, ch. 24, section 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On July 29, 2005, Rep. Rush Holt of New Jersey introduced
H. Res. 419. The resolution sought all documents, including
telephone and electronic mail records, logs and calendars,
personnel records, and records of internal discussions in the
possession of the Secretary of State relating to the disclosure
of the identity of Ms. Plame as an employee of the Central
Intelligence Agency during the period beginning on May 6, 2003,
and ending on July 31, 2003.
In February 2004, the House Committees on Intelligence,
Armed Services, the Judiciary, and International Relations each
reported adversely to the House a similar resolution, H. Res.
499.\2\ Like H. Res. 499, H. Res. 419 would direct executive
branch officials to transmit documents to the House of
Representatives that are the subject of an ongoing criminal
investigation. In light of this, the Committee voted to report
the resolution of inquiry adversely.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\H. Res. 499, 108th Cong. (Jan. 21, 2004).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department of Justice opened a criminal investigation
in September 2003 into whether government officials who
allegedly identified Valerie Plame to the press violated
Federal law that prohibits identifying covert agents. Press
reports indicate that the FBI investigation includes the White
House, the Departments of State and Defense, and the Central
Intelligence Agency and that ``boxloads'' of documents have
been forwarded to the FBI investigation team-including White
House phone logs and e-mails.\3\ Law enforcement officials have
been quoted indicating that the dozen agents assigned to the
case have not encountered any stalling tactics.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\Charlie Savage, Ashcroft Steps Aside in Probe into CIA Leak, The
Boston Globe, P. A12 (Dec. 31, 2003).
\4\Tom Brune, Probe of Spy's Outing Nearly Done, Newsday p. A23
(April 6, 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In December 2003, the then-Attorney General, John Ashcroft,
recused himself from the investigation and the then-Deputy
Attorney General appointed United States Attorney Patrick
Fitzgerald to lead the investigation as special prosecutor.\5\
Mr. Fitzgerald is a veteran prosecutor with experience in
national security matters and enjoys a stellar reputation. Mr.
Fitzgerald, according to press reports, has been granted more
independence than the norm under Department of Justice
Regulations.\6\ For instance, Mr. Fitzgerald, unlike other U.S.
Attorneys, reportedly does not have to seek approval from
Department of Justice officials in Washington, DC before
issuing subpoenas or granting immunity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\See Savage, supra note 4.
\6\Cam Simpson, Ashcroft Removes Self from Leak Probe; Fitzgerald
to Lead the Investigation, Chicago Tribune, p. C1 (Dec. 31, 2003).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The press further reports that, in January 2004, a grand
jury convened in Washington, DC to hear testimony on the
Valerie Plame matter.\7\ The grand jury has broad authority
that allows investigators to subpoena witnesses and documents,
including the same documents requested in H. Res. 419.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\See Brune supra n. 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
By all reports, Mr. Fitzgerald is pursuing the
investigation into the Valerie Plame matter aggressively and
responsibly. The Committee concluded that it would be unwise to
allow H. Res. 419 to jeopardize an ongoing criminal
investigation by the Department of Justice.
Under current circumstances, the International Relations
Committee believes that congressional oversight of the
protection of the identities of our intelligence agents under
the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982 is best left
to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence
(HPSCI), the Committee of primary jurisdiction.
Because H. Res. 499 could impede an ongoing criminal
investigation and the HPSCI is conducting oversight of this
matter in its capacity as Committee of primary jurisdiction,
the Committee ordered it reported adversely.
Hearings
The Committee did not hold hearings on H. Res. 419.
Committee Consideration
On September 14, 2005, the Full Committee marked up H. Res.
419, pursuant to notice, in open session. The Committee agreed
to a motion to report the resolution adversely to the House by
a record vote of 26 ayes to 21 nays.
Vote of the Committee
Clause (3)(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives requires that the results of each record vote
on an amendment or motion to report, together with the names of
those voting for or against, be printed in the Committee
report. The following record vote occurred during consideration
of H. Res. 419:
Vote to report to the House adversely:
Voting yes: Hyde, Leach, Smith (NJ), Burton, Gallegly, Ros-
Lehtinen, Rohrabacher, King, Chabot, Tancredo, Paul, Issa,
Flake, Davis, Green, Weller, Pence, McCotter, Harris, Wilson,
Boozman, Barrett, Mack, Fortenberry, McCaul, and Poe.
Voting no: Lantos, Berman, Ackerman, Menendez, Brown,
Sherman, Wexler, Engel, Delahunt, Meeks, Lee, Crowley,
Blumenauer, Berkley, Napolitano, Schiff, Watson, Smith (WA),
McCollum, Chandler and Cardoza.
H. Res. 419 was ordered reported adversely to the House by
a vote of 26 ayes to 21 noes.
Committee Oversight Findings
The Committee held no oversight activities under clause
2(b)(1) of rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives.
New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures
Clause 3(c)(2) of House Rule XIII is inapplicable because
H. Res. 419 does not provide new budgetary authority or
increased tax expenditures.
Performance Goals and Objectives
The rule requiring a statement of performance goals and
objectives is inapplicable.
Constitutional Authority Statement
Pursuant to clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, the Committee finds the authority for
this resolution in article I, section 1 of the Constitution.
New Advisory Committees
H. Res. 419 does not establish or authorize any new
advisory committees.
Congressional Accountability Act
H. Res. 419 does not apply to the legislative branch.
Federal Mandates
H. Res. 419 provides no Federal mandates.
Dissenting Views
The intentional disclosure of the identity of a U.S. covert
intelligence agent, for whatever purpose, increases the risk to
the lives of the brave men and women who risk their lives in
the clandestine service to protect this nation from foreign
threats. It also poses a grave threat to the national security
of the nation because it will create doubt in the mind of
foreign sources who could provide vital intelligence to our
undercover operatives that their identity will be protected; if
the identity of the U.S. agent can be disclosed for crude
political purposes, then any meetings they may have had, and
been observed to have, with that agent exposes those sources to
retaliation by the foreign government. What if that foreign
source has inside information about a pending terrorist attack
on the United States, but decides against sharing that
information with an undercover U.S. operative for fear that the
terrorist group could kill him or his family? This is the true
cost of the Administration's actions; we may not learn about
another 9/11 in time to prevent it.
In the consideration of H. Res. 419, the International
Relations Committee had a choice on how to address this
despicable act and national security threat. We could have
assumed the responsibility of oversight of the Executive Branch
in areas of intelligence that affect U.S. foreign policy, as
the rules of the House charge us. We could have demonstrated to
the country and to the rest of the world that we would not
countenance this blatantly political act by this or any White
House. We could have demonstrated our resolve to investigate
this fully and expose those responsible for it, and perhaps
provided some reassurance to our brave intelligence agents and
their sources that we will protect them. We could have at least
asserted oversight over the State Department papers that may
have inadvertently provided the source for subsequent White
House officials' disclosures, something that is clearly within
this Committee's jurisdiction. Instead, the Committee Majority
chose to simply step aside and acquiesce to the evident wishes
of the Administration. The Majority simply decided to trust the
Administration to investigate itself, to wait out an
investigation that shows no sign of ending or bringing any
culpable person to justice.
The Majority of the Committee has again let down our
intelligence community and all Americans that are still
astonished by the perfidy of the exposure of our undercover
agent for political purposes.
It has been over two years since the American people
learned that a White House official exposed the identity of a
CIA undercover operative to the media, perhaps calling six
separate journalists with the information. One of these
journalists--a conservative commentator who alone among the six
chose to put personal publicity above national security--
published the agent's identity in a column ostensibly about the
charges leveled by her husband, former Ambassador Joseph
Wilson, that the Administration's claim that Iraq had sought to
buy uranium from Niger was false and misleading. This
journalist wrote in his column that he was told by the White
House officials that the Ambassador's wife was ``an operative''
of the CIA, presumably intending to cast doubt about the
Ambassador's motivations; other journalists were apparently
told this was the ``real story'' and that Wilson's wife was
``fair game.''
As events have borne out, Ambassador Wilson was correct.
The claims made by the President and others in his
Administration that Iraq had purchased uranium from Niger were
indeed false. Indeed, clearly and evidently false, based on
badly-forged documents that even a cursory investigation would
ascertain. According to press reports, our own intelligence
agencies had grave doubts about their authenticity as early as
the summer of 2002. Nevertheless, the President and his
Administration used it as a vital piece of evidence that Iraq
was reconstituting its nuclear weapons program. Even after
senior intelligence officials insisted the claim be deleted
from the President's speeches, the claim continued to surface
in statements by senior Administration officials. The Secretary
of State, in his presentation before the United Nations
Security Council in February 2003, wisely refused to repeat the
claim, recognizing its dubious character.
Administration officials have since admitted that the Iraq-
Niger uranium claims were unsupportable--admitting this fact
only reluctantly and in a raft of finger-pointing. And yet,
someone in the White House could apparently not resist the
temptation to tarnish the reputation of the one man who had
actually, personally investigated the claim and who quietly
told the Administration that the charges were false. When he
was not heeded, he rightfully stated his opinions and
information, openly and for the public record, in The New York
Times in June 2003.
We find it extremely hard to believe that the disclosure of
the CIA agent's identity by White House officials was
inadvertent. One crucial fact has recently come to light; in
June 2003, Secretary of State Powell had a top-secret State
memorandum (prepared by the Department's Bureau of Intelligence
and Research) with him regarding the Wilson mission during the
President's trip to Africa. This memorandum reportedly had a
section identifying Wilson's wife as a CIA operative, and
several White House senior aides may have reviewed that memo,
which could have been the source of their knowledge of Ms.
Plame's identity. If so, they knew that information was
classified. How could anyone in the White House therefore
believe that this public revelation was not criminal or
dangerous? Rather, we believe that the leaking of Ms. Plame's
identity as a covert operative was clearly an intentional
effort to discredit her husband's public charges of the
Administration's misuse of intelligence, conducted to exact
political vengeance and perform damage control. If we are
correct, this was the ultimate ``dirty trick'' by an
Administration to silence its critics.
It is true that this matter is already being investigated
by a special prosecutor, whom we do not intend to demean. We
note, however, that the only person to have suffered
imprisonment in this matter is a journalist who refused to
reveal her sources, even though she never even wrote a story.
It is imperative that Congress fulfill its own oversight
function in the investigation of this serious matter. U.S.
Attorney Fitzgerald and the grand jury that is investigating
this issue may find that while there has been wrongdoing, the
legal elements of the federal criminal statutes involved here
have not been met, and no indictment may be handed down. In
that eventuality, he has no duty to report to Congress on his
findings. And the fact that there may not be, in the course of
this investigation, enough evidence to charge a federal crime
does not mean that our national security is unaffected. Indeed,
we need to ferret out how such an act, even if unintentional,
could happen and establish safeguards to ensure that it never
happens again.
This resolution of inquiry does not ask for Mr.
Fitzgerald's or the Justice Department's internal investigatory
documents or in any way impair grand jury secrecy; it demands
instead the primary materials that would allow Congress and
this Committee to conduct its own investigation. Indeed, as we
prepare for any investigation that is deemed necessary, these
documents can be kept in complete security and confidentiality
and need not undermine Mr. Fitzgerald's efforts. We would
remind our colleagues that even in this Administration there
have been congressional inquiries conducted while the U.S.
Government had a criminal investigation open. Just to cite one
case, in the last Congress both the House and the Senate
conducted an investigation of the Enron scandal with multiple
hearings and the subpoena of Justice Department targets,
including calling all the major corporate officers who have
been subject to plea agreements and indictments or remain
targets of the investigation. Allegations of insider trading
involving Martha Stewart were also investigated by
Congressional committees during the course of a criminal
investigation. Of course, in the last Administration there were
numerous congressional investigations of matters under criminal
investigation (including some where grand juries were active).
These investigations include those of the Waco Incident, the
U.S. technology transfers to China, allegations of campaign
finance violations, the White House Travel office and many
others. And at this very moment, the Committee on International
Relations is investigating the U.N. Oil-for-Food scandal at the
same time that criminal investigations are taking place on the
very same issue.
Moreover, it is a fact that the Executive Branch is
investigating itself on what may turn out to be, at least in
part, a political act. Congress must conduct oversight as it
has repeatedly in the last ten years, and may need to charter
an independent investigation. We regret that the House Majority
has, time and time again, refused to conduct real oversight if
the results may be discomfiting to this White House. This is
not what the American people expect from their Congress,
regardless who is in charge.
We regret that some choose to see this effort at seeking
the truth as merely a political gambit; that has always been
their defense when faced with effective and legitimate
criticism. Last year, ten former CIA case officers and
analysts, some of whom are known to us and are generally
sympathetic to this Administration, wrote to the Speaker of the
House and stated ``[f]or the good of the country, we ask you to
please stand up for every man and woman who works for the U.S.
intelligence community by immediately launching a congressional
investigation.'' We endorse this plea wholeheartedly, and
regret that the majority of this Committee chose not to hear
it.
Tom Lantos.
Howard L. Berman.
Gary L. Ackerman.
Donald M. Payne.
Robert Menendez.
Sherrod Brown.
Brad Sherman.
Robert Wexler.
Eliot L. Engel.
William D. Delahunt.
Gregory W. Meeks.
Barbara Lee.
Joseph Crowley.
Earl Blumenauer.
Shelley Berkley.
Grace F. Napolitano.
Adam B. Schiff.
Diane E. Watson.
Adam Smith.
Betty McCollum.
Ben Chandler.
Dennis A. Cardoza.