I think it's correct to say that Joe Wilson's credibility is irrelevant to the Plame investigation, or what anyone makes of the Plame investigation. There isn't anything exculpatory for the Bush administration in the fact, if it is one, that Wilson lied about whether his wife recommended him for his little jaunt to Niger or not. And if it turns out that the CIA never passed along Wilson's conclusions, as he supposed, that ought to influence our view of the way that the CIA handled information in interacting with the administration. But it is, again, irrelevant to the question of whether anyone in the administration acted badly in outing Wilson's wife.
Fine. That's true. But after reading and reviewing Wilson's books, and interviewing him, it's a bit much for people to turn around and say that Joe Wilson is not an issue at all. For a time, he was an issue, and his credibility was drawn on to bolster criticisms of the administration. The fact that the administration deserved the criticisms is also irrelevant, since much was made, once upon a time, of the fact that it was Wilson, a credible man, who was making them.
There's a good post blog post on this here:
http://perfidy.org/comments.php?id=P1975_0_1_0
The blogger, Ross, has taken the time to read the Senate report and put it together with comments that Wilson has made at various times. He (Ross) doesn't see anything that seriously challenges Wilson's credibility.
Plame was apparently used as a conduit to get an invitation to Wilson to attend a CIA meeting to discuss the whole Niger business. But she didn't attend the meeting and it was there that the idea of Wilson going to Niger was actually broached.
Ah, interesting. I think my post wasn't especially well written, since I meant to sound more neutral about whether Wilson was credible or not. My target was people who are now convinced that Wilson is not credible, but don't care.
Posted by: Chris at July 15, 2004 04:39 PM