Of note, I believe that Bill Bennett, on his radio program "Morning in America" had held that Plame was not covert when her name was leaked to the press as a CIA operative. I had my doubts, and wondered at his basis for the claim (certainly it had been questioned, but I'd never heard it confirmed that Plame did not maintain covert status).
This Capitol Hill testimony sets that to rest (much better than Patrick Fitzgerald every accomplished it, I would say).
Valerie Plame put a glamorous face and a personal story to Democrats' criticism of the Bush administration Friday, telling a House committee that White House and State Department officials "carelessly and recklessly" blew her CIA cover in a politically motivated smear of her husband.
Plame, the operative at the center of the leak scandal that resulted in last week's criminal conviction of a former top White House official, created more of a stir by her presence on Capitol Hill than by her testimony.
She revealed little new information about the case, which sparked a federal investigation and brought perjury and obstruction of justice convictions of Vice President Dick Cheney's former top aide, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby. No one has been charged with leaking her identity.
It does not excuse the administration at all (if there was any wrongdoing), but Plame put her job on the line when she recommended her husband for the job and he wrote about it.Wilson's article was fundamentally inaccurate, and of course attention began to focus on how Wilson got a gig like that in the first place.
The Wilson lawsuit strikes me as frankly hilarious. I cannot imagine what sort of evidence the Wilsons have that makes them think the suit has merit; most likely it's designed as a fishing expedition (hoping to search for the evidence by getting administration officials on the witness stand). And to keep the issue in people's minds so that George W. Bush will lose the White House in '08.