CIA leak warrants independent probe

President Bush insists that he wants to know who in the executive branch leaked information to a national syndicated columnist that resulted in the public identification of a Central Intelligence Agency operative. We applaud the president for his stand. But Bush also says that he does not believe a special counsel should be appointed for an independent investigation. On that, we strongly disagree.
The president must know that having the Justice Department lead the probe will not silence the critics, if for no other reason than the blind loyalty U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft has shown him. Should Justice conclude that there was no violation of the law that prohibits the identification of a covert officer of the CIA, the issue will not die.
Democrats on Capitol Hill and several contenders for the Democratic nomination for president in next year's election have made it clear that a special counsel is needed to eliminate any appearance of a cover-up.
As House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi said in a statement this week, "An independent investigation of this despicable matter must be undertaken immediately. It must be thorough, and it must be beyond question in terms of the vigor with which it is pursued.
"Given allegations about the involvement of senior White House officials and the past close association between the attorney general and one of those officials, the investigation should be headed by a person independent of the administration.
"If there ever was a case for the appointment of a special counsel, this is it."
Compelling case
The White House denied reports this week that Karl Rove, the president's senior advisor, may have been the source of the leak, but the possibility of top administration officials' being involved makes the case for an independent investigation all the more compelling.
"As a member of the Intelligence Committee for 10 years, including two years as ranking Democrat, I know full well the risks taken by courageous clandestine intelligence officers and the need to have their identities protected," Pelosi said.
But this case goes beyond the mere ID'ing of Valerie Plame. The reason that her name was whispered to conservative columnist Robert Novak must be explored.
Plame is the wife of former Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, who was publicly critical of the Bush administration's handling of intelligence about Iraq.
Wilson contends that a report he wrote, after a visit to the west African nation of Niger to investigate claims that Saddam Hussein had attempted to buy "yellow cake" uranium ore for possible use in nuclear weapons from that country, was tweaked by the White House to justify the invasion of Iraq. The report said the claims had no basis.
The former ambassador has asserted that the leaking of his wife's identity was in retaliation for his public criticism of the Bush administration's decision in Iraq.
That assertion must be thoroughly investigated, not only because of the legal and moral ramifications of such action, but because of the politics involved.
Bush is seeking re-election next year and though he enjoyed strong support from the American people during the Iraq invasion in March, his poll numbers have been on the decline.
Ashcroft works at the pleasure of the president and therefore cannot be viewed as an unbiased participant.
Ashcroft should use the authority granted him by Congress to appoint a special counsel to handle the CIA leak. That way, Congress would have the ability to review the evidence and decide whether the findings have merit.