New York Times columnist Nicholas D. Kristof questioned the motives behind special counsel Patrick J. Fitzgerald's investigation into the alleged outing of undercover CIA operative Valerie Plame by wrongly claiming Fitzgerald “is said to be mulling indictments that aren't based on his prime mandate, investigation of possible breaches of the 1982 law prohibiting officials from revealing the names of spies.” Fitzgerald's mandate, however, was not limited to the 1982 Intelligence Identities Protection Act, or any other single federal law.

In his October 25 column (subscription required), Kristof commented on “the harm that special prosecutors can do”:

Special prosecutors always seem to morph into Inspector Javert, the Victor Hugo character [from the novel Les Miserables] whose vision of justice is both mindless and merciless. We don't know what evidence has been uncovered by Patrick Fitzgerald, but we should be uneasy that he is said to be mulling indictments that aren't based on his prime mandate, investigation of possible breaches of the 1982 law prohibiting officials from revealing the names of spies.

As Media Matters for America noted, Fitzgerald was assigned with a broad mandate to investigate the alleged leak of Plame's identity as a CIA operative. According to his official delegation as a special counsel (reprinted in a 2004 Government Accountability Office decision paper), Fitzgerald was granted “all the authority of the Attorney General with respect to the [Justice] Department's investigation into the alleged unauthorized disclosure of a CIA employee's identity.” The delegation made no mention of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act or any other specific statute.

Indeed, Fitzgerald's plenary authority was confirmed in a February 6, 2004, letter sent by then-acting Attorney General James B. Comey in response to a request from Fitzgerald for clarification that the original delegation conferred such authority. Comey wrote:

At your request, I am writing to clarify that my December 30, 2003, delegation to you of “all the authority of the Attorney General with respect to the Department's investigation into the alleged unauthorized disclosure of a CIA employee's identity” is plenary and includes the authority to investigate and prosecute violations of any federal criminal laws related to the underlying alleged unauthorized disclosure, as well as federal crimes committed in the course of, and with intent to interfere with, your investigation, such as perjury, obstruction of justice, destruction of evidence, and intimidation of witnesses; to conduct appeals arising out of the matter being investigated and/or prosecuted; and to pursue administrative remedies and civil sanctions (such as civil contempt) that are within the Attorney General's authority to impose or pursue.