No, BB. Both are wrong. But "outing" a CIA -- or any intelligence agency -- operative puts not only the life of the operative at risk, but also the liveS of those with whom that operative came in contact. And this doesn't even begin to address the national security issues.

Look at it this way: Agent X-12 is exposed. X-12's in-country contacts are rounded up, the innocent and the guilty. One or more crack under questioning, leading to other arrests. Given the "questioning" techniques used in some countries others might be maimed or die, guilty or not. At the very least the US is embarassed, at the middlin' worst the intelligence operation is compromised, at the very worst innocent people die and all earlier steps also occur.

If you doubt the results of intelligence work, look at the results of the Zimmerman Telegram or Gary Powers' U-2 flight. Look at the US Marines at the US Embassy in Moscow who traded (low-level) intelligence information for sexual favors.

No, there's a definite difference in "quality" between a President getting a BJ and outing an intelligence agent. Lying under oath is wrong, but consider the implications of each as well.