NYTimes front page / For Two Aides in Leak Case, 2nd Issue Rises - READ

[bunny planet]

this was just posted at 10:15 pm. I haven't even had the chance to read it through yet.

http://nytimes.com/2005/07/22/politics/22leak.html?hp&ex=1122004800&en=da4770e9392bb1c6&ei=5094&partner=homepage

[bunny planet]

1. It looks like an important story!!!!

[Skink]

2. Someimes I actually pay for the times...

Wait I work in a bookstore. I can read it free.:evilgrin:

[johnfunk]

28. Stick a fork in Turdblossom and Scooter...

... they're DONE!

[Bumblebee]

4. Wow

I swear they made a tactical mistake by rushing the name of the nominee. Speculation for another week or so would have bought them more time. Now it's back to the WP competing with the NYT as to who will publish things first in the Rove saga (instead of who can guess who teh nominee will be) -- which is great news for us! Great when their "brilliant" strategy misfires like that.

[Pirate Smile]

10. and WSJ and Bloomberg and etc.

[Tin Man]

40. Hadley furnishes Rove & Libby w/ Plame's identity

Below is Tin Man's partial translation of the NYT article. Tranlated material appears inline with the original text of the article - (translated material is italicized text bounded within parentheses, like this).

They (Rove and Libby) had exchanged e-mail correspondence and drafts of a proposed statement by George J. Tenet, then the director of central intelligence, to explain how the disputed wording had gotten into the address (Rove and Libby were seeking some "explanation" that would neuter the story building around Wilson's discrediting of the "16 words" which "mistakenly" appeared in the SOTU address) Mr. Rove, the president's political strategist, and Mr. Libby, the chief of staff for Vice President Dick Cheney, coordinated their efforts with Stephen J. Hadley, then the deputy national security adviser, who was in turn consulting with Mr. Tenet. (email evidence has arrisen that ties Rove, Libby, and now Hadley together on the effort to somehow explain away the "16 words" and/or neutralize Wilson's assertions).

The work done by Mr. Rove and Mr. Libby on the Tenet statement during this intense period has not been previously disclosed (the email correspondence linking Rove, Libby, and Hadley is a new revelation). People who have been briefed on the case (meaning: Rove's Lawyer Luskin speaking to NYTimes regarding the revelations) discussed this critical time period and the events surrounding it to demonstrate that Mr. Rove and Mr. Libby were not involved in an orchestrated scheme to discredit Mr. Wilson or disclose the undercover status of his wife, Valerie Wilson, but were intent on clarifying the use of intelligence in the president's address (When approached by NYT reporter, Rove's lawyer waves hands wildly and blows smoke, says that the emails to Hadley were intended only to clarify how the 16 words managed to pass un-redacted during the CIA review of SOTU address, and had nothing to do with how Rove and Libbey came to know the identity of Wilson's wife). Those people who have been briefed requested anonymity because prosecutors have asked them not to discuss matters under investigation. (Rove's lawyer dosen't like the sound of this development, claims he can't offer any more detail, and hangs up).

[Skittles]

52. hey Tin Man

I like your style :hi:

[Toots]

62. Can we say CONSPIRACY

Hell maybe even Racketeering but definitely CONSPIRACY

[Imagevision]

88. Oh, conspiracy conspiracy conspiracy! - Do you think Bush could have

pulled this off on his own. Even Nixon took some of his cronies down when he split, actually some did do time!

[woosh]

3. They're in trouble.

[rodeodance]

57. you betcha!!

[writes2000]

5. Luskin, Rove, Libby & Fleischer talking to the press to save their asses.

[Pithy Cherub]

6. whoa, the circle is much bigger - NSC....

from the NYT article: "It is not clear what information Mr. Rove and Mr. Libby might have collected about Ms. Wilson as they worked on the Tenet statement.

The effort was particularly striking because to an unusual degree, the circle of administration officials involved included those from the White House's political and national security operations, which are often separately run. Both arms were drawn into the effort to defend the administration during the period.

In another indication of how wide a net investigators have cast in the case, Karen Hughes, a former top communications aide to Mr. Bush, and Robert Joseph, who was then the National Security Council's weapons proliferation expert, have both told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that they were interviewed by the special prosecutor.

Ms. Hughes is to have her confirmation hearing on Friday on her nomination to lead the State Department's public diplomacy operation. Mr. Joseph was recently confirmed as undersecretary of state for arms control and international security. As part of their confirmation proceedings, both had to fill out a questionnaire listing any legal matters they had become involved in."

:popcorn:

[lovuian]

48. and did they write they were questioned in a ongoing investigation?

I wonder if Joseph did???

[Pithy Cherub]

86. yep, he's already been confirmed so the Senate knew. n/t

[Skittles]

56. why would Ms. Hughes be considered wide net?

she is bush's nanny for chrissakes

[Pithy Cherub]

85. She is also a member of the NSC subcommittees (WHIG)

that have had KP/nanny duty behind this pResident. She receives classified info and how she handled it while working for the NSC will be key. What did she know and when did she know it...

[pointsoflight]

7. This info points to conspiracy....

Not just perjury and obstruction of justice, but conspiracy.

[nolabels]

55. STOP THAT, the word is coincidence

It's all just coincidence, and you can hang your hat on that

http://www.villagevoice.com/blogs/bushbeat/archive/2005_01.php


http://www.lessig.org/blog/archives/cat_presidential_politics.shtml

[burythehatchet]

8. little tidbit regarding Ms. Karen

Ms. Hughes is to have her confirmation hearing on Friday on her nomination to lead the State Department's public diplomacy operation

Nail her friggin ass to the wall!!

[deminks]

9. Well, well, well. Ms. Hughes' name appears.

(snip from the article)

In another indication of how wide a net investigators have cast in the case, Karen Hughes, a former top communications aide to Mr. Bush, and Robert Joseph, who was then the National Security Council's weapons proliferation expert, have both told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that they were interviewed by the special prosecutor.

Ms. Hughes is to have her confirmation hearing on Friday on her nomination to lead the State Department's public diplomacy operation. Mr. Joseph was recently confirmed as undersecretary of state for arms control and international security. As part of their confirmation proceedings, both had to fill out a questionnaire listing any legal matters they had become involved in.

[DanCa]

26. Didn't she call us terrorist?

And treasonist and every other dirty little word her mouth could utter?

[cal04]

38. no surprise Hughes name appears. She was part of the WHIG

Systematic coordination began in August, when Chief of Staff Andrew H. Card Jr. formed the White House Iraq Group, or WHIG, to set strategy for each stage of the confrontation with Baghdad. A senior official who participated in its work called it "an internal working group, like many formed for priority issues, to make sure each part of the White House was fulfilling its responsibilities."

In an interview with the New York Times published Sept. 6, Card did not mention the WHIG but hinted at its mission. "From a marketing point of view, you don't introduce new products in August," he said.

The group met weekly in the Situation Room. Among the regular participants were Karl Rove, the president's senior political adviser; communications strategists Karen Hughes, Mary Matalin and James R. Wilkinson; legislative liaison Nicholas E. Calio; and policy advisers led by Rice and her deputy, Stephen J. Hadley, along with I. Lewis Libby, Cheney's chief of staff.

The first days of September would bring some of the most important decisions of the prewar period: what to demand of the United Nations in the president's Sept. 12 address to the General Assembly, when to take the issue to Congress, and how to frame the conflict with Iraq in the midterm election campaign that began in earnest after Labor Day. A "strategic communications" task force under the WHIG began to plan speeches and white papers. There were many themes in the coming weeks, but Iraq's nuclear menace was among the most prominent.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&contentId=A39500-2003Aug9¬Found=true

[Jane Austin]

49. That WHIG group tells you everything you need to know about Bushco.

Here they are planning a war, and most of the people in the group are PR and political types.

Seems like the emphasis should be on diplomatic, military and foreign policy people when you're planning a war.

Leave it to Bushco to load the effort with political dirty tricksters.

[BonnieJW]

69. Mary Matalin?

I wonder what James Carville will have to say if his little wife is part of a conspiracy?

[Peace Patriot]

70. "how to fwame the conflict with Iraq in the midterm election campaign..."

How 'bout havin' Paul Whossit's plane fall out of the aiw...heh, heh? Now that's fwamin'.
You got it, sir. One fwamin' aiwplane coming up!

[skip fox]

90. More than two indictments likely. Rove may get 2 himself!

Rove, in fact, orchestrated the KNOWING and DELIBERATE leak of a covert CIA official, one whose identity the agency was actively concealing.

Each new piece of evidence suggests that a number of administrative officials will face multiple indictments in the leak of Plame's identity. Rove will receive probably more than one.

1. The inanity and hysteria of the RNC's (and others') spinning has been noted by reporters across the nation as indicative a party which "off its game." Expecting a terrible outcome, they were stalling for time, hoping the Supreme Court Nominee would bump the story off the front pages. (For a day it did . . . until Walter Pincus's story yesterday about classifications on the State Department memo sent to Air Force One.) Al Franken told us yesterday (7/21) that after some difficulty he was able to demonstrate to the RNC staff that the story on their web-site which states Wilson claimed the Vice President sent him to Niger was simply false, a lie (showing the context for Wilson's quote yet again). What was the RNC's reaction? "We're standing by it." Simple as that. My point it, when they are willing to be so consciously and blatantly dissembling in public (which can be used against them), that they are very distressed about the future.

2. We know there were at least 6 initial reporters contacted (including Novak, Miller, Cooper, and Pincus) and that 3 of those contacted called at least one secondary source the confirm the story (Cooper implies he had more than single confirming source named as Scooter Libby). We know that Cooper's initial source (Rove) specifically released him, but that Miller's would not do so for her. Since we already know Novak's initial source is Libby, there would be no reason him not to release Miller if he were her source (unless the crime was more obvious). Therefore we know that there were two (Libby and Rove) initial sources and probably at least another. Already we are deeply into the terrain of collaboration. But when we realize that to have 3 confirming sources available, since the "conspiracy" (it becomes the unavoidable word) could not insure who the reporters would call to confirm their stories, they had to have several primed (ready and willing to confirm) (Of course a confirming source for one reporter could be a primary course for another.)
Impossible to accomplish these 9 (or 9+) calls by at least 2, probably 3 or more initial caller, with others ready to confirm, without coordination. It wouldn't be rocket science for the Rove's Machiavellian machine he calls a mind, and it would be Rove of all people in the group of officials (probably largely composed of the White House Iraq Group) would direct (mastermind) the entire, making sure no two officials attempted to act as an initial source for a single reporter (that would appear too eager), that the story be believable (pitched nonchalantly, briefly), that the story is given in slightly different forms, and that the confirming sources were in place and with the story somewhat different in non-substantive matters (so it doesn't sound like story leaked by rote.) Therefore it was deliberately leaked.

3. We know Rove has had multiple visits by the FBI and to the grand jury. The implication is as loud as it gets.


4. The State Department memo, said to be at least one origin of the information concerning the Plame-Wilson-Niger connection and reputedly of high interest to the grand jury, was reported by Wlater Pincus yesterday to me clearly marked "S" for "Secret." Today's reports in fact indicate it was marked "TS," "Top Secret." Therefore the official who disseminated the identity from this source was highly aware that the CIA was actively trying to conceal Plame's identity. Therefore it was knowingly leaked.

Therefore, RNC's spin, the numbers of callers, the deliberate and repetitive acts, Rove's visits with FBI and grand jury, and the knowing intent behind the leak = Rove will go down in Plames. Likely he is guilty of leaking (with knowledge), leading a conspiracy to leak, and perjury.

There's no way out of this for Rove. The best he can hope for is the softest landing t5hat does the least damage for other officials and the Republican Party. (On a hot summer afternoon?)

[Bumblebee]

11. Too bad Bolton is not among them

reportedly...

[enough]

12. This is some of the strangest writing I have ever read.

If anything says there is something to this, it is the wierd tone of this article.

[Bumblebee]

16. True

It's confusing, awkward, and repetitive. They want to make sure that we know that they got it from sources close to Rove, yet they are also subtly (and why so subtly?) signaling that they are not buying it -- so it's sort of a mess, as far as the art of writing articles goes...

[A-Schwarzenegger]

17. No shit. I had to read 3 or 4 sentences 3 or 4 times

to figure out what they were saying. It was part circumspect,
I think, and part not very clear writing.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

19. It reads as if it were rushed

Yet they were trying to be very cautious of what they were implying.

[Don Claybrook]

24. It's packed with several semi-hidden treasures

Did you catch the part about "Democrats eager to bring up the matter of Bolton" part (paraphrase)? It sounds like they know something about Bolton that they want out, maybe something that was classified and restricted to the committee?

I'm happy as a clam to see this starting to burst at the seams.

[ernstbass]

65. My thoughts exactly

[LizW]

73. It is weirdly written, but they're getting it.

This story is very, very dangerous, and they're being careful. But they've got it. What they're saying, very carefully, is that these guys revealed the identity of a covert agent while they were involved in a massive effort to protect Bush and Cheney from the fallout of the "16 words" proving to be false.

The main message at that time was that the "16 words" was a mistake. They were desperately spinning that none of the major players had known before before the SOTU. Wilson's trip had a direct tie to Cheney, and they were so freaked out about it that they THOUGHT Wilson had said Cheney sent him, when Wilson actually never said that.

The desperate message EVERYONE was trying to get out was "Cheney didn't send Wilson." (Even Rice - look at what she said in the gaggle on AF1)

This is why they latched onto the "his wife sent him" story (even though that also turned out not to be true), because they were DESPERATE to get the press to say that Cheney didn't.

It is actually possible that they didn't out Valerie Plame out of revenge or vindictiveness, but that it was a stupid mistake born out of their desperation to protect Cheney.

I am confident that Fitzgerald has this case nailed. He's got Rove and Libby and he seems to have the whole conspiracy of the WHIG and the plot to sell the war. It is a case that could bring down a corrupt government. I wonder if he'll do it.

[CoffeeCat]

79. I'm wondering that too...will Fitzgerald expose the lies that sold us war?

Excellent, excellent synopsis LizW.

The NYTimes article was a difficult read and you provided some much-needed clarity.

Like you--I'm wondering about Fitzgerald. Will he stick specifically to his findings on the Plame matter? Or will he go deep and reveal how the American public was sold a rotten, lying bill of goods in order to get the public behind the war.

The fact that Plame's name was revealed is very important. However, it's tied to a more important issue--that this administration lied us into an unnecessary war. We've always known this. It has to come out.

They simply can't get away with this.

I wonder (and hope) that Fitzgerald's scope will extend beyond the Plame matter.

[goforit]

13. "Circle talk" .....leave it to the NYT. Their journalism needs improvement

This investigative journalism looks like a circus!!!

This is smoke to hide the footprints of truth!!!

This newspaper has been out of sinc for five years and you can really see it.

Rumsfeld and the NYT have one thing in common....

CHAOS!!!

:argh:

[bunny planet]

15. Yes, the second page of the article is definitely bizarre.

[Straight Shooter]

14. Hint of conspiracy in this article. Big hint.

The work done by Mr. Rove and Mr. Libby on the Tenet statement, during this intense period, had not been previously disclosed. People who have been briefed on the case discussed the critical time period and the events surrounding it to demonstrate that Mr. Rove and Mr. Libby were not involved in an orchestrated scheme to discredit Mr. Wilson or disclose his the undercover status of his wife, Valerie Wilson, but were intent on clarifying the use of intelligence in the president's address. Those people who have been briefed requested anonymity because prosecutors have asked them not to discuss matters under investigation.

The article subtly intimates that Rove, Libby (and whoever else) are trying to cover their a**es that there was no conspiracy to retaliate against Wilson by exposing Plame. Hoo-boy!

edit: the typo "disclose his the undercover" is the NYT's error. They must have been in a hurry to get this out.

[joeunderdog]

18. Judith Miller is only in jail to hide the rest of this story.

What key info does she have that will tie this together? There will be a point when it won't serve any purpose for her to stay in jail if they keep uncovering more parts to this story. When she decides to "talk," it'll be because she has nothing new to tell us and we've uncovered it all. What does she know about who else is in on this? You have to imagine that there is a bigger fish to fry here--Cheney?--or else she would be cooperating by now.

[rodeodance]

21. grand--they are keeping the story ALIVE---good for them.

[confludemocrat]

27. Seems it's revealing in an oblique way some of what Miller might know (?)

What are they up to? I agree the writing is opaque and filled with "circumlocutions"s. Very hard to read. Save it before they take it down.

[hootinholler]

36. Hell, what wouldn't Miller know?

From my outline:

8: NYT
8.1: Miller
8.1.1: WMD Articals:
http://www.mediainfo.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1984429

Jun, 2004:
http://newyorkmetro.com/nymetro/news/media/features/9226/index.html -:
During the winter of 2001 and throughout 2002, Miller produced a
series of stunning stories about Saddam Hussein’s ambition and
capacity to produce weapons of mass destruction, based largely on
information provided by Chalabi and his allies almost all of which
have turned out to be stunningly inaccurate.

-also-

Her Iraq coverage didn’t just depend on Chalabi. It also relied
heavily on his patrons in the Pentagon. Some of these sources, like
Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz, would occasionally talk to her on
the record. She relied especially heavily on the Office of Special
Plans, an intelligence unit established beneath Undersecretary of
Defense Douglas Feith. The office was charged with uncovering evidence
of Al Qaeda links to Saddam Hussein that the CIA might have missed. In
particular, Miller is said to have depended on a controversial neocon
in Feith’s office named Michael Maloof. At one point, in December
2001, Maloof’s security clearance was revoked. In April, Risen
reported in the Times, Several intelligence professionals say he
came under scrutiny because of suspicions that he had leaked
classified information in the past to the news media, a charge that
Mr. Maloof denies. While Miller might not have intended to march
in lockstep with these hawks, she was caught up in an almost
irresistible cycle. Because she kept printing the neocon party line,
the neocons kept coming to her with huge stories and great quotes,
constantly expanding her access.

8.1.1.1: On Dec. 3, 2002, Miller aired in the Times the allegations
of an "unnamed informant" who said that a deceased Russian scientist
("Madam Smallpox") might have given Iraq a virulent strain of
smallpox. Nine months later, Dafna Linzer of the Associated Press
authoritatively reported: "U.S. Weapons Hunters Find No Evidence Iraq
Had Smallpox" (Sept. 18).

8.1.1.2: April 21 "baseball cap" story - unidentified source wearing
cap discloses WMD processing locations - pegged bogon detector.

8.1.1.3: And, most memorably, she co-wrote a piece in which
administration officials suggested that Iraq had attempted to
import aluminum tubes for nuclear weapons. Vice-President Dick
Cheney trumpeted the story on Meet the Press, closing the
circle.
http://newyorkmetro.com/nymetro/news/media/features/9226/index.html -:

8.1.1.4: One incident that still rankles happened last April, when
Miller co-bylined a story with Douglas Jehl on the WMD search
that included a quote from Amy Smithson, an analyst formerly at
the Henry L. Stimson Center. A day after it appeared, the Times
learned that the quote was deeply problematic. To begin with, it
had been supplied to Miller in an e-mail that began, Briefly
and on background a condition that Miller had flatly
broken by naming her source. Miller committed a further offense
by paraphrasing the quote and distorting Smithson’s
analysis. One person who viewed the e-mail says that it
attributed views to Smithson that she clearly didn’t hold. An
embarrassing correction ensued. And while the offense had been
entirely Miller’s, there was nothing in the correction
indicating Jehl’s innocence.
http://newyorkmetro.com/nymetro/news/media/features/9226/index.html -:

8.1.2: (4.4.1.1) Mobile Exploitation Team Alpha (META)

8.1.2.1: "General Judith Miller" -- as Shafer has dubbed her -- was
accused by a half dozen officers of intimidating soldiers
searching for WMD. An Army officer told Kurtz: "Judith was always
issuing threats of either going to The New York Times or to the
Secretary of Defense." Another charged: "She ended up almost
hijacking the mission" of the Mobile Exploitation Team Alpha
(META), which was charged with examining potential Iraqi weapon
sites after the war.
Her journalistic coup lay, rather, in talking her way into getting
clearance from the Pentagon and being allowed to embed with the
75th. As Drogin told Layton, "she was in a great position to get
the initial confirmation in the field" when WMD were found. But
they were not found, despite her best efforts to make readers
think that they were or were about to be.

8.1.2.2: Eugene Pomeroy, public-affairs officer for MET Alpha
According to Pomeroy, as well as an editor at the Times,
Miller had helped negotiate her own embedding agreement with the
Pentagon an agreement so sensitive that, according to one Times
editor, Rumsfeld himself signed off on it.
http://newyorkmetro.com/nymetro/news/media/features/9226/index.html -:

8.1.3: Pals with Chalabi (7.1)
http://newyorkmetro.com/nymetro/news/media/features/9226/index.html -:

8.1.4: Pals with King Hussein
http://newyorkmetro.com/nymetro/news/media/features/9226/index.html -:
As a correspondent for The Progressive and National Public Radio, she
turned her academic interest into a professional one, traveling to the
region and cultivating a network of highly placed sources. Nina
Totenberg, a colleague from NPR, recalls a party in the mid-seventies
at which Jordan’s King Hussein caught a glimpse of Miller across the
room and howled, Juuuuddddy!

Kiiiinnnggg, she responded.

8.1.5: Pals with:
http://newyorkmetro.com/nymetro/news/media/features/9226/index.html -:
Miller had ready access to many Mideast potentates. As she shuttled
between meetings with Hussein, Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak, and
Palestinian Liberation Organization chief Yasser Arafat in 1984, her
colleagues joked about the Miller Plan for peace.
and
From her first day at the Times, Miller’s life and work have been hard
to separate, which for a reporter is both a strength and a
weakness. She’s a passionate person she gets caught up in her
sources passionately, one of her Times colleagues told me. Friends
from her earliest days in Washington noted that she didn’t surround
herself with people her own age. She sought out the best and brightest
at the city’s highest levels, dating Larry Sterne, the Washington
Post’s foreign editor, and hanging out with the defense gurus Richard
Perle and Walter Slocum. These people were powerful. But they were
also interesting, and Judy liked talking to them. She is curious and
enthusiastic, says one friend from this period.

8.1.6: Jeffery Goldberg
Remember, everyone was obsessed with the White House sex story, says
New Yorker writer Jeffrey Goldberg, who was invited by the paper to
join Miller in an investigation unit to examine Al Qaeda. Goldberg
found her an impossibly difficult colleague. But he also realized her
value. She happened to be prescient about the rise of the global
jihad. And it was her unpleasant hyper-aggressiveness that enabled her
to help force a very important story the possibility of a marriage
between WMD proliferators and global jihadists closer to the top of
the agenda.

[NJCher]

41. grossly unprofessional

Jordan’s King Hussein caught a glimpse of Miller across the
room and howled, Juuuuddddy!

Kiiiinnnggg, she responded.


What is the NY Times doing with such a grossly unprofessional person on their staff? It is clear she has no concept of the boundaries of being a reporter. No sense whatsoever of "professional detachment."

I am disgusted. From the very depths of my being, I am reeling with contempt for this silly wench.

Cher

[leftchick]

63. some group funded by the WH

must be paying the NYT to keep judy on. That is the only logical conclusion I can come up with.

[confludemocrat]

60. Mostly contemptible stuff, mixed with bits of pluck & energy

Ultimately a disaster for the world. Kinda tragic professional/personal path. Thanks for this, nicely put together.

[Skittles]

53. Ms. Miller isn't protecting any source or "principles"

she's protecting her own sorry ass

[LeftHander]

64. It is thought she is in protective custody....

That seems to be the most logical reason for her going to jail...

the protecting sources excuse is just a ruse to take the focus off of Miller.

It seems likely that Miller has the info that ties Cheney to the Niger forgeries, the outing, coverup, obstruction of justice and conspiracy.

Yes folks...IMHO the entire Bush WHite hOuse is going to be brought down. I wouldn't be surprised if Hastert become president by years end due to Presidential succession.

Even if Dimwit claims ignorace on what his underlings were doing he is still responsible.

[LizW]

74. Yes. Miller's in jail to protect Cheney. n/t

[ElsewheresDaughter]

83. give joeunderdog a kewpie doll!

[fearnobush]

44. I don't know, reads like something unintelligible until it favors Rove

and Libby

"People who have been briefed on the case discussed the critical time period and the events surrounding it to demonstrate that Mr. Rove and Mr. Libby were not involved in an orchestrated scheme to discredit Mr. Wilson or disclose his the undercover status of his wife, Valerie Wilson"

"not involved" come on NYT. Why can't they be a little more clear and to the point like the opening of the latest Bloomberg story:

July 22 (Bloomberg) -- Two top White House aides have given accounts to a special prosecutor about how reporters first told them the identity of a CIA agent that are at odds with what the reporters have said, according to people familiar with the case.
<http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000103&sid=an7SakVWGrTQ&refer=us>

NYT is still doing dirty work for this Administration of treason.

[Skittles]

54. they're just pointing out the spin

and frankly, the spin is ridiculous. If they were talking about people we didn't know we'd theorize. BUT IT'S ROVE AND SCOOTER, two of the smarmiest assholes to ever grace politics.

[Jane Austin]

50. Who knew Tenet didn't have his own speechwriters,

but had to rely on political types from the White House to give him something to say?

Feh.

[The Stranger]

68. The article ties Rove, Libby, and Plamegate to WMD lies and SOTU speech.

If Rove and Libby were willing to break the law (by outing Plame) to feed the public lies about nuclear weapons in Iraq, then:

1. You have an issue of national security.

2. No longer was the war misguided -- it was intentionally, craftily and carefully created and known opely to be illegal by those doing so, and those people doing so was not the CIA.

3. Rove and Libby should be implicated in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people, including 2000 U.S. servicemen and women.

[CAcyclist]

89. Sounds Kinda Like "I Am Not A Crook" nt

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

20. That whole town, DC, ...

Is purging itself of everything it knows. The White House has lost all control of the story and they must be losing their minds.

Couldn't happen to a more deserving bunch of slugs.

[rodeodance]

22. so----WHEN will they go DOWN?

[Captain Hilts]

23. At least we have baseball now. (nt)

[DanCa]

25. This is big

Thanks for the link. No wonder there pushing religion so hard these days. They got alot to feel guilty about.

[TahitiNut]

29. Daily Kos gave a 'heads up' on this story (PERJURY of Rove and Libby)

"Update: Think Progress has the Bloomberg piece."

Two top White House aides have given accounts to the special prosecutor about how reporters told them the identity of a CIA agent that are at odds with what the reporters have said, according to persons familiar with the case.

Lewis “Scooter'’ Libby, Vice President Dick Cheney’s chief of staff, told special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald that he first learned from NBC News reporter Tim Russert of the identity of CIA agent Valerie Plame, the wife of former ambassador and Bush administration critic Joseph Wilson. Russert has testified before a federal grand jury that he didn’t tell Libby of Plame’s identity.

White House Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove told Fitzgerald that he first learned the identity of the CIA agent from syndicated columnist Robert Novak, who was first to report Plame’s name and connection to Wilson. Novak, according to a source familiar with the matter, has given a somewhat different version to the special prosecutor.

These discrepancies may be important because one issue Fitzgerald is investigating is whether Libby, Rove, or other administration officials made false statements during the course of the investigation.

http://dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/7/21/211334/816



From the NYTimes piece, we read ...

People who have been briefed on the case said the White House officials, Karl Rove and I. Lewis Libby, were helping prepare what became the administration's primary response to criticism that a flawed phrase about the nuclear materials in Africa had been in Mr. Bush's State of the Union address six months earlier.

They had exchanged e-mail correspondence and drafts of a proposed statement by George J. Tenet, then the director of central intelligence, to explain how the disputed wording had gotten into the address. Mr. Rove, the president's political strategist, and Mr. Libby, the chief of staff for Vice President Dick Cheney, coordinated their efforts with Stephen J. Hadley, then the deputy national security adviser, who was in turn consulting with Mr. Tenet.

At the same time, they were grappling with the fallout from an Op-Ed article on July 6, 2003, in The New York Times by Mr. Wilson, a former diplomat, in which he criticized the way the administration had used intelligence to support the claim in Mr. Bush's speech.

The work done by Mr. Rove and Mr. Libby on the Tenet statement during this intense period has not been previously disclosed. People who have been briefed on the case discussed this critical time period and the events surrounding it to demonstrate that Mr. Rove and Mr. Libby were not involved in an orchestrated scheme to discredit Mr. Wilson or disclose the undercover status of his wife, Valerie Wilson, but were intent on clarifying the use of intelligence in the president's address. Those people who have been briefed requested anonymity because prosecutors have asked them not to discuss matters under investigation.

Does anyone know what C-O-N-S-P-I-R-A-C-Y spells?

[confludemocrat]

30. Loaded with hard to interpret stuff, like a so-called "Tenet statement"

"Karl Rove and I. Lewis Libby, were helping prepare what became the administration's primary response to criticism that a flawed phrase about the nuclear materials in Africa had been in Mr. Bush's State of the Union address six months earlier."

So Rove and Libby were working on something to respond to criticism independent of Wilson's whistleblowing criticism? Who else besides Wilson was critical in any way necessitating laboring over such a response? Why don't they be more enlightening on the source of the other criticism and its nature? If they don't have enough reporting to flesh out the story in a fuller way, why are they writing this? Whose purpose is it serving?

Don't you just hate the way they never raise the issue of Bush or Cheney's possible (to me sure) involvement in this? It's like a forgone conclusion that these two incompetents are clean.

[bunny planet]

32. the NYTimes is afraid to seem premature by making that inference.

unless they are trashing Clinton, Gore, or Kerry, they won't ever go out on a limb.

[LizW]

78. Here's the "Tenet statement" - July 11, 2003

http://edition.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/07/11/tenet.statement/

Notice how he goes out of his way to protect Cheney, saying things we now know to be unture:

"In an effort to inquire about certain reports involving Niger, CIA's counter-proliferation experts, on their own initiative, asked an individual with ties to the region to make a visit to see what he could learn." Emphasis mine.

This is a lie. The CIA already thought the Niger uranium claim was nothing. They already had reports to that effect from the U.S. ambassador to Niger, and from a 4-star general who had gone there. But Cheney kept asking about it until they had to send someone to check it out again. But notice how Tenet specifically says the CIA did it on their own initiative. Now that we know Rove and Libby had a hand in preparing this statement, it is clear that they were protecting Cheney.

[donkeyotay]

87. Yes, they protest too much

It had to be known from early on that the Niger documents were forgeries. As you point out, others were sent besides Wilson, and even the Italian reporter who supposedly turned the documents over to our embassy, went to Niger and said they were forgeries. When the UN finally got their hands on them just before the war, the said they were crude forgeries, that it only took a short time to prove they were false, and that no intelligence agency would have been taken in by them.

In a classic misdirection, they GOPers are denying something that was never charged: "Cheney didn't send Wilson." But that's not what Wilson said. Wilson basically said the CIA sent him to check out something in response to Cheney. This would be consistent with what we know about both the fraudulence of the Niger papers and the OSP/Cheney's push for war.

Also. Cheney was the one who started dropping the nuclear innuendos in the fall of 2003. That points to a big question: who put the discredited Niger claims BACK IN in fall of 2003?

[RSchewe]

31. These people are going down!

I wonder what "distraction" we should be looking out for now?

[confludemocrat]

33. And here's the basis of it all not public interest, but press payback for:

"The leak case shows that administration officials have in effect been using reporters as shields by claiming that the information on Plame first came from them."

This has been known among journalists for awhile now, I reckon and has been driving their beating senseless of of Scotty dog and their barking back at righty spinners like Hannity.

[Autumn Colors]

39. Oh ... perhaps ....

more London bombings or a rise in the terror alert here in the US due to vague terrorist "chatter"...

... but I agree with a comment someone made in another thread, that Fitzgerald better be walking around with a bulletproof vest and some very loyal bodyguards these days.

[Bumblebee]

34. They now have &#8226; Graphic: Investigation Continues

to go with the article (just below it)

Maybe they are hoping that would make the item itself less confusing -- or that their readers would put together what they do not yet dare to spell out... I do like the sound of "Investigation continues" though.

[confludemocrat]

35. Can't figure out this passage (grand jury testimony can't be discosed)?:

"Those people who have been briefed requested anonymity because prosecutors have asked them not to discuss matters under investigation."

Yet Matt Cooper can write about what he testified to. I thought GJ testimony could be disclosed by the witness. Unless they ask you not to?

[hootinholler]

37. If you testify, you are not gagged regarding your testimony,,

Everyone else involved is.

I could be wrong, but I think that's right.

-Hoot

[ncteechur]

45. I think you are. I remember when Sidney Blumenthal testified

over the Clinton thing, he then was able to speak on just what he has said.

[Miss Chybil]

42. I just got the funny feeling it's Powell who's fueling this drip, drip,

drip. Who else would have disclosed the memo HE had on Air Force One? Unless, of course, it was the CIA official who gave it to him. Whoever it is, I hope they keep it up until the WHOLE truth is laid bare before this country about our "leaders" in Washington.

[Jane Austin]

51. It wasn't a CIA official who gave it to him.

It was a State Department memo, sent from State to Colin Powell on his trip.

Here's the relevant paragraph from the Washington Post story:

<snip>

Plame -- who is referred to by her married name, Valerie Wilson, in the memo -- is mentioned in the second paragraph of the three-page document, which was written on June 10, 2003, by an analyst in the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR), according to a source who described the memo to The Washington Post.

<snip>

Just trying to keep the record straight.

BTW, I wonder who the "former official" referred to in this paragraph might be? Powell? Tenet?

<snip>

A former government official, though, added another element to how the statement was prepared, saying that no one directed Mr. Tenet to issue it and that Mr. Tenet himself felt it was needed. The statement said that the "C.I.A.'s counterproliferation experts, on their own initiative, asked an individual with ties to the region to make a visit to see what he could learn."

<snip>



(Edited to add quote.)

[rodeodance]

58. I tire of the drip drip--The whole cabal needs to be outed NOW.

[Orion The Hunter]

43. Is it time to wrustle us up a posse?

So much for the SCOTUS pick diverting attention from the CIA leak story...

[liberace]

46. Novak: Plame vs. Wilson

As the story develops, I still wonder about Novak naming Wilson's wife as Valerie Plame.

Early in the scandal, our side trumpeted the fact that it didn't matter that Rove didn't leak Valerie by name, a simple Google search would have revealed her name to Novak.

Well, Novak may have gotten her name that way. But how did Novak end up referring to her by her maiden name instead of as "Valerie Wilson"?

Check, for instance the source Media Matters provides:

See http://www.cpsag.com/our_team/wilson.html">here.

"He is married to the former Valerie Plame and has two sons and two daughters."

The former Valerie Plame? Meaning, she is now Valerie Wilson, right, Mr. Novak?

Novak supposedly says he got her name from Who's Who In America.

See Wikipedia (Note 1).

Can anyone verify what Who's Who actually says? Thanks!

(I hope my links work. I've never tried this before).

[Dhalgren]

72. This "Plame/Wilson" thing always bothered me...

It is as though whoever gave Novak Ms Wilson's name had gotten it from a document listing her name as Plame; as though that was the name she actually went by. Which means that it wasn't just a casual "oh, she's Wilson's wife" kind of disclosure, but much more of a rushed hatchet job. Someone found her name listed on some classified document as "Plame" and didn't take the time or effort to check on it - just rushed it out to their media hitters. This seems like something that could be run down and traced.

[RevCheesehead]

47. Woohoo, Bunny! You're on the front page!!!

:woohoo:
This is spectacular! :7

[bunny planet]

66. Hey Rev.

:hi:

[lanlady]

59. this article is all over the place

It's as if the NYT editor said shit, we're being scooped by the Post and WSJ, rush something into print fast...

The one interesting mention is that you had the political advisors merging with the national security team. Not surprising to anyone who's been following the nature of the Bush White House, where everything is one big 24/7 p.r. operation, but good of the Times to point it out.

[MGKrebs]

71. I think that is important.

I have to believe that the seperation is supposed to exist for a very good reason- political staff do not necessarily have the needed security clearance.

[myrna minx]

61. This is such a strangely written article.

I need to re-read this to make sure if I understand it correctly. I seems pretty damning, but the writing seems deliberately confusing.

[mountebank]

67. I read this article as pro-Rove, but it is definitely confusing.

The article seems to indicate that the information it contains about Rove and Libby was deliberately leaked to the NYT in order to establish that they were working together on a legitimate project to rebut, not smear, Wilson. (Granted, it contains other information as well.) I read it as another installment in a continued series of leaks from the pro-Rove camp, and find it quite ironic that the NYT first sends a reporter to jail to protect powerful people and now reports leaks that defend powerful people; it is the exact opposite spirit of Watergate and shows how far the media have shifted from serving the people to serving power.

[bunny planet]

77. The Times is ambivalent about their coverage of treason, that's for sure.

So glad I cancelled that paper.

[corky44]

75. Why is story so top heavy with Tenet angle?

The lead should be the TOP SECRET status of Air Force 1 memo!
I'm sick of the Time's attempts at softening bad news for the administration
with their info (spin) from these "people who have been briefed"
Hey NYT GET WITH THE PROGRAM!!!

[barbaraann]

76. I just checked out the Wikipedia article on the NYT. (groan)

The "Allegation of Bias" section looks like mostly rightwingers contributed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_york_times

[MGKrebs]

80. It looks more and more like Tenet is up to his neck in this.

Either as a co-conspirator or as someone who was used and is now trying to save his ass.

Given that Tenet had so much "help" writing that statement on July 11, 2003, what are we to think of this excerpt: "There was no mention in {Wilson's} report of forged documents -- or any suggestion of the existence of documents at all.

"Because this report, in our view, did not resolve whether Iraq was or was not seeking uranium from abroad, it was given a normal and wide distribution, but we did not brief it to the President, Vice-President or other senior Administration officials."

There was no reason to expect that Wilson would have found forged documents in Niger as they did not surface until 7 months later. And the reports of this alleged transaction were coming out of Italy, not Niger.

It may be a swipe at Wilson, but it is being used mostly as an excuse for not telling the President about the trip. But it may also be a slip up, exposing some lack of clarity in keeping their lies straight. IF the forged documents were created BEFORE Wilson's trip, and some of these guys knew about them, it is easy to see how they might remember having the expectation that Wilson would find them, and being disappointed (and pissed!) that he didn't, and failing to remember that they weren't supposed to know about them yet.

edit to add link to Tenet statement:
http://www.cia.gov/cia/public_affairs/press_release/2003/pr07112003.html

[Barrett808]

81. Prison's too good for them - Dress them up in BDUs, hand them M16s...

And send them to Anbar.

[niceypoo]

82. Rove, Libby tried to identify Iraq nuclear aim

WASHINGTON -- At the same time in July 2003 that a CIA operative's identity was exposed, two key White House officials who talked to journalists about the officer also were working closely together on a related underlying issue: whether President Bush was correct in suggesting earlier that year that Iraq had been trying to acquire nuclear materials from Africa.

The two issues had become inextricably linked because former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, the husband of the unmasked CIA officer, had questioned Bush's assertion, prompting a damage-control effort by the White House that included challenging Wilson's standing and his credentials.

People who have been briefed on the case said that the White House officials, Karl Rove and I. Lewis Libby Jr., were helping to prepare what became the administration's primary response to criticism that a flawed phrase about the nuclear materials in Africa had been included in Bush's State of the Union address six months earlier.

At the same time, they were grappling with the fallout from an Op-Ed article on July 6, 2003, in The New York Times by Wilson in which he criticized the way the administration had used intelligence to support the claim in Bush's speech.

It is not clear what information Rove and Libby might have collected about Valerie Wilson as they worked on the Tenet statement.

The effort was particularly striking because to an unusual degree, the circle of administration officials involved included those from the White House's political and national security operations, which are often separately run. Both arms were drawn into the effort to defend the administration during the period.

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/233632_rove22.html

They had their national security and their propaganda arms both working together?? Well, duh. Gotta make that case for war no matter what!

Two years of denials. Fire the piece of crap AKA "turd blossom"

[Radical Rick]

84. Here is the real story!!!

Skittles (1000+ posts) Fri Jul-22-05 04:23 AM
Response to Reply #6
56. why would Ms. Hughes be considered wide net?
she is bush's nanny for chrissakes



Actually, I think Wet Nurse might be more appropriate!!!!

Seems to me that Karen and Chimp have a strange thing going on...maybe Shrub wears a diaper and sucks his thumb while Karen rocks him to sleep...of course when Gannon gets there the party REALLy starts to rock!!!!