Declassification unnerved White House aide

[Judi Lynn]

Declassification unnerved White House aide

By Andy Sullivan
Reuters
Thursday, January 25, 2007; 3:10 PM

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President George W. Bush's 2003 decision to declassify an intelligence report to rebut an Iraq war critic stirred unease even in the White House, an administration official said on Thursday in the perjury trial of a vice presidential aide.

White House official Cathie Martin said she was "not comfortable" in July of that year when her boss, Vice President Dick Cheney, told her to use the information to counter charges that the administration had manipulated intelligence to build a case for invading Iraq.

Bush drew criticism last spring when he admitted he declassified the report and authorized White House officials to leak it to reporters in order to counter criticism from former ambassador Joseph Wilson, who said the administration ignored his findings that no uranium sale had taken place.

With her husband FCC Commissioner Kevin Martin watching from the front row of the courtroom, Martin said she was "still not comfortable about the NIE" even as Cheney's chief of staff, Lewis "Scooter" Libby, began sharing the information with reporters.
(snip/...)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/25/AR2007012501112.html

[BOSSHOG]

1. Declassification for political purposes

and the right wing hate machine still heeps praise upon this most evil of human beings. Joe Wilson, a real patriot, tells the truth and bush jeopardizes lives and missions because of it. And yet "conservatives" still blather about the need for more killings and the evil of the liberal media.

[applegrove]

13. It is all politics - no governance with this lot in the WH. n/t

[Ellipsis]

2. Cheney's ex-spokeswoman says VP's office was aware of Plame prior to Libby's talks with reporters.

In a major development today in the I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby perjury and obstruction of justice trial, a former vice presidential spokeswoman raised questions about the defense employed by Dick Cheney's former chief of staff. Cheney's former Press Secretary Cathie Martin took the stand and told the prosectuion she had briefed Libby and the Vice President on the identity of CIA agent Valerie Plame as the wife of Iraq war critic Ambassador Joseph Wilson.

Martin revealed that she had a conversation with a CIA counterpart who in the course of the discussion said that Plame was Wilson's wife. She immediately informed Cheney and Libby of this fact, on a date she said was prior to July 6th, according to the Associated Press. Libby claims he learned of Plame's identity days later.

The defense will cross-examine Martin on Libby's behalf this afternoon. MSNBC has provided details on Libby's lawyers questioning of memory as a tactic to call witnesses' accounts into doubt during the trial.


http://www.rawstory.com/news/2007/Cheneys_spokeswoman_says_her_office_was_0125.html

[wakeme2008]

3. I do not see that in the major headlines

:shrug:

[Ellipsis]

6. It's there.

They changed the color and font ...still no copy.

[iconoclastic cat]

4. I wonder what that means, exactly...nt

[swag]

5. Could be something in the Live Blog of the trial. Try here:

http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/01/25/libby-liveblog-cathie-martin-one/#comments

on edit: Okay here is what I bet it is:

M Week of July 7, meeting with VP on the Hill, we had another staff meeting, so we were in on Capitol Hill. Talked to VP about press inquiries and reports related to Wilson matter. He dictated to me what he wanted me to say.

Published on board.

Not clear who authorized travel
Did not travel at my request
A0parently unpaid
Never saw document allegedly trying to verify
He was convinced Niger could not have provided uranium to Iraq but in fact they did in 1980s 200 tons under IAEA seal
No written report
VP unaware of trip, conclusions, until Spring 03
As late as October considered judgment was that SH had indeed undertaken vigorous effort to acquire uranium from Africa–according to NIE.

[swag]

7. Really, the live blogs of the trial at firedoglake.com are fun reading.

That one in particular.

[Ellipsis]

9. I went looking for that first before I posted.

I read the earlier stuff... I remembered the blogger but not the site. Thanks for the linky. It is a fun read.

[swag]

10. Oh, you're welcome.

And I didn't mean to be a cock about anything, just wanted to give the linkum.

Cheerio! On with the trial.

[Tellurian]

8. Click on the msnbc link at Raw story..

Whats happening?

They are covering for Cheney.. Now, Martin suddenly remembers when another CiA agent told her about Plame's agent status. Originally, the CiA agent denied revealing Plame's identity; now suddenly, his memory is slowly returning. The way I see it. Fitz has his work cut out for him having 2 people claim "they" told Libby Plame's identity. Technically, absolving Cheney of any responsibility, so far.

[Garbo 2004]

14. Except Libby's own notes document that Cheney told him about Plame's employment around June 12. It's

in the indictment, IIRC, based on testimony and docs before the grand jury. Cheney learned from CIA. And others also told Libby about Plame, as noted in the indictment. Remember, these are witnesses for the prosecution. Fitz called them to make a point.

And that point is, so many people told Libby about Plame, including Cheney, there's no way Libby could have "forgotten" that he knew Wilson's wife worked for the CIA. Which is what he later claimed to the grand jury to "explain" his previous lies under oath.

[Tellurian]

17. Nice summary, thanks..

I admit to not doing my due diligence in following the flow of the trial. I appreciate your encapsulation highlighting the salient facts and Fitz's motivation. One of those days.... overworked synapses refusing to fire.
Thanks..

[MGKrebs]

19. Not sure if getting Cheney is the goal here, but Libby's credibililty

is taking some hits.

[hang a left]

20. The key here is Valerie Plame (Flame)not "Wilson" or "his wife"

and the, I believe june 28 meeting libby had with miller and miller's earlier notes.

[yellowcanine]

11. Let's hope Cathie Martin kept good notes of her conversations. That would

make it much harder for Libby's lawyer to cast doubt on her account.

[Supersedeas]

15. Do you think the trial pundits find Cathie Martin credible--isn't it odd--the Network coverage of

this trial.

Think about the intense media coverage of some of the celebrities of the past ten years or so. Remember the twenty-four hour updates, defense and prosecution attorneys posing as experts commenting on tactics, strategy, witness credibility. Geraldo, Nancy Grace and Dan Abrams made a career out of celebrity trials (heck, some of the experts made careers from being television commentators who cover celebrity trials--Greta Van Whatshername Sunbeam) and some were given a one hour televised national forum to do nothing but analyze the minutia of every celebrity trial...and sometimes trials not involving celebrities--whatever trial du jour.

Funny, some of us have discussed how the media would rather cover a celebrity trial than invest in gathering news about war or Darfur or the policy decisions which impact the budget or the environment. Yet, here is a 'celebrity' trial, and it's like the media third rail.

Does it strike you as odd how the media is so 'stand-offish' regarding the Scooter Libby trial? Here, we have a trial involving National Security issues, involving the rational for a war that is still being prosecuted, and with the Vice President of the United States being a key witness....yet, we are lucky to receive a 30 second soundbyte that mentions that there is a trial at all.

Consider the difference in how the media crawled all over John Mark Karr following his every step from Indonesia to Colorado and monitoring the meals he ate when his case never even made it to trial.

Then, in what may be one of the most fascinating actual trials in this nation's history involving pure political intrigue at the highest levels (the Vice President chief of staff is claiming that he is being scapegoated for the sake of protecting the President's political advisor), the media acts as if it has to bite a bullet to give us a twenty-second update on the case--much less tell us who the witnesses were, what they had to say, did the witness sound credible, what did the opposing counsel manage to garner on cross examination.

Geraldo, Grace, and Abrams would do an entire show just on the cross-examination for the trial du jour. Yet, the media would rather talk about the candidate du jour in an election that is more than 1 year and a half away. What do the polls look like today, Wolf?

Am I wrong about this...do you think this trial is getting as much coverage as other trials?
Might the fact that key members of the media play a role in the trial have an impact on the quantity and quality of coverage?

[Peace Patriot]

23. The "media" are all tangled up in this trial. Already, in the first days of the

trial, we've learned that the VP's office considered Meet the Press a pushover venue where they could "control the message." Prior to the trial, NYT war propagandist Judith Miller was jailed for covering up for Libby. And, indeed, the entire case is about the Junta's use of columnist Robert Novak to out a CIA agent and an entire CIA WMD counter-proliferation network, and their efforts to plant a cover story "around town" (calls to at least six reporters) that Valerie Plame's identity as a covert CIA agent was known by many people. The facts of the Bush Junta, and the facts of this case, reveal the lapdog relationship between our war profiteering corporate news monopolies and the White House, as the White House spun the war, and lied through their teeth about the justification for it, and then tried to spin the treasonous act of outing CIA agents. This is likely the major reason that they are not treating this case like a "celebrity trial." THEY are the "celebrities"--and in some cases the co-criminals. And right now, they are trying to recover their credibility with (and propaganda power over) the American people, an uphill battle. The American people have actually resisted their war propaganda from the beginning. 56% of the American people opposed the Iraq War way back in Feb. '03, before the invasion--despite the heaviest load of shit war propaganda they have ever been subjected to. It's up to 70% now, with 84% opposing any U.S. participation in a widened Mideast war (according to a poll posted here last summer during Israel's attack on Lebanon). Our "Committees of Correspondence"--the internet and word of mouth--have become the preferred form of obtaining news and opinion, by the most educated segment of the population (the opinion-makers). So it is not a time when the war profiteering corporate news monopolies want their collusion with war and fascist policy to be highlighted. The Libby trial reveals their disgraceful collusion with the warmongers.

[underpants]

12. Libby was "preoccupied with national security matters" like Tom Cruise??

Libby's lawyers say he did not lie deliberately to the FBI and a grand jury, but did not remember correctly what were trivial conversations when he was preoccupied with national security matters. Cheney is expected to testify on Libby's behalf.



http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/01/24/libby-is-dreamy-over-scientology/

[DoYouEverWonder]

18. He was so busy he can't remember anything

but he had plenty of time and was all excited about meeting Tom and Penelope. I wonder if he followed through on their request to twist Germany's arm to back off Scientology?

[lovuian]

16. Cathie aren't you obligated to go to the FBI with your

information hopefully for your sake did


If scooter goes down so will he take others with him

[struggle4progress]

21. Cheney spokeswoman contradicts former staff chief's account in CIA leak case

The Associated Press
Published: January 25, 2007

WASHINGTON: Vice President Dick Cheney's spokeswoman says she told I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby that a prominent war critic's wife was a CIA employee earlier than Libby has said he first learned it from a reporter ...

Besides Martin, one State Department and two CIA officials testified earlier to conversations with Libby about Plame before July 10, 2003. The defense tried to show each had imperfect memories ...

Fitzgerald got Martin to testify that Cheney personally wrote out statements and talking points for Libby and other aides to give to reporters to deny he was behind Wilson's trip or ever learned Wilson's conclusions ...

Martin testified that the Harlow conversation occurred by July 6 because she was not surprised to see Wilson discussing the affair on NBC's "Meet the Press" on that date. But Wells got her to acknowledge "it makes sense to me" she might have talked about Plame with Harlow on June 11, when government telephone records show they talked.

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/01/26/america/NA-GEN-US-CIA-Leak-Trial.php

[struggle4progress]

22. Aide testifies Cheney helped effort to discredit Wilson

By Richard B. Schmitt, Times Staff Writer
5:27 PM PST, January 25, 2007

... "I recall the vice president telling me to keep track of this story, and keep track of the commentators who were continuing to write on this story and talk about us," Martin testified. "We were paying attention to 'Hardball' with Chris Matthews because he had been talking about it a lot." ...

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-libby26jan26,1,2730931.story?coll=la-headlines-nation


A few links on CM:

Gergen peddled misinformation on Plame case, again and again
Thu, Jul 14, 2005 5:47pm EST
http://mediamatters.org/items/200507140003

Fund, Mehlman, others falsely claimed that Wilson said his wife was not a clandestine agent
Thu, Jul 21, 2005 1:10pm EST
http://mediamatters.org/items/200507210003

Matthews, Brooks falsely attacked Wilson over Niger trip's genesis, conclusions
Mon, Jul 25, 2005 7:06pm EST
http://mediamatters.org/items/200507250005

On Hardball, Wash. Post's Allen repeated false claim about Wilson's trip to Niger
Thu, Jul 28, 2005 5:47pm EST
http://mediamatters.org/items/200507280005?offset=40&show=1

Ginsberg falsely claimed Post, Times offered conflicting accounts of Libby/Miller conversation
Mon, Oct 3, 2005 7:02pm EST
http://mediamatters.org/items/200510030008

On imbalanced Hardball panel, Toensing repeated Plame investigation falsehoods and distortions
Thu, Oct 13, 2005 6:11pm EST
http://mediamatters.org/items/200510130008?is_gsa=1&final=1

Matthews, Mitchell, and O'Beirne combined for Plame misinformation triple-team
Fri, Oct 14, 2005 7:43pm EST
http://mediamatters.org/items/200510140009

NBC's Gregory falsely reported that Wilson said Cheney "set up" trip to Niger
Fri, Apr 7, 2006 2:33pm EST
http://mediamatters.org/items/200604070006?src=other

Wall Street Journal's Harwood: Rove's alleged "backhanded confirmations" in Plame case were not leaks
Fri, Apr 28, 2006 6:19pm EST
http://mediamatters.org/items/200604280009

Matthews, others uncritically reported Novak's claim that Plame leak was "inadvertent"
Wed, Jul 12, 2006 3:14pm EST
http://mediamatters.org/items/200607120004

[Peace Patriot]

24. Thank you, Struggle4Progress! What a telling list. It supports my thesis,

stated above, as to why the war profiteering corporate news monopolies are not treating this trial like Watergate, or like the "celebrity trials" they are so fond of covering (hours and hours of analysis of trial minutia). They were collusive in the war. They were collusive in outing Plame and Brewster-Jennings. They are whores. And this crime has involved them and their whoring ways from the beginning. It was, in fact, a media-committed crime (outing CIA agents in a newspaper column), that reveals just how low they have gotten, as to their journalistic responsibility to tell the truth and to hold government to account. Rotten. To. The. Core.

In a situation--our current one--in which there is no regulation of news monopolies, and no controls on the use of our public airwaves (no "Fairness Doctrine"), we have only two tools for improving journalism: a) use of market forces to influence the fatcats who control the news --boycotting their news venues and the products they sell, pressuring them financially; and b) pressure on individual journalists on the matter of their credibility, so that they understand that they aren't "selling well," which can affect their marketability as whores (--journalistic whores have to eat, too, and have to at least simulate the real thing, in order to be useful to their masters).

Yikes. I'm so cynical. But I have good reason to be. Let me just soften that a bit. I think there are SOME journalists working for the corporate news monopolies who would like to do their very important job with integrity and according to high journalistic standards, but are often prevented from doing so. I think we can lend them some help--with letters, calls and emails not just to them but also to their bosses when they do a good job, or when they don't, and by boycotting venues that don't improve. "How to get our credibility back?" should be the question on the minds of everyone in the corporate monopoly news venues. Ultimately, we need to bust up these monopolies and bring back the "Fairness Doctrine" for use of the public airwaves. We can't--and shouldn't try to--regulate print newspaper content, but we CAN and SHOULD prevent say, a newspaper empire from owning TV, radio and other venues, and we CAN and SHOULD require fairness in political coverage as a condition for obtaining a license to use the public airwaves. They (the owners of the news organization) can propagandize all they want, as long as they provide equal time for other opinions. That's how it should work. The "Fairness Doctrine" in turn influences TV/radio news organizations toward fairer and more objective coverage--and, indeed, it also influences print media, which--if a context of fairness is created in TV/radio--don't want to be regarded as unfair or biased.

So we have remedies that are currently atrophied--deliberately targeted by Reagan (and, unfortunately, by Clinton as well)--which we need to restore. Meanwhile, we have to do whatever we can do--in the toxic atmosphere of the Bush Junta--to improve or boycott the corporate monopoly media. Another pressure on them, obviously, is the internet and its many alternative news/opinion outlets and blogs.