JASON LEOPOLD: CIA LEAK PATH: CHENEY, LIBBY, WOODWARD!!!

[kpete]

CIA Leak Path: Cheney, Libby, Woodward
By Jason Leopold
t r u t h o u t | Report

Monday 06 March 2006

In mid-June 2003, when former Ambassador Joseph Wilson's criticism against the White House's use of pre-war Iraq intelligence started to make national headlines, Vice President Dick Cheney told his former chief of staff and close confidant I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby to leak classified intelligence data on Iraq's nuclear ambitions to a legendary Washington journalist in order to undercut the charges made against the Bush administration by the former ambassador.

On June 27, 2003, Bob Woodward, the Pulitzer Prize winning reporter, became the first journalist to whom Libby leaked a portion of the classified National Intelligence Estimate that purportedly showed how Iraq tried to acquire yellowcake uranium from Niger.

This story is based on interviews with current and former administration officials who work or worked at the CIA, the State Department and the National Security Council. All of the individuals are familiar with the events that took place in the days that led up to Libby's meeting with Woodward and other journalists in which the NIE was discussed.

Woodward, currently an assistant managing editor of the Washington Post, did not return calls for comment. Leonard Downie, the executive editor of the Post, would not comment for this story. A spokeswoman for Cheney said she could not comment for this story, and attorneys for Libby did not return calls for comment.

...............

The leak of the NIE to Woodward was orchestrated by Cheney and Libby in mid-June 2003 in hopes that Woodward would write a story for the Washington Post that would contradict the assertions made by Wilson - that there was no truth to intelligence cited by the Bush administration on numerous occasions that Iraq tried to purchase 500 tons of uranium from Niger.

.............

It was then that Cheney decided the only way to counter Wilson's criticism was by having Libby leak portions of the NIE to a select group of reporters whose previous work in their respective publications had advanced the White House's political agenda.

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/030606Z.shtml

[npincus]

1. since Cheney did not testify under oath, did he commit an

indictable offense by his 'misleading' testimony? Lawyers, please advise.

[hang a left]

3. I think he was questioned...

lying to the feds I would think arouses to the level of high crimes and misdemeanors.

[Stephanie]

7. I think the missing 250 emails will be his undoing

Someone withheld those emails. That is obstruction of justice.

[stop the bleeding]

27. yep n/t

[Hamlette]

26. no we know what Cheney told Fitzgerald?

Libby told Ffitz his "superiors" told him to leak the info, I think he was authorized by Cheney to tell Fritz that. Therefore, Cheney probably told Fritz he declassified the info and told Libby it had been declassified.

I don't see it as reporters trying to say the whole story was not leaked at once hence the WH did nothing wrong. I see the defense as: bush gave cheney the authority to declassify info, he declassified the Plame story and gave it to Libby. That's why Fritz couldn't indict anyone on leaking classified info. Cheney declassified it and Fritz has known that all along. All he can get Libby and Rove on is lying to the Grand Jury and/or investigators.

My only question is: why isn't Cheney declassifying the report bigger news? Bush made such a big deal out of saying he would fire anyone who leaked classified info. Did he know when he said that Cheney had declassified the info? If not, why the hell not? This was a big story at the time. Why didn't Bush just say: "we declassified the information"? That makes it go away, or at least makes it a different story: what the hell is the VP doing declassifying the identity of CIA operatives? If Bush did know that Cheney declassified the info, then saying: "I will fire anyone found to have leaked this" makes Clinton parsing over the meaning of "is" look down right honest.

The question to ask is: why did Bush say he would fire people for leaking the info when he knew Cheney had declassified it. Or, why didn't Cheney IMMEDIATELY tell Bush he had declassified the info?

[lyonn]

48. Very good questions in your post

bush denying anyone in his office knew anything about the leak;

Cheney not telling bush that the info was declassified by him.

How can even a president or v. president legally out a CIA covert agent along with the covert company? If anyone else did that they would do some serious jail time.

[babsbunny]

65. Yeah, We know what Cheney told Fitz

He said, "Fitz, Go Fuck Yourself!" :rofl:

[Catrina]

69. Yes, those are excellent questions ~ obviously Bush knew nothing about

the declassification of the information. And why didn't Cheney let him know before he spoke publicly about it?

Is it certain that it WAS declassified, or are they making this up and retroactively doing it? Also, how can this be? Isn't there a procedure before the making such sensitive information available which could cost lives? Wouldn't they have to notify the agents who are under cover, the Nocs, the entire network, before just blabbing all over the place like this?

Something doesn't sound right about that, but I haven't heard anyone really address it ~

[Usrename]

30. Martha Stuart might have an answer to that question.

Hmmm.

[Lochloosa]

38. Lying to a federal prosecutor during the performance of his duties,

under oath or not, is a crime.

[leveymg]

55. Obstruction of Justice, even if not sworn under oath

There are actually three separate crimes by Cheney here: lying to Fitz (OOJ); leaking the classified CIA NIE (misuse of classified documents); and initiating the the Conspiracy to out Plame.

As for the lie to the Special Prsecutor: Cheney told Fitz that Libby was his original source for information about Plame's identity -- Libby recently testified that it was the Vice President who provided that information to him. One or the other is lying -- now we learn that Cheney convened the early June 2003 meeting to discuss how to counter Wilson, setting off a chain of events that led to Novak outing Plame six weeks later.

Things are looking worse and worse for Cheney.

[stepnw1f]

2. Kaboom

good morning DU.

[Peace Patriot]

4. Whatever is indictable or not indictable, I am struck by the utter sleaze

bags that American journalists have become. It still shocks.

[Clark2008]

6. Not all of them are - mostly it's just the Beltway reporters

and news bunnies and gigalos on the Tee Vee.

Real reporters, in your hometown, still do a very good job given the long hours and low pay.

However, Woodward has been suspect as being CIA for a long, long, long time.

[tblue37]

47. Actually, I think he is suspected of being Military Intelligence

rather than CIA. I could be wrong, but that is what I remember. Can anyone provide more info? (BTW< I think MI is a rival to the CIA.)

[lyonn]

49. Woodwards access to this white house is interesting

Then mix in the Watergate....

Edit: Can you imagine Helen Thomas or David Gregory getting that assignment for a book?

[leveymg]

59. Woodward worked for Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI)

Military Intelligence Division (MID) is Army intel. They are parts of Defense Intelligence Agency. NSA is an allied Agency. All report to the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS).

Woodward's mentor at The Washington Post, Ben Bradlee, was also ONI.

Katherine Graham's late husband, Bob Graham, was CIA.

Fifteen years ago, a book came out that revealed that during the Nixon Administration the then Chairman of the JCS, Admiral Moorer, was instrumental in a deal with CIA Director Richard Helms and FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover to remove Nixon from office. According to Silent Coup: The removal of a president by Len Colodny and Robert Gettlin, each had a different reason for wanting to be rid of Nixon and Kissinger. Woodward and Bradlee are cast as instruments of Moorer in that successful effort.

The book is worth the read, at the very least. Judge for yourself.

The fact that the CIA and the JCS decided to have the Inspector Generals of the agencies refer the Plame case and the OSP-AIPAC spy case for prosecution by the Justice Department indicates to me that history may have repeated itself.

[tblue37]

67. Fascinating. Thanks.

I will plan on reading that book this summer!

[Peace Patriot]

73. Do tell what their reasons were--reasons of Helms and Hoover to get rid

of Nixon and Kissinger (according to the book). I've recently begun to re-think Watergate myself, and was kind of thinking along the same lines--that Watergate was not what it appeared. Possibly military-industrial fascists against the opening to China? Possibly Nixon-Kissinger efforts to end the Vietnam War (and the Cold War for which it was a proxy) were more genuine than they appeared? Or something to do with the JFK assassination? (ditto, RFK, MLK). (--some of the same characters suspected in JFK murder involved in Watergate). (Wild spec: The good guys in the Secret Service, FBI or CIA taking revenge for the JFK murder? Maybe it wasn't really Helms-Hoover but only appears to have been, with people under them making their own decisions about it and taking action.)

Generally what I've been thinking is Nixon was a liberal compared to Bush--established the EPA and other stuff, and was actually a good administrator and head of government (again, by comparison). Perhaps the Reagan coup was already in the planning stages, and item #1 was destroying the lib/mod wing of the Repub Party (quite powerful in Calif and NY prior to Reagan--Calif Repubs were the environmentalists back then, not the Dems). With Reagan, the fascists took over the Calif Repub Party, and the program has been enriching the rich and larding on the corp/military budgets pretty much ever since.

I also recall reading somewhere that Nixon--partly as a result of the huge antiwar protests--held back a plan to use nukes on Vietnam. He may have been just too much of a peacenik for certain powerful factions. What Kissinger negotiated was the US DEFEAT--at the hands of little brown people in straw hats and sandals.

But one other big thing changed too (in addition to government becoming of, by and for the rich)--a deep and positive change in the purposes of our big military machine, and a concurrent change for the better in our nation's intelligence community. The disaster of Vietnam (over 2 million Vietnamese and Southeast Asians slaughtered, and over 50,000 US soldiers killed--for NOTHING) was extremely unpopular and made Congress and the military wary of any further such wars. It started as a CIA war--entirely instigated by us, using a few highly corrupt Vietnamese politicians and war profiteers to create a phony gov't in the south. That sort of interference in other countries became more fraught with doubt, after Vietnam. The illegal Iran-Contra war, under Reagan, expressly forbidden by Congress (and using profits from sale of arms to Iran to fund thugs and assassins against the new Nicaraguan revolutionary gov't), and other rotten dirty schemes (death squads in El Salvador, assassination of Allende in Chile, support of dictators and torture in Chile, Guatemala, etc.) became increasingly exposed and disapproved of. Although the Dems didn't impeach Reagan for Iran-Contra (which they surely should have done), they did investigate and prosecute some, and, subsequently, the dictatorships in So. America began to be toppled (we are seeing the marvelous results today in strong leftist governments being elected throughout Latin America). This new sense of ethics--of no more foreign assassinations, for instance--was real enough, and continued under Clinton.

And that is what has primarily been overturned by the Bush junta--all that progress in becoming and just and good superpower, which had started with the end of the Vietnam War, under Nixon, and his visits to China AND to Russia.

Nixon, the peacenik. Could that be it (why Watergate was permitted to happen)? (--and I've also thought that the WHOLE THING--STARTING with the burglary--was DESIGNED to oust Nixon).

There is also reason to believe that JFK's peaceful inclinations were what got HIM killed (refused to invade Cuba; prevented a nuke exchange over Russia/Cuba missiles; signed an exec order shortly before his death withdrawing US military "advisers" from Vietnam), and MLK (had recently come out against the Vietnam War), and RFK (had completely turned around about the war and was running a successful antiwar campaign for president when he was shot and killed.)

Well, I'd be interested to know what these writers think Helms' and Hoover's motives might have been, re: Nixon. (It's hard to reconcile the bombing of Cambodia with Nixon the peacenik, but then self-delusion is always a factor in human affairs.)

[Catherine Vincent]

5. I don't know about the rest of you guys, but I'm ready for another

Fitzgerald news conference.

[DoYouEverWonder]

9. Oh sure

You just want new pictures of your sweetie.

;-)

[Catherine Vincent]

16. No, I want him to get to the bottom of all this and explain it all.

Honest! :evilgrin:

[peacetalksforall]

8. kpete, is there something new here or is it all confirmation of what has

been pieced together so far?

[kpete]

11. When Stop The Bleeding Checks in, We will Know EVERYTHING!

[stop the bleeding]

23. Checked in at post# 12

last paragraph that I posted out of the article really has me thinking - something seems really odd to me about it, I just don't know what yet.

[The Backlash Cometh]

10. Why isn't he stepping down today?

It's time to investigate Halliburton.

[stop the bleeding]

12. The noose is tightening around Darth Cheney, Rove's and Rice's

necks.

Indictments soon

editing comment now with some quotes, nothing new per se but these quotes show the focus of the case
- quotes will be here in a minute....

This story is based on interviews with current and former administration officials who work or worked at the CIA, the State Department and the National Security Council. All of the individuals are familiar with the events that took place in the days that led up to Libby's meeting with Woodward and other journalists in which the NIE was discussed.

~snip~

Cheney and then-Deputy National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley led a campaign beginning in March 2003 to discredit Wilson, according to current and former State Department and CIA officials. Although the officials said they helped prepare negative information on Wilson about his personal and professional life and had given it to Libby and Cheney, Wilson seemed to drop off the radar once the Iraq war started on March 19, 2003.

With no sign of weapons of mass destruction to be found in Iraq, news accounts started to call into question the credibility of the administration's pre-war intelligence. In May 2003, Wilson re-emerged at a political conference in Washington sponsored by the Senate Democratic Policy Committee. There he told the New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristoff that he had been the special envoy who traveled to Niger in February 2002 to check out allegations that Iraq tried to purchase uranium from the country. He told Kristoff that he briefed a CIA analyst that the claims were untrue. Wilson said he believed the administration had ignored his report and had been dishonest with Congress and the American people.

~snip~

It was then that Cheney decided the only way to counter Wilson's criticism was by having Libby leak portions of the NIE to a select group of reporters whose previous work in their respective publications had advanced the White House's political agenda.

For an administration that despises leaks, the decision by Cheney to declassify highly sensitive portions of the NIE and have his most trusted aide leak it to reporters in order to attack the former ambassador's credibility shows how personal the Wilson issue had become for the vice president.

~snip~

In that first person account published in the Post, the Watergate-era journalist wrote that when he met with Libby on June 27, 2003, "Libby discussed the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction, mentioned "yellowcake" and said there was an effort by the Iraqis to get it from Africa. It goes back to February '02. This was the time of Wilson's trip to Niger."

~snip~

In the meantime, while Libby had been leaking portions of the NIE in late June to back up the administration's use of the Niger claims, other officials from Cheney's office and the National Security Council had been speaking with a select group of journalists and had revealed Plame Wilson's identity.

Jeez Cheney could you be a little more obvious, the NIE goes back to Feb 02 same time as Wilson's trip, certain Intel officials gather information on Wilson regarding his personal and professional life and give it to Cheney. Cheney goes after Wilson on a PERSONAL level because to Cheney this was PERSONAL. Cheney gets authority to basically do what he wants in March of 2003. The last snippet is interesting cause it seems like Leopold is trying to say that their were 2 different campaigns against Wilson originating out of the VP's office, I would imagine that the line between those campaigns is somewhat blurry. In other words I wonder how many of these "Officials and Journalists" were players in both campaigns???? The hearings coming up in April involving the journalists will be very telling, I just wonder who it is gonna be and which campaign their testimony will be about?

[seemslikeadream]

25. Thank you so much stop the bleeding

[npincus]

29. could you speculate on how "soon"?

Fitz is famous for taking his time.... would soon mean as soon as this month? within 6 months?

I've read that 'warning letters' are sent out prior to indictments. Any evidence that any of these parties have been notified yet or will be?

Waiting is hell.

[stop the bleeding]

31. Sorry no I can't, and that is a good thing. Fitz is methodical, he gets

paid the same no matter if a case/investigation takes him 6 months or 6 years to complete. However, I do believe that Fitz gets better satisfaction(form of higher payment) from convicting criminals and upholding truth, liberty, justice and apple pie, as opposed to getting a monetary payment.

The longer this takes means that more and more people will be ensnared, and once Fitz has you in his web your done.

Yes waiting is hell, but can you imagine what kind of hell it must be for Cheney, Rove and Rice.

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

Man thinking about that way brings a big ole smile to my face, thanks for helping me put things into context.

[KoKo]

35. I remember Chris Matthews on several of his shows making reference

to Wilson's "private life," in a sneering "yuk, yuk" manner. He has several guests on (one might have been Howard Fineman) where Tweety would bait with a question like: "So...what about Wilson ...I hear he and his wife were on the party scene in DC pretty heavy...and so why wouldn't everyone know his wife was CIA...huh..huh???" (this isn't an exact quote but pretty much typical of what I heard.) Matthews brought this up several times in different ways on different nights making it seem like the Wilsons were fluffy party people and also alluded to "party times" in Wilson's past that might be "unsavory."

Tweety wasn't the only one, but I remember him bringing it up the most. And, the "Talking Points" were repeated on other shows by guest like Kate O'Bierne types who are RW hacks.

So...this sure sounds like Matthews and maybe Russert and others were privy to whatever the FBI found on their past lives ....directly from Cheney down through Libby. I would bet that the "WHIG" group with Mary Matalan was sent out to do some dirty work too. So that might be why the two campaigns to discredit were mentioned.

We've all suspected that was going on here...but this sounds like more proof that it was even dirtier...going after their personal life on one hand while outing Valerie Plame's CIA covert position with the other.

Disgusting. I hope Woodward and the others are exposed on this for everyone to see...but unless they were indicted they will probably just continue to be stovepipes for the Bushies and the Right Wingers.

[leveymg]

60. I would offer one thing here: the 3/03 EO did not give Cheney power to

declassify the NIE or to reveal Plame's identity. Cheney assumed that power and weilded it, alright, but it had no basis in any legal authority we know about. See, http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/2/10/105540/799

[kpete]

63. thanks for the info

My gut tells me Fitz is closing in....

[Just Me]

13. Soooo, when's Cheney gonna' be charged with obstruction?

:shrug:

Also, doesn't this info/evidence show the intent or mens rea necessary to charge Cheney with the federal prohibition against outing an agent? He knew her status and intentionally conspired to out her (and the operation she worked through). Doesn't that meet the high threshhold for charging Cheney pursuant to federal law?

[BuyingThyme]

14. Leopold is taking the bait, he's got it all wrong.

Woodward had absolutely nothing to do with this until Cheney needed a cover story.

Woodward's role was/is to present a scenario where people could have learned of Valerie Plame's identity (1) as Joseph Wilson's wife, (2) as as a CIA employee, and (3) as a covert CIA operative on separate occasions.

They want to convince us that nobody was ever told that Joseph Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, was a covert CIA operative. They want us to believe that the so-called reporters put the pieces together on their own.

Woodward is lying. This is a ruse. It's a scam.

Leopold is getting suckered.

[Catherine Vincent]

15. I know one thing, Woodward is not to be trusted.

[symbolman]

18. Now THIS is speculation I can get behind..

I agree completely. And I studied this subject for over a year.

A lot of the is well known, and this looks like a speculation writing about the same story that Leopold "released" the other day..

More of the same, only it's got that "Perils of Pauline" angst again..

WILL Dick Cheney be found out (based on old information repeated here)?

Will Rove be Indicted? (Yeah, still waiting..)

WILL there be over 20 Indictments? (Old Raw Story call, never came true, is that still on their site?)

Jason? Are we spinning like the right here and Selling false HOPES?

[BuyingThyme]

19. I don't think he's spinning.

I think he's being spun.

[lala_rawraw]

28. Provide the link where Raw Story reported that...

Still waiting, because you say it a great deal and no matter how many times it is said that no one reported such a thing, you are still continue to shop this falsehood. Please provide reference to where this was reported as I am dyng to know. Thank you

[stop the bleeding]

32. Couldn't find any for RS but another blog on the internets did, see here

I did a search in the DU archives and this thread here from 10/05/2005 is the first that I a was able to find that mentions the "22 indictments", there may be earlier threads and links but I did not see them.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=4981620

link that DU thread uses as a source

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2005/10/are-22-indictments-imminent.html


Hope this helps;)

[symbolman]

33. RIGHT

*I* am supposed to supply a LINK to a STORY THAT YOU CENSORED FROM YOUR OWN SITE.

Get real.

How about if I just ask everyone on the DU to supply the THREAD where Raw STORY SAID THERE'D BE 20-26 INDICTMENTS by FITZGERALD..

Would that work BETTER FOR YOU?

[Catherine Vincent]

36. I remember reading the 20 indictment bit from Larry Johnson's blog.

Maybe Raw Story was going by what this former CIA agent said?

[Media_Lies_Daily]

39. IMHO, I also believe Johnson's info was the source for what Raw....

...story posted on their website.

[yodermon]

44. This is all I could find.

Larry Johnson posted this on his blog on 10/18/05:
http://noquarter.typepad.com/my_weblog/2005/10/a_new_tidbit_on.html

Had lunch today with a person who has a direct tie to one of the folks facing indictment in the Plame affair. There are 22 files that Fitzgerald is looking at for potential indictment. These include Stephen Hadley, Karl Rove, Lewis Libby, Dick Cheney, and Mary Matalin (there are others of course). Hadley has told friends he expects to be indicted. No wonder folks are nervous at the White House.

Then there is this from known disinfomation outfit TomFlocco.com dated 10/21/05 (3 days later)
http://tomflocco.com/fs/CiaPlameCaseIndictments.htm

Washington, DC—October 21, 2005—12:00 EST—TomFlocco.com exclusive—Today Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald handed over 22 indictments to Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez, accusing President George W. Bush, Vice President Richard Cheney and others of espionage, obstruction of justice, perjury and a variety of other charges in the matter of the CIA/Valerie Plame leak-gate case.

According to intelligence sources who spoke with federal whistleblowers Thomas Heneghan and Stewart Webb, Bush then ordered Gonzalez to fire Fitzgerald and have the indictments quashed and sealed.

Gonzalez refused to release the indictments which have been handed down by the grand jury and ordered served by a judge, subjecting the Attorney General to additional charges of obstruction of justice, the sources said.

I can't find any links on DU or Rawstory indicating that Rawstory reported the "22 indictments" meme at any point in time.

I'd check with the Wayback machine, but as you can see here, (http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://rawstory.com ), Rawstory.com ceased to be archived as of 4/1/2005.
(copy & paste into browser if link is broken. Remove spaces.)

Go figure.

[stop the bleeding]

45. earliest DU threads on this that I could find were from 10/05/2005

see post# 32

the links there reference this story as of 10/05/2005, as far as I can tell Larry Johnson was the next one to mention this, but as stated in post#32 I couldn't find anything for RS.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=4981620

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2005/10/are-22-indictments-imminent.html

[lala_rawraw]

53. We never reported it

And Google has cache ability. We stopped archiving after the server was lost and we had to get a new one. Our programmer did not then put an archiving function in. So after going through a few programmers, we should be good to go soon. It has been a disaster. But be that as it may, we never wrote any such thing. I know this, because if it were written, I would have written it because that is my beat. I can tell you in no uncertain terms that we never wrote such a story. I don't know why people think we did.

[Torn_Scorned_Ignored]

72. Could This Be What Was Thought

to be from Rawstory?


http://www.thinkprogress.org/leak-scandal

[lala_rawraw]

52. It does not exist... that is Americablog

Not Raw Story. We censored nothing from our site and Google has cache, so feel free to find where we reported that, because we did not.

[symbolman]

64. You reported it RIGHT HERE.

And when people got pissed later, someone at RS came back and said the most unbelieveable thing, that it was the DU folks fault for actually believing everything they are told (paraphrasing).. and THAT was so bizarre that it's a post I want to find..

Thanks to the update by DU, there are a lot of these revisionisms that have gone down the memory hole, but maybe not.. I'm going to put a little list together myself.

[stop the bleeding]

68. symbolman DU search archives should have these threads that you

are referring to in the above post. As far as I know DU doesn't modify or erase their past threads so you should be able to find these. As I stated in posts # 32 and 45 I could only find this thread as being the earliest reporting in reference to these 20something indictments.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=4981620

which linked to here:

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2005/10/are-22-indictments-imminent.html

which actually goes to Radar

There may be a thread on DU about what you are saying but right now I can't find it.

Could you help a brother out and find that/those thread(s)?





on edit: spelling

[lala_rawraw]

57. Take a moment and read this...

Because of this rumor, Byrne reviewed our reporting on Plame leak. Print it out, post it on your wall before you tell me what I wrote or did not write and accuse us (wow) of censoring.

http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Editors_Note_Examining_Raw_Storys_leak_1215.html

-----
Confirmed reports

We reported Oct. 18 and Oct. 19 that Cheney advisers John Hannah and David Wurmser had a role in disseminating information about undercover CIA officer Valerie Plame Wilson. Days later, the New York Daily News reported that "Special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, meanwhile, is combing over testimony by John Hannah and David Wurmser, national security aides to Vice President Cheney who sources questioned under oath say may be the key to the probe." The New York Times also listed Hannah, mysteriously, at the end of one of their leak articles, saying that he had been interviewed in the case. In 2004, United Press International, citing FBI sources, reported that Hannah was a target in the case and that he was suspected of being a leaker.

We were the first to report on Oct. 12 that Vice President Dick Cheney was under close scrutiny in the leak investigation, and that Fitzgerald was trying to determine whether Cheney had a role in the CIA outing. This was confirmed by the New York Times Oct. 24, when they revealed that Cheney had been one of Libby's sources (An important note: The New York Times erred in this piece. They alleged that Libby "first learned" of Plame's identity from Cheney. This is untrue: the indictment indicates an individual tied to the CIA was the first to tell Libby of Plame's identity).

We reported that Rove was facing likely indictment. This was confirmed by the Washington Post, the New York Times and various other news outlets. Rove was facing indictment, but Fitzgerald opted not to indict him after a last-minute move by Rove's attorney, Robert Luskin. We reported that Luskin was offered a plea deal on Tuesday by Fitzgerald, which was also confirmed.

We reported that the Washington Post's Jim Vandehei told Hardball that law enforcement agents interviewed Valerie Plame's neighbors to see if they were aware of her CIA status. This was confirmed. We later reported they were interviewed in an attempt to convince a skeptical grand jury that White House officials may have violated a law criminalizing the outing of CIA agents, and that the jury was unlikely to accept such a charge. This was true; no charge was made in the indictment.

We reported that Rove was "Official A" in the Libby indictment. This was confirmed.

We reported that Fitzgerald had secured a single indictment before his announcement Friday, the first news agency to signal Rove might elude indictment.

We reported that Libby was indicted before Fitzgerald's official announcement - the first news agency to report the indictment. This was confirmed.

We reported that Vice President Cheney had lied in his public statements about not knowing about the leak. This was confirmed.

We reported that the CIA leak investigation would not end with Libby's indictment, despite the fact that before the indictments some news agencies indicated it would. This was confirmed.

We revealed in an interview with Joseph Wilson that he believed there was a larger administration role in the CIA leak case. It was later revealed that Cheney had played a role in providing information to Libby about Plame. This was confirmed.

We reported that uproar over Judith Miller, who was placed in jail for more than 80 days in connection with the case, had caused an uproar in the New York Times newsroom with numerous reporters questioning publisher Arthur Sulzberger Jr. and Executive Editor Bill Keller. This was reported that there was a sense of unease at the Times newsroom over Miller's role in the CIA leak scandal. This was confirmed also in the New Yorker piece, and in a piece in Vanity Fair.

We reported that Rep. John Conyers had written Bush asking him to promise he wouldn't pardon those indicted in the leak case. This was confirmed.

We reported that Rep. John Conyers had written Bush asking that Rove explain his role in the leak case or resign. This was confirmed.

We advanced a speech given by Rep. Louise Slaughter in which she said that America deserved better than "no comment" on the leak case. This was confirmed.

We reported that senior Democrats sought assurances that Fitzgerald would issue a final report. This was confirmed.

We reported that Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) sent a letter seeking reassurances that witnesses in the leak case would not be granted immunity. This was confirmed.


<Snip>


Reports confirmed abroad

We reported that National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley was the source for Bob Woodward at the Washington Post as regards information about Valerie Plame Wilson. Hadley has not denied that he was the source; his aides have. Besides Bush and Cheney, he is the only current senior administration official who did not deny being Woodward's source by name or through a named spokesperson. Richard Armitage, a former deputy to Colin Powell, has also declined to comment. The story was confirmed by the London Sunday Times. It has not been reported by a major news organization in the United States.

[symbolman]

61. Censorship is being thrown out by you

My site being censored (actually given no ATTRIBUTION) by your site when the very Press Release that you claimed to have used I POSTED from Buzzflash for all to see, which clearly showed a co authorship, along with everyother site, including Editor & Publisher who put TBTM at the Top of their article as well. It was on Democrats.com, and many other sites, couldn't have been missed.

No, what I said was that I believe your site practices REVISIONISM, and on the fly, works really well with the dribbling BREAKING fits and starts of your stories that keep folks punching that Refresh button on the RS site.

Since you've kindly taken the time to list these (and to be honest a lot of this stuff was KNOWN and reported in the Media, as I researched this subject for a YEAR making my "Rove's War" film, then it should be no problem for you to list the DATES you posted these SCOOPS.

Just grab the dates for these stories and list them and I'll be glad to show HOW you revised your speculations, or used other people's stories as your own.

GOT DATES? Let's see 'em.

[symbolman]

54. Well, I'm on the hunt, these things are archived everywhere

How about this story, getting closer to it:

Raw Story - They Got The Day Right!
Raw Story correctly reported that yesterday was Wednesday.

The rest of their scoop seems to have vanished - Fitzgerald did not even meet with the grand jury, let alone present the evidence that would result in Rove being led away in chains (Merry Fitzmas!).

http://justoneminute.typepad.com/main/2005/12/raw_story_they_.html

Glad they got the day right..

**************

I'll find it, thought I had it in my Raw Story follies, oops, I mean Files..

Actually looking for the thread where RS BLAMED DU'Rs for "Believing them".. that one SLAYED ME :)

***

BTW, passing along ridiculous information as FACT from "undisclosed" sources then linking someone else at the bottom looks a Lot like Corporate media reporting to me..

THis something that RS SAID and we'll find it.

[leveymg]

62. I tend to agree with Buying Thyme.

But, it won't work as protection against OOJ and conspiracy charges. It may be a ruse to avoid a charge under the IIPA, but that's almost irrelevant at this point.

Don't worry, they've screwed themselves deeply enough by conspiring to release a classified CIA document and making false statements to cover that up.

[stop the bleeding]

66. I appreciate your research and insight on this thread,

I always walked away with more knowledge than what I came with when reading your posts.

Thanks Mark you rock!!

[autorank]

17. Another proud moment for Bob Woodward and the WaPost!

What a jerk. He sets himself up as some sort of paragon of journalistic excellence, a real tiger. Then when people call him to comment on a story, he won't, nor will his editor Downie.

The arrogance of power... they can wield it but they can't deal with the questions when things go wrong. What a bunch of babies.

Recommended

[acmejack]

21. Things sure have changed over the years.

So many of my generation have revealed themselves to be materialistic drones. One wonders how it is possible that these people can turn about so completely from who and what they once were.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

42. Woodward's always been that way....

...since his early days with the Office of Naval Intelligence. Some researchers believe that Woodward never left the ONI, but has basically been an agent for the Pentagon's version of the CIA's "Operation Mockingbird".

Most Americans are just now finding out.

[autorank]

50. $$$$'s & Power, I'm afraid. I've noticed that too.

But, hey, f' em if they can't take a joke. They have to look at themselves in the mirror every morning. Wouldn't want to be them.

[EVDebs]

24. Bob Bennett in the Senate and Woodward in the WashPost, control phreaks

at CIA all with a 'secret agenda'.

Deep Throat, by Bob Harris
www.metroactive.com/papers/sonoma/07.03.97/scoop-9727.html

"""I have told Woodward everything I know about the Watergate case, except the Mullen Company's tie to the CIA."--Robert F. Bennett, testifying before House Special Committee on Intelligence, July 2, 1974.

Robert Bennett was the head of Robert R. Mullen and Co., a CIA front headquartered in the very same building as the CIA's Domestic Operations Division. The Mullen Co. did legitimate PR work; it also did PR for other CIA fronts and provided cover abroad for CIA operations. Bennett's most notable employee was Howard Hunt, a former chief of covert actions for the Domestic Operations Division of the CIA.""

[autorank]

51. Thanks for the education on that. Never fails to surprise me. Amazing.

[Roland99]

20. Traitors that deserve to die traitors' deaths!

:mad:

[Name removed]

22. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[in_cog_ni_to]

34. No wonder Woodward tried to poo-poo the story on Larry King!

Rat Bastard was involved!:rofl::rofl: See what happens when you crawl in bed with the devil Bob?:rofl: I hope he goes down in flames, but did he write a story about Plame? I can't remember. This just shows the WH trusted him enough to be their mouthpiece. IMCPO

[Octafish]

37. TRAITORS!

Plame and her company, Brewster, Jennings & Associates, worked to stop the spread of nuclear weapons and other types of WMDs. It was a real problem after the break-up of the USSR and Plame and her network were doing important work to protect and defend the United States of America.

Too bad traitors like Cheney (and his underling, George W Bush) compromised the national security of the nation. Well-paid turds in Corporate McPravda like Deepthroat Bob Woodward and Steno Judy Miller do all they can to aid and abet treason.

[Just Me]

41. To my knowledge, the CM nas never reported the purpose of that,...

,...undercover operation and how the BushCO/neoconster regime's outing directly damaged/sacrificed national security. That regime clearly isn't interested in protecting the U.S. or her people. It has an entirely different agenda from that,...one that is completely self-serving.

[H2O Man]

56. It is interesting to note

that the vast majority of the corporate media fail to report what is now documented -- that the CIA has told the investigators that Plame was indeed covert at the time she was exposed, that she had been involved in overseas work in the past five years, that the Agency attempted to keep her cover from being blown, and that there was no way she could be used after Novak's article.

As many DUers will remember, I had wrote that the first witness Fitzgerald called was an Agency member able to verify Plame's status. Of course, there was no way for me to document that. But I think most of my friends here believed me. A two paragraph "article" in the 2-13-06 edition of Newsweek documented that the judge made public that her status was verified.

The amount of damage this did should never be underestimated.

[yellowcanine]

40. Now we know why Woody was trying to downplay this story. Which in and

of itself, raises some interesting journalistic ethics questions about Woody. Why did he think it was ok to comment on a story that he was a part of? Shouldn't he either have kept his mouth shut or volunteered to be interviewed by another reporter on the story?

[spuddonna]

43. Okay, so Woodward has been receiving classified intel for months...

...to use in 'Plan of Attack'... He views this as 'ok' because it's background info for his book.

Then he gets the Plame info... "The information in the NIE about Niger was still considered highly classified and extremely sensitive, and although Woodward had been the recipient of classified information on other occasions during the course of gathering material for his books, the data he was provided with concerning the NIE had been authorized by Cheney in order to rebut Wilson. Woodward never wrote a story for the Post about the intelligence information he was given."

That's what I thought. Woodward himself never wrote any piece on this Plame. Why? No time because of his book? Or did he realize it was dangerous info - he wasn't going to handle it 'directly'? Either way, he soon comes out on talk shows decrying the whole affair as 'junkyard dog' prosecution tactics, which in itself is insane. The CIA asked for this investigation. How often has the CIA asked for external investigations to be done?! So this sounds like Woodward protecting the hand that feeds.

It also sounds like Cheney may have tried to 'legitimize' the leak by passing it to Woodward. "See, here's the guy that uncovered Watergate - he says the whole Wilson-Plame thing is a politically motivated attack on the WH!"

I can see how they'll try to spin this as 'no harm' - Cheney had already 'declassified' her status so its perfectly legal! (Tell that to the CIA!)

How does the WH get to declassify intel that was classified by the CIA? Where is the process? GAAAH!!!

[Catherine Vincent]

46. "How does the WH get to declassify intel that was classified by the CIA?"

Don't you know? The CIA named one of their buildings after George H. W. Bush. So this corrupt administration thinks they can declassify whatever they damn well please.

[Disturbed]

58. Cheney made public a secret CIA Operation!

Brewster, Jennings & Associates. Even if, as the Bush Regime and it's Spin Docs are were correct in that V. Wilson aka Plame was not covert, which is a lie, the outing of Brewster, Jennings & Associates was a crime and maybe treason.

[spuddonna]

70. LOL Yeah, I forgot about that...

How Poppy kept getting his intel briefings... (sigh)

These people probably keep copies of the Constitution handy as toliet paper...

[BuyingThyme]

71. esuaceb tsuj kcik