Judy Miller and the 2002 NIE (BooMan)

[kpete]

Judy Miller and the 2002 NIE
by BooMan
Thu Apr 6th, 2006 at 06:25:22 PM EST

In my previous posting, I referred to the fact that Judith Miller anticipated, by a month, all the key judgments of the intelligence agencies about Iraq's nuclear program that went into the 2002 National Intelligence Estimate. But, I left it to the reader to go to the sources and compare them. This led to some confusion. So, let me lay it out for you all again, and then put the two documents side by side.
On September 8, 2002, Judith Miller and Michael Gordon published an article entitled U.S. Says Hussein Intensifies Quest for A-Bomb Parts . In the first week of October, the intelligence community produced the 2002 National Intelligence Estimate. It was a report that was requested from Congress and it was used to justify their vote for the authorization of force. As you will see, it used almost the same language, and drew the same conclusions, to describe the state of Iraq's nuclear capabilities as Miller's article had used. In other words, Judith Miller had seen all the facts that went into this highly classified report a month before Congress did.

Now, fast-forward to July of 2003. Baghdad is occupied, but no one can find anything to back up either Judith Miller's reporting, or the reporting from the NIE (they are the same thing) on Iraq's nuclear program. Once again, Scooter Libby goes to Judith Miller. He shows her (again) the key findings of the NIE (as if she hadn't seen them back in September 2002). He also reveals Valerie Plames's name and occupation (apparently getting her department wrong).

Now he claims, in court, that he went and got specific permission to leak these documents to Judith Miller in July. But, who leaked them to her in September of 2002?

MORE AT:
http://www.boomantribune.com/story/2006/4/6/182522/5719

[Garbo 2004]

1. Yes, also note that although Cheney told Libby Plame worked at

Counterproliferation Division of the Directorate of Operations (where the spies are), when Libby chats with Judy he tells her she works as an analyst at WINPAC. That wasn't a slip or an error, that was an intentional CYA and trying to cover his tracks. Just like him asking Judy to ID her source as a Hill staffer.

The NIE was Libby's cover story for talking to Miller on July 8. Funny he forgot about that meeting in his office on June 23. So did Judy until Fitz encouraged her to "refresh" her memory.

[Peace Patriot]

3. Thank you, Garbo 2004! Excellent analysis!

And I want to add to this scene of the NIE leak cover story:

Judith Miller was old buds with the Brits chief WMD expert, David Kelly, who had been whistleblowing to the BBC about the "sexed up" pre-war intel (late May). On July 7, after Kelly was interrogated at a safe house and threatened with the Official Secrets Act, Blair was informed that Kelly "could say some uncomfortable things." (Note: COULD say; not HAD said.) There is then a flurry of what appears to be panicked activity among the Bushites, on AF-1 and on the ground in DC, during the week of July 7-14*, including this meeting of Libby/Miller on the 8th. Plame is outed on July 14. Kelly is found dead, four days later, on July 18, under highly suspicious circumstances. His office and computers are searched. And, four days after that, the entire CIA counter-proliferation project, headquartered at Brewster-Jennings, is additionally outed (also by Novak), putting all of its covert agents and contacts around the world at great risk of getting killed.

I think the July 8 meeting of Libby and Miller might have been about Kelly as well as Plame. What did he know? What are the "uncomfortable things" that he "could have said," had he lived--that Blair was warned of on July 7 (Hutton report)?

-----

*(The known story is that the Bushite flurry of activity in outing Plame was triggered by Wilson's publication on July 6. But was it? It could also have been what Blair found out about what Kelly knew, on July 7. The dates are so close. And why out Brewster-Jennings and put all those coverts at risk--and put themselves at greater risk of treason charges? To punish Wilson for an article? That seems excessive.)

[stop the bleeding]

10. kick

Feb 02 there was mock up on Iraq War Intel/Yellowcake and Plame's name was first noted in memo's from these/this meeting.

Fast forward, out of these memo's there became one that was called the INR memo that was essentially notes from that meeting along with other Iraq Intel. (summer 2003)This is the memo that was on AF1 that was being passed around by Ari, Powell, Rice ect... This is the same memo that was handled by Armitage that he gave to Powell by request before that AF1 Africa flight. - SEE Roger Morris link below for better details

The NIE - this is a document that traditionally takes up to 3 months to prepare and is always customary before our Country does big events like a war per say. Now according to Firedoglake, the WH wasn't even gonna have an NIE until Dick Durbin asked for one and the WH reluctantly complied and did it in 20 days or so vs the usual 3 months. - SEE FIREDOFLAKE link for better details

Now here is the fun part, the INR memo that has Plame's status all throughout it, was included as a footnote in the NIE but not in the White Paper of the NIE that went to Congress as requested. In addition to the INR footnote it completely contradicted what portions of the NIE was saying about yellow cake - important omission IMO.


more on the INR and NIE here at

http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:_mjOsVbkl6AJ:firedoglake.blogspot.com/2006_02_05_firedoglake_archive.html+Could+Cheney+Declassify+the+NIE+plame+inr+firedoglake&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1

I you have to scroll down at least a 5th of the page you'll see,

and also this on how the INR came into being by Roger Morris - Feb 02 & summer of 03 for important parts - already highlighted.

http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:RajaUXFaeDcJ:www.counterpunch.org/morris07272005.html+counterpunch+rice+INR+NIE+plame&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1

Now based on that the INR does contain Plame's name, as far as the NIE solely on it's own - well we will have to wait until it is "declassified" - oops it already is - silly me.

Lastly my bet is that the NIE does mention Plame and her Husband since they had been on the radar for quite some time. Also keep in mind that I have given you a watered down version of what went on based on my memory from reading countless articles/blogs and reports.


Also I agree 1000% with other DU'ers that leaking ANYTHING for political gain is TREASON, but I thought you all should have some insight on the how these memo's are playing with our lives.

[NVMojo]

2. ...ah, it's good to be reminded! KICK!!!

[chill_wind]

4. There's a good timeline of the development of the NIE (two versions)

re: "who leaked them to her in in September 2002"

is an interesting question, because according to all the sources at link (see below)Congress didn't even start demanding the NIE until September, almost as an afterthought, in anticipation of upcoming vote.

Sept 8 there was a major Bush media blitz on cable by key Bush officials.
Sept 9 Congress ( Senators Durbin and Graham) seriously insisted work on an NIE get underway. It was slapped together (sounds like) in 3 weeks (NIE supposedly to be an involved collaborative effort normally taking months to complete).

As you point out, BooMan, the NIE wasn't published until Oct 1. Further-- there were two versions.
The scary, alarmist, sexed-up one for the media campaign and the public consumption (declassified version published on CIA website) and the other one. With all the caveats and fine print circulated to the BA and Congress. That fact has always bothered me a lot as well.

Summary of NIE Conclusions - After the document is completed, two different versions will be released. An abridged declassified version is posted on the CIA’s website for the public, while the classified version is disseminated within the administration and to Congress (see (8:00pm) October 1, 2002). The two versions portray the threat posed by Saddam Hussein very differently. The classified version of the NIE on Iraq provides a far less alarmist view of the threat allegedly posed by Iraq than that which is presented in the public version of the document. According to US intelligence and congressional sources who read the classified document, the intelligence estimate contains “cautionary language about Iraq’s connections with al-Qaeda and warnings about the reliability of conflicting reports by Iraqi defectors and captured al-Qaeda members about the ties.” And notably, the second paragraph of the “key judgment” section states that the estimate lacks “specific information” on Iraq’s alleged arsenal of weapons of mass destruction.

(snip)

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/context.jsp?item=complete_timeline_of_the_2003_invasion_of_iraq_7

[stop the bleeding]

9. The White /declassified version did not have the INR footnotes

which had contradictory statements on Yellowcake - an obvious omission - Now here's something - the INR memo that became a footnote in the NIE was based on a Feb 02 meeting that discussed Plame and her status, this is the same memo that was later drawn up and then pulled by Armitage as requested by Powell that was passed around on AF1 on the trip to Africa - this INR memo had the Yellowcake claims as bogus but even more it had Plame's job/status all through it and marked as "Secret".

So there are few things to take into account here. I will be back in minute


more on the INR and NIE here at

http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:_mjOsVbkl6AJ:firedoglake.blogspot.com/2006_02_05_firedoglake_archive.html+Could+Cheney+Declassify+the+NIE+plame+inr+firedoglake&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1

I you have to scroll down at least a 5th of the page you'll see,

and also this on how the INR came into being by Roger Morris

http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:RajaUXFaeDcJ:www.counterpunch.org/morris07272005.html+counterpunch+rice+INR+NIE+plame&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1

[Patsy Stone]

5. K&R

Thanks.

[mzteris]

6. BUT - - -

**Now, fast-forward to July of 2003. . . . Once again, Scooter Libby goes to Judith Miller. He shows her (again) the key findings of the NIE (as if she hadn't seen them back in September 2002). He also reveals Valerie Plames's name and occupation (apparently getting her department wrong). ****


I thought they meet in JUNE of 2003. (Remember the Aspens?)

[The Stranger]

7. Will that disgusting, worthless wretch trash ever pay for her bloodlust?

[NoAmericanTaliban]

8. Judith Miller is a GOP tool just like a lot of other press

Very few of them questioned the whole buildup to the war & some even went so far as to promote it like Miller did. The overall grade for the press at that time is a big F.

[bush_is_wacko]

11. When did Powell resign again? I have to tell you my mind is having a

really hard time wrapping itself around the various time-lines. I believe this ties up quite a few "tinfoil hat" theories into a nice tidy package but there are so many interwoven events here it is hard to keep track of them all.

:crazy:

[slipslidingaway]

12. This needs a BIG kick as it would silence the executive order

excuse. Maybe there are others articles she wrote prior to October '02 that contained info from the NIE?