Fitzmas: Did Cheney implicate Bush's involvement in PlameGate?

[Tin Man]

Recapping some discussion posted here late last night...

Consider the following note entered into the record by Fitz at the Libby trial yesterday.



On the bottom half of the document, Cheney writes:
"Not going to protect one staffer + sacrifice this guy this Pres that was asked to stick his neck in the meat grinder because of the incompetence of others."

Of particular interest is Cheney's strikeout of the words "this Pres" (as in "this President") from the sentence. Why did Cheney refer to the President, and subsequently cross-out this reference? What was Cheney's original intent and/or message, and why did he feel the need to make revisions?

Examination of the physical structure, the layout, of the sentence in question - reveals that the revision was made "in real time", i.e. Cheney crossed-out the words "this Pres" as soon as he wrote them, then immediately composed the remainder of the sentence. So let's consider the note, as it was composed chronologically, i.e. as it was original assembled - ink flowing from pen to paper:

1) First, Cheney writes:
"Not going to protect one staffer + sacrifice this guy this Pres

2) Immediately, Cheney strikes out the words "this Pres"
"Not going to protect one staffer + sacrifice this guy this Pres

3) Now Cheney completes the sentence:
"Not going to protect one staffer + sacrifice this guy this Pres that was asked to stick his neck in the meat grinder because of the incompetence of others."

Notice "that was asked to stick his head in the meatgrinder" is a passive voice construction. Passive voice "hides" the subject of the action, revealing only the action and the object of the action. This begs the question: *Who* asked Libby "to stick his head in the meatgrinder"?

Could it have been "this Pres" perhaps?

Did Cheney originally intend to write something like
"Not going to protect one staffer + sacrifice this guy (that) this Pres. asked to stick his head in the meatgrinder" - using an active voice that identifies Bush as the source of the request?

Did Cheney suddenly reconsider this active voice sentence construction, which explicitly named the Pres as the source of the request, and with a single stroke of the pen, change the construction to passive voice to avoid identifying the President's involvement? Did Cheney implicate that Bush authorized PlameGate???

For the original thread from which these ideas emerged, refer to http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x85018
Look for discussions of Spazito and Tin Man. And thanks to Cynatnite for the capture of the .pdf document for inline display.

[hippiechick]

1. or could "the Pres" = a cut-off reference to 'The Press' ie, Russert ?

:shrug:

[Tin Man]

3. Capitalizing "press" ? That's unusual. Capitalizing "president" is not.

No, I really think Cheney intended to write Pres, as in President.

[hippiechick]

5. I think you're jumping to conclusions.

:tinfoilhat:

[Tin Man]

8. firedoglake transcript of courtroom discussions re "this pres"

Key:
W is Judge Walton
A is Addington (Cheney's current Chief of Staff and former Council)
from yesterday's firedoglake courtroom blogcast

-----------------------------------------------------------------

W: Can you make out what's crossed out?

A: I can't tell.

Walton reminds people to talk to each other, maintain proper decorum.

A: Now that it's been expanded I can read it. Pres is scratched through. I read that as two words This Pres.

W: This Pres was crossed out by VP and note goes on to read.

[rocktivity]

29. But Cheney spells "press" with a small "p" in his second line

So much for jumping to conclusions.

:headbang:
rocknation

[Tin Man]

30. Thanks! I missed the obvious.

[rocktivity]

28. What else does Cheney's note say?

"Has to happen today

Call out to ? press saying (some? same?) thing about Scooter and Karl..."

:shrug:
rocknation

[pacalo]

2. Yes!

Now that I've seen the handwritten note, I believe he meant to say this:

"Not going to protect one staffer + sacrifice this guy (that) this Pres. asked to stick his head in the meatgrinder" - using an active voice that identifies Bush as the source of the request?

Most definitely.

[porphyrian]

4. I'll kick that. - n/t

[Mandate My Ass]

6. The phrase "this president" is unique to this administration

Former WH spokespeople and other executive branch officials have always referred to the occupant of the WH as the president, as well they should. So I concur with the theory that Cheney was implicating Bush but quickly changed to the passive voice to cover his misstep. :popcorn:

[jsamuel]

7. I think it says, "THE guy THIS Pres"

[thereismore]

13. it says "THE guy THE Pres" - Cheney always dots his i's. It is possible that

the line started with "the Pres", then got crossed over, and "the guy" was inserted.

[Tin Man]

15. I think you're right about "the guy the pres", but I disagree about the sequence he wrote it

I don't agree that "the guy" was inserted after Cheney wrote "the Pres" - if Cheney were to have written "the Pres" first, this would have made for an (unconventional, reverse) indentation of the left margin for this paragraph/sentence, but in the paragraph/sentence immediately above - Cheney used the (conventional, positive) indentation from the left margin.

No, I think Cheney wrote "the guy the Pres" (with conventional indentation), then crossed-out the Pres to change from active to passive voice, and then completed the sentence - in that sequence.

[thereismore]

16. yes, I agree. nt

[Lerkfish]

9. republicans can't spell...."rediculous"

LOL

[King Coal]

10. Watch for a pardon.

[Tin Man]

11. Good call. After all, Libby didn't DEFY the Pres, Libby was FOLLOWING Bush's oreders

...and that's why Libby is pissed.

Libby and Rove both did as they were instructed. Libby got burned, but Rove got protected.

The aspens are turning, and they're turning in clusters...

[ChairmanAgnostic]

36. Even many conservatives would be pissed if Libby gets pardoned.

If Cheney and Co. had not destroyed the CIA by the gentle application of the Potter Goss treatment, even the CIA would be screaming bloody murder, as would the NSA, DIA, State, and other still rational coherent people still remaining in government.

[peacetalksforall]

12. If President, it only points out what we've already talked about - Rove

is key to strategical direction and invention.

We knew it before and during the heat of this investigation, they pretended that he was transferred to the RNC (?), but he never moved out of the WH. (However, he's slipping or they are trying to transfer his role to Bartlett and others and they are slipping.)

What's coming out of the voting investigations, is that he (if he's the one) is not quite a genius at hiding formula decisions for switching.

If true that C was going to write this President, he might as well as written Bush's Brain.

Now I get what people were saying last week that they wrote that they thought the target was Bush.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

23. that's why Miller won't say who else she heard 'the wife' from

did anyone ask what this meant in the testimonies?

[thereismore]

14. Not going to protect one staffer + sacrifice the guy (that) the Pres. asked to stick his head in

the meatgrinder.

That's what Cheney intended to write.

[Tin Man]

19. Precisely. Cheney was mad - "the Pres" had approved PlameGate, but when the shit hit the fan...

...but when the shit hit the fan, Cheney saw that Bush was protecting Rove, while cutting-loose Libby.

Cheney didn't like that HIS guy (Libby) was being sacrificed, while Rove was being protected. T

[Supersedeas]

17. definitely some slippage -- Defense Counsel MUST explore this.

[Norquist Nemesis]

18. Remember what Bush told Petreaus (sp)??

Reportedly, he just told him, "Make it happen."

Bush's management style is to delegate in a 'I don't care what you have to do, just make it happen. Your loyalty to me will protect you'. Now apply that to Cheney, Rove, and the rest of them.

[tinfoilinfor2005]

20. What I find pretty interesting is that he just "kind of" scratched out

the words THIS PRES. Cheney is a devious guy and he knew that this could blow up at some point, and he knew it at the time he was writing this memo. I believe anyone else would have solidly scribbled over those words so that they wouldn't become conjecture at some point. I think Cheney intended the note to be scrutinized and for bush to be implicated. A bit of payback for involving his closest friend Scooter. Anyway, I'm certain that's what Sherlock Holmes would have concluded. :)

[Spazito]

21. On the question of whether Cheney wrote...

"this Pres." or "the Pres.", if you look at the way Cheney wrote "this" when he wrote "this guy", it is exactly the same.

It is interesting that the defense made a very real point of discerning whether it said "this Pres" when cross-examining Addington. Was the intent behind the question to further the contention of the defense that Libby was hung out to dry, not only by the Rove/Bush factor but also by Cheney? That is the only reason I can think of because, otherwise, given the trial is not about the outing of a CIA agent but about obstruction and perjury, what would be the relevance of the two crossed-out words?

[Garbo 2004]

22. Another possible take: Cheney went too far & backed off. Bush didn't "ask" Libby to leak,

Cheney did. Cheney does stuff on his own and then uses the President's name to claim or give the impression that Bush knows and authorized it. He'd done it before. Perhaps he thought of doing that again in the note, then thought better of it and crossed it out.

One of Fitz's earlier filings frequently overlooked IMO perhaps lends credence to this possibility. It refers to the same time period of the Cheney note, when Libby was trying to get the WH to give him a public "exoneration." H20 Man raised it again in one of his recent threads:

One of the most important pre-trial documents in the case is the Government’s Response to Defendant’s Third Motion to Compel Discovery, filed on April 5, 2006. On pages 27-28, we find the following:

"During this time, while the President was unaware of the role that the Vice President’s Chief of Staff and National Security Adviser had in fact played in disclosing Ms. Plame’s CIA employment, defendant implored White House officials to have a public statement issued exonerating him. When his initial efforts met with no success, defendant sought the assistance of the Vice President in having his name cleared. Though the defendant knew that another White House official had spoken with Novak in advance of Novak’s column and that official had learned in advance that Novak would be publishing information about Wilson’s wife, defendant did not disclose that fact to other White House officials (including the Vice President) but instead prepared a handwritten statement of what he wished White House Press Secretary McClellan would say to exonerate him...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=63805

[Tin Man]

24. That could be true, but then, who authorized Rove to leak?

I don't think Cheney would have been the guy to authorize Rove's leaks.

With both Rove and Libby actively leaking to press correspondents, IMO it seems likely the Pres must have authorized. Of course, Cheney was the ringmaster, but the Pres would have authorized. To me, Cheney's note appears to confirm the involvement of the Pres.

Thanks for the link to H20 Man's post (and specifically, Govt response to Defendent's Third Motion).

As you pointed out, this doc explicitly states "During this time, while the President was unaware of the role that the Vice President’s Chief of Staff and National Security Adviser had in fact played in disclosing Ms. Plame’s CIA employment". However, I kinda think Fitz intentionally tossed-in the "President unaware" phrase - without it, there is a suggestion that the Pres was aware (which, BTW, I think is true).

I think Fitz may have included this "Pres unaware" line, because he didn't have the goods on W's involvement, and wanted to make clear that he wasn't actively pursuing that angle... just yet(?) Perhaps Fitz was making a feignt as part of a larger campaign strategy, i.e. don't play your hand all at once - sucker 'em in first?

[Spazito]

25. The "meatgrinder" quote and the note came up again today

(not the issue of the two crossed-out words) just before the lunch break in a discussion between Judge Walton, Fitzgerald and Wells:

Snip


Fitz Clips aren't just clearing Rove. McC declining to clearing Libby. Mr Libby testified that he was aware that Rove had been cleared and he was aware he was not cleared it caused him to have conversations about why he should not be cleared. He was aware that McC was being asked. There are emails that when the name appears in the press, or circulated in VP. There are emails showing that they discussed references to Scooter. To say there is no evidence that Libby was aware of this. WH PS is being asked questions about him. And PS refuses to clear him. Notion that he wasn't aware. As a result, it's how we get to the so-called meat-grinder quote. I did not leak to Novak. VP endorses that note. It's the whole context of having McC clear him publicly. When he sits down on October 14, he has gone to VP who has had the PS tell the world that he did not leak this, it goes to his state of mind. It couldn't be more probative. Then he would have every reason to do what we allege that he did.

End of Snip

Wells is objecting to 4 clips Fitzgerald wants to use, this one being one of them.

[elehhhhna]

26. Which Freep BA asshat wrote the "rediculous" part? THAT"S HUGH!!1!!

[OregonBlue]

27. Or could Rove be the one protected and the Pres sacrificed?

[helderheid]

31. KICKING for those bitching about truthout - same info de-leopoldized

[Ganja Ninja]

32. "because of the incompetence of others"

OK lets see ... Rove is pretty competent at what he does so that leaves only Bush and his entire cabinet. This is a tough one. So much incompetence ... who to choose?
Condi is incompetent.
Rummy is incompetent.
Powell was competent so he's eliminated.
Hmmm? Who does the word incompetent best describe? Who is the CEO/MBA of incompetence? Oh well I guess we'll have to wait and see.
:think:

[Spazito]

33. Wow, this note was brought up yet again at the end of today's

trial events. The following took place after the jury and the last witness was excused, the whole discussion blogged on firedoglake from where "emptywheel" posts is fascinating, imo, but I am only snipping the part that brings up the Pres.:

Snip

Fitz, If I could switch to the other two. Ones involving the clearing. Libby clearly describes in GJ, describes how he goes through with a statement that he wants McC to say. He says I spoke to mr McC and McC issues the clearing statement. If Libby had made statement himself, there's no question it'd be admissible. He deputized someone. Not hearsay if offered against a party, authorized by a party.

Walton. Anything on that one.

Wells Threshold for keeping them out.

Walton does he have to see them if he does something that is genesis for what was said. If subsequently, McC says that.

Wells, no it didn't work that way. McC does nothing. Libby has to talk to VP of the US, VP did whatever he did. McC is not Libby's agent. doesn't take

Walton VP has become his surrogage.

Wells, I don't know you'd have. … you'd have to

Walton, we'd need VP testimony

Wells, whatever he did he did not do it as Libby's surrogate. That's what I'm drawing a distinction.

Walton if I go to Chief Judge to have a statement disseminated, doesn't that become my statement. And Chief Judge CLEARLY is not my agent.

Walton, I'll have to review transcript.

Wells, I think you'll have to talk to President BUsh bc he's probably somewhere in that chain.

END of SNIP


Note the last line in the snip where Wells brings in the President, it is bolded in the blog testimony at firedoglake:

http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/01/31/libby-live-matt-cooper-three/

[Tin Man]

35. I gotta admit I'm having a hard time following the current line of discussions

They seem to be arguing whether Snotty Scotty's statements (exhonerating Libby of involvement in Plame leak) can necessarily be tied, as a direct action, to the requests of Libby and/or Cheney - am I correct?

And I don't understand how this debate is relevant to either the prosecution's case (i.e Libby perjury, obstruction) or the defense (i.e. Rove made Libby the fall guy).

Can anyone help?

[Spazito]

37. The discussion that ensued last thing today was actually

a continuation of one that began just prior to lunch today and it is where Fitzgerald explains why he feels these videos are probative:

Snip

Wells Two evidentiary issues following conclusion of exam. Govt wants to play video clips of press secty McC making certain statements. We object to the playing of clips. McClellan, and agent bond, there will be an objection—the only relevance of those clips could be wrt Libby's state of mind. No evidence that Libby saw those clips, or reviewed those transcripts. They're lengthy.

Walton your concern. Libby not privy, no evidence of state of mind

Wells wrt one clip, where I believe McC cleared Karl Rove. Libby is asked a question, but I believe except for that there's no evidence that Libby saw that clip or any of the three others.

Walton essence of what these say.

Wells, let govt.

Walton What do these clips say

Fitz Clips aren't just clearing Rove. McC declining to clearing Libby. Mr Libby testified that he was aware that Rove had been cleared and he was aware he was not cleared it caused him to have conversations about why he should not be cleared. He was aware that McC was being asked. There are emails that when the name appears in the press, or circulated in VP. There are emails showing that they discussed references to Scooter. To say there is no evidence that Libby was aware of this. WH PS is being asked questions about him. And PS refuses to clear him. Notion that he wasn't aware. As a result, it's how we get to the so-called meat-grinder quote. I did not leak to Novak. VP endorses that note. It's the whole context of having McC clear him publicly. When he sits down on October 14, he has gone to VP who has had the PS tell the world that he did not leak this, it goes to his state of mind. It couldn't be more probative. Then he would have every reason to do what we allege that he did.

End of Snip

http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/01/31/libby-live-matt-cooper-one/

Scroll down to where emptywheel posts "Oops, there's more", the discussion re the tapes, etc, begins there.

[autorank]

34. Tim Man, this is excellent.

Your content and text analysis is very engaging. I'm sure that there are people having nightmares
right now. Libby's team had this for quite a while, I suspect, through discovery. Did the WH crew
understand the significance; did Libby keep it to himselv (as in Libby's legal team). The mind begins
to reel with possibliities, like your conjecture "this President" asked Libby to take the fall BECAUSE
"this President" was the prime actor in the leak.

Excellent! More, More