RSSUsing PayPal
Libby's Source Was Vice President Richard Cheney -- Not Journalists
Share / Recommend - Comment - Print - Monday, Oct 24 2005, 9:34PM
CLOSE 
SOCIAL WEBSITES
http://digg.com/submit?phase=2&url=http://twn.riverlab.com/archives/2005/10/libbys_source_w/&title=Libby's Source Was Vice President Richard Cheney -- Not Journalists&topic=political_opinion" target="_blank">Digg
Del.icio.us
Reddit
Facebook
Newsvine
Stumble UponEMAIL THIS ARTICLE
Scooter Libby has been caught in a very serious lie about the source of his knowledge that Valerie Plame Wilson was a CIA agent. He apparently testified before the grand jury that his source had been a journalist.
However, the New York Times now reports that his source was his boss, Vice President Cheney.
From this jaw-dropping article that will certainly lead in the Times tomorrow:
I. Lewis Libby Jr., Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff, first learned about the C.I.A. officer at the heart of the leak investigation in a conversation with Mr. Cheney weeks before her identity became public in 2003, lawyers involved in the case said Monday.The notes, taken by Mr. Libby during the conversation, for the first time place Mr. Cheney in the middle of an effort by the White House to learn about Ms. Wilson's husband, Joseph C. Wilson IV, who was questioning the administration's handling of intelligence about Iraq’s nuclear program to justify the war.
Lawyers said the notes show that Mr. Cheney knew that Ms. Wilson worked at the C.I.A. more than a month before her identity was made public and her undercover status was disclosed in a syndicated column by Robert D. Novak on July 14, 2003.
Mr. Libby's notes indicate that Mr. Cheney had gotten his information about Ms. Wilson from George J. Tenet, the director of central intelligence, in response to questions from the vice president about Mr. Wilson. But they contain no suggestion that either Mr. Cheney or Mr. Libby knew at the time of Ms. Wilson's undercover status or that her identity was classified. Disclosing a covert agent's identity can be a crime, but only if the person who discloses it knows the agent's undercover status.
It would not be illegal for either Mr. Cheney or Mr. Libby, both of whom are presumably cleared to know the government's deepest secrets, to discuss a C.I.A. officer or her link to a critic of the administration. But any effort by Mr. Libby to steer investigators away from his conversation with Mr. Cheney could be considered by Patrick J. Fitzgerald, the special counsel in the case, to be an illegal effort to impede the inquiry.
This is amazing information. You may ask why?
First of all, this means that Vice President Cheney has known all along that he was Scooter Libby's source -- and whether Libby had license from him or not to try and slaughter the reputation of Joe Wilson -- CHENEY KNEW.
The entire charade of President Bush stating that he wanted to get to the bottom of who leaked Plame's name -- and who was involved -- is no longer believable at any level. Cheney would not have failed to disclose this to Bush, and Bush played along as if none of his staff were involved. They confessed nothing -- accepted no responsibilty -- until forced by Fitzgerald.
According to Scooter Libby's notes, George Tenet was the source for the information about Valerie Wilson lining up the trip -- so to speak -- for her husband, but did not necessarily include the information that she was a covert operative.
This is where things get interesting. Although Fitzgerald may not need to establish this connection, it seems increasingly plausible to TWN that Tenet and Cheney had some kind of exchange regarding Joe and Valerie Wilson. Cheney then passed off the information to Libby along with a few expletives about Wilson, implying that the @#$%@%er should be done in.
The question is how did Libby then churn up more info on Wilson without other parts of the "untrusted" bureaucracy spitting in his face or reporting his sins?
My hunch is that he went to trusted spear-carriers for Vice President Cheney -- the office and staff of Under Secretary of State John Bolton. Fred Fleitz, Bolton's chief of staff, maintained his CIA WINPAC portfolio and access as an active duty CIA staff member while he operated as Bolton's "acting" chief of staff. We know that Fleitz was a key part of the intelligence cherry-picking/stove-piping operation when it came to both the intel and policy response to various global WMD concerns -- in North Korea, Libya, Iran, and Iraq.
We also know that David Wurmser and John Hannah, who have both apparently cooperated after threats of legal action (i.e., time behind bars) with Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald worked both for John Bolton's operation and the Vice President's office.
I recently consulted with a number of senior State Department officials about the level of interaction between Vice President Cheney's office and John Bolton's office -- and was informed that there was "intense" exchange between them, constant. One said that "Bolton and his team were operatives of Vice President Cheney inside the State Department establishment -- there to subvert Armitage and Powell wherever they could, and if not subvert, then there to spy on the them and report back.
TWN knows nothing more than what it speculates to be a plausible scenario. Tonight, I consulted with three senior State Department officials, one currently at the State Department and two who are now outside the Department. All three of them agreed that the scenario I have described about Fleitz being the source of information about Plame's covert WINPAC role -- and this information then passing from Fleitz and/or Bolton to Scooter Libby "is not unbelievable."
Patrick Fitzgerald does not need to prove that Fleitz and Bolton added to the information that Libby had from Vice President Cheney. It's not part of the case if Fitzgerald is focusing narrowly on discrepancies and untruthfulness in Libby's testimony -- or focusing on the act then of spreading these rumors about Plame to non-cleared members of the media.
But TWN hopes that those in the know will join me at Starbucks at Connecticut & R Streets and fill in the holes that Fitzgerald does not fill.
For now, we can know that the Vice President of the United States was neck-deep in this affair and knew it ALL along.
Fascinating and deeply, deeply disturbing.
-- Steve Clemons
« Previous Article - Bob Herbert on Lawrence Wilkerson's "Astonishingly Candid" Talk» Next Article - Larry Wilkerson Erases Any Doubts About Cheney-Rumsfeld Cabal in Tomorrow Morning's Los Angeles Times
Disturbing, but not surprising at all.
Would have been nice to know this info LAST October 24th as opposed to this one, no?
--
This may explain why Tenet abrubtly resigned probably as protest to Bush after one of his agents were outed by Darth Cheney's people.
Merry Fitzmas !
Happy Fitzukah !
Prosperous Fitzkaa !
and peace on earth, goodwill to all ...
"Oh, THAT Valerie Wilson! Why didn't you say so?!"
didn't Bolton claim during his confirmation hearings that he had not testified to Fitzgerald? If Fitz were sniffing at Fleitz on this topic, wouldn't Bolton have been asked about this? And allegedly Bolton visited poor poor Judy twice while in durance vile... who told JM about that Flame woman?
i'm reminded of what good ol' howard dean said yesterday...
[Howard] Dean was asked Sunday by ABC "This Week" host George Stephanopoulos: "If [Fitzgerald] finishes his investigation without bringing indictments and without issuing a final report, will you accept that as the end of the matter?"
"No," Dean shot back. "Because I fundamentally don't think these are honest people running the government."
http://takeitpersonally.blogspot.com/2005/10/good-ol-howard-cant-resist-telling.html
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/10/23/114843.shtml
and, yes, it's "fascinating and deeply, deeply disturbing..."
Cheney then passed off the information to Libby along with a few expletives about Wilson, implying that the @#$%@%er should be done in.
You captured that almost as perfectly as you did this:
The entire charade of President Bush stating that he wanted to get to the bottom of who leaked Plame's name -- and who was involved -- is no longer believable at any level.
I'm telling ya... the impeachment clock starting ticking on these black hats the moment the NY DAILY NEWS published that piece about Bush scolding Rove for botching the Wilson smear.
He knew. He lied. He covered it up.
The gates have been breeched, the waters of truth are starting to flow.
What are the impeachment odds in Vegas now?
Also posted this over at Digby's joint:
The Times piece said that Cheney was questioned under oath. That seems new. Is it?
Well?
the NYT states that Cheney DID testify under oath...perhaps he was just preliminarily interviewed not under oath but then was called in for the 2nd time but under oath?
if we know this much now about cheney's involvement, imagine what Fitzgerald knows!
good work, steve, you bring a lot of threads together.
looks to me for sure that at the very least cheney will get mentioned as an unindicted co-conspirator in some espionage, perjury or obstruction charges.
book 'em, Fitz!!
I am disappointed that the damage has already been done with the years of mis-information given to the public. There are people who still hold a belief Ambassador Wilson will be indicted by the Fitzgerald investigation, and the administration folks will walk away. The media, specifically FOX, has begun in the last couple of weeks their "criminalization of politics" arguments to defend these people.
If rumors are true, then I am also disappointed the investigation will not provide a detailed report to what he had found out. That could have let the fox in the hen house.
Steve, thanks for giving us your take on this. So much speculation/hope/fear is going around. I trust your perspective about what these things mean. I also appreciate what a force you have been to help light shine where we need to see. Wilkerson's talk about transparency is here in action.
This whole thing sounds like a novel (could be written by one I. Lewis Libby); a novel where the seemingly unbelievably written Bolton character shows up to foreshadow bad dealings...
The unfortunate part is that it also seems quite plausible, IMHO, that Cheney will have just enough deniability to avoid charges and serve out his term, and that Bush will pardon any key players who do get indicted.
We will not see a rerun of Watergate (http://www.watergate.info/casualties/ for a reminder of what that entailed). Too bad.
Countdown had some red tool on tonight who spent his time sying a) Democrats smeared Ken Starr; and b) the American people elected the president, not his staff. BushCo's going to dump the lot of them (maybe Cheney too?) and bring in "wise men" ala Iran-Contra and go to the wall to insulate il Ducetto from these guys.
The irony is all they did was respond to his cri-de-couer, "will no one rid me of that miserable, courageous, handsome diplomat whom the old man likes better than me."
Jon Stewart just cleaned Bill Kristol's clock. The White Sox are up 2 in the World Series. There is a god and she has a wicked sense of humor.
God bless Jon Stewart! I can't wait to watch him the night the indictments finally come down.
Make sure you get a Venti. I suspect that this story is so huge, coffee sales at the mentioned Starbucks will be astronomical for the next few days.
While you're at it, think hard about bringing a "next in line" ticket number dispenser with you.
Hang on.
Cheney knew who the source was, yes, that's clear-- just as it was "clear" that Iraq had WMD's because we had the receipts. (From the early 80's, of course, but still.) And Cheney would also know if/when he talked to Libby, and possibly others.
BUT, if we're talking about a private conversation between Big Time and Scooter (and what conversation on sensitive intelligence matters isn't private?), then how the heck is Mr. Fitzgerald going to prove Cheney knew that Valerie Plame was in deep cover? Even assuming that Fitzgerald does press for an indictment on Libby, AND the grand jury votes in favor, AND Fitzgerald then offers up a plea bargain to deliver Cheney, AND Libby takes it, then the best we can hope for is still only a he-said/he-said on the witness stand. And remember, Cheney can't be indicted by the grand jury anyway... that would be a job for the U.S. Congress. (Earliest possible date: January 3, 2007. Work on it.)
Bottom line, I'm with michaelm and the jillions of others predicting likewise: Cheney and maybe Bush named as unindicted co-conspirators. Rove and Libby will take the hardest fall, with Hadley, Bolton, Fleitz, Wurmser, Hannah, Card, and a small handful of others getting much lesser charges (and possibly pleading down even lower). Judy Miller won't get charged, at least initially, although her fate at NYT will be judged according to how many times her name appears in the other indictments.
No need for a final report by Fitz because Bob Woodward is probably already on it.
Does anyone know when Judy Miller was originally subpoenaed? Is it possible she fought testifying to get past the election?
What if Tenet, who clearly had a little reason to pissed off at these guys, told Fitz all SORTS of interesting information, including how they tallked him into diving on the sword?
Who knows...at this point, my expectations are too high and I'll probably be disappointed. I mean, we all know that the Admin has all lied through their teeth on this, but proving a case is harder than knowing it.
The questions Aaron Brown asked Jeffrey Toobin - and neither could answer - is "Cui Bono?" (although neither put it that way.
Why does this information about Cheney emerge now? Who would leak it, and how would they benefit?
The only person who benefits is Bush 43 - and the only way he benefits is by avoiding indictment, tossing the blame of the whole grisly affair onto the backs of his closest associates - the Kenneth Lay defense.
Witin the week, we've already seen the "revelation" of the potential cover story. Steve, is it possible that this whole "Cheney-Rumsfeld cabal" version of events, told by both Scowcroft and Wilkerson, is actually a spin created by Bush 41 and his closest associates to save 43?
Certainly, the father must know what the son has done - brought us to war on false pretenses, which he knew to be false, and repeatedly lying to the American people in order to achieve his ends. The father must also know that the penalties for treason, espionage, and other high crimes and misdemeanors must extend from impeachment to imprisonment and potentially execution.
Certainly the father would do almost anything - even sacrificing the family retainers - to make sure that the son, and the family name, would not go down in American history as the greatest villian to occupy the Oval Office.
Better to have the son seen as a dupe, the hapless trusting victim of a "cabal", then as an integral part of the whole maleficent and larcenous scheme.
The nomination of Bernanke today is already infuriating Bush 43's "base", as the man is not a true-believing supply-sider. Bernanke is also an eminently sensible choice, from the point of view of a Bush 41 Republican.
Has the steering wheel been wrested away from the President? A little too late; we've already driven off the pier
Remember, this is NADAGATE. There ain't no crime, Plame had a desk job, statute of limitations, attempt to out a covert agent can't be proved and the agent weren't covert. No indicts. No crime. No report. No news. Nada.
I know bureaucracies well enough that I am sure, somewhere in the bowels of some filing system, there are records of all this that would NAIL these perps.
It may be that a puzzle will have to be put together from seperate pieces but there is, I`m sure, evidence enough to convict if only it can be found.
Mr. Fitzgerald needs to take as much time as he needs to tie all the loose ends together into one well wrapped package.
"Eventually, the truth will emerge. And when it does, this house of cards, built of deceit, will fall." - Robert C. Byrd
Cheney's going down and Bush will be dogged with this shit for the next 3 years. Ha fucking ha!
Yes fascinating, in the same way that a train wreck is fascinating. Deeply disturbing? look I live in a small town in Oregon, I don't watch TV, and even I know that Cheney-Bush have been crooks from the get-go. This is not any more deeply disturbing than Cheney's efforts to keep his energy policy meetings locked up -- no more deeply disturbing than a pre-emptive war, tax cuts for the rich, and on and on.
What is truly deeply disturbing is the support these thugs continue to get from the public, deeply disturbing that the NYTimes now starts doing real reporting after being the Bush-Cheney bitch for the past several years.
Excuse me while I go wipe the froth off my chapped and bitter lips.
Cheney knew and lied? Very interesting, but not surprising. What would be a surprise? Having someone identify the person(s) who forged the Niger yellow-cake documents and explain who made the case that they were real, and to whom. Yes, that would be a big surpise.
wilson46201 wrote:
Merry Fitzmas !
Happy Fitzukah !
Prosperous Fitzkaa !
and peace on earth, goodwill to all ..
Don't forget Fitz-ivus, based on Festivus. Festivities will include the traditional Festivus pole, the airing of grievances, and the feats of strength.
What do we know about Marc Grossman? The INR memo was drafted for him on 6/10/2003.
Two days later, Cheney was talking about Plame with Libby.
Louise:
Who's to say that Bush 41 didn't have a hand in the leak himself? After all, he's one of the few ex-presidents who actually does exercise his right to see the CIA's daily briefings. (And why not, used to be the agency's top man himself-- gotta keep tabs over at Langley.)
When I saw at the bottom of Fitz's website under "Viewing Notce" that documents could include spreadsheets and Power Point thingies, I thought "This could go big! This could have legs!" Happy Snoopy Dance Time!
Louise - great post and something that rings true for me. I've thought for a long time that it must irk 41 to see how 43's people have torn down the CIA. Imagine: the director of the CIA no longer sees the president. The CIA director reports are now presented to the president by John Negroponte. I digress...
One thing most people don't understand about GHWB is that he is actually a right smart guy. He was Phi Beta Kappa at Yale at a time when that distinction meant something. He, like all of the Bush men before him, was a successful businessman who was an innovator in the oil business. (Gotta a problem with offshore oil drilling? Take it up with GHWB. It was his idea and he helped develop the technology to make it so.) Yet another digression...
It makes a lot of sense to me that he would do anything in his power to rescue his boy from certain disaster. (Not the country, mind you, just his child. Oh, and as long as it doesn't interfere with the profits of his partners at the Carlyle Group.)
Last digression: the most sickening thing to happen in the last few days was The Hutch (aka Kay Bailey), who had the huevos to state on television that perjury is a pesky technicality. I just tortued myself by reading her Federal Registry entry about Clinton's impeachment. If she had a shred of humanity left she would have had to take anti-emetics this morning before she could look at herself in the mirror. What a slimey pig. It makes me barf to know that Hillary has befriended her: http://journals.aol.com/republicanjen/RepublicanJen/entries/1388. Talk about honor among thieves.
Ha! You kinda knew that ol Dirty Dick would be behind a mess this big. From orchestrating the the Gas Gouge of '05 with his behind closed doors meetings with energy execs to the Rush to War manipulation of intel, Dick is neck deep. Note to FOX - this kind of politics is criminal.
I think the "Save George" movement is eminently plausible. I too realized what stage we were in when the "Bush chewed out Rove" leak came--the dogs were beginning to bite each other. When that stage comes, every man (and woman) fights for the right position to be in. Dad knows quite a bit about squeezing between the pylons on a national security scandal (cough-Iran Contra!-cough). And the people involved in going suddenly scathing are old hands of 41s.
The revenge of the CIA: don't fuck with the spooks.
The title of the article has been changed on the NYTimes website as follows:
Oct. 24: "Cheney Told Aide of C.I.A. Officer, Notes Show"
Oct. 25: "Cheney Told Aide of C.I.A. Officer, Lawyers Report"
The link above is to the Oct. 24th version.
I don't know what this means. I just posted more info over at DailyKos, in a comment, attached to a diary by Kos.
I don't know what this means. Any ideas?
Okay, I just had a closer look at this thing and realized that this title change is not all that significant since the original article does in fact mention that it was lawyers who reported that notes revealed this information.
Both titles are equally correct; the second one just seems to have more "punch."
...although I hope Steve will still update the link so his readership will be emailing the version with the better title!
So, how long has the Times been sitting on this?
Fitzmas may be coming, but there'll a hard winter after that, including Bush's pardons and another rightwing wacko on the Supreme Court. And even if Dirty Dick is forced to resign, you know Bush will appoint at best another Gerald Ford as VP, for his own pardon party. Just like Nixon.
That's why it is so vitally important to VOTE TO IMPEACH come November 2006. This time, your life really does depend on it. America has to boot these Republican bastards out of office, and make every Democrat sign a Contract on Corruption that includes a vow to impeach George Bush the minute a Democratic majority is sworn in.
Nate, I think they changed their headline because no one at the paper has actually seen these notes. They've been bitten that way in the past ...
I'm generally a right-wing guy, I suppose, but I'm not one to defend this kind of crap.
All administrations, apparently, get caught in some coverup or other in their second term - but this one has it all: war, a femme fatale (two, actually - Plame and Miller), a "cancer on the presidency," an Eliot Ness-type investigator ...
... fascinating. Almost as good as Watergate. I'd be surprised if the indictments go higher than Libby, but then I'm surprised that it's come to this in the first place. (Not because I thought the administration was particularly honest - just that I didn't realize that they would be this foolish).
Let the games begin. Lefties deserve some good news at long last - even the schadenfreude kind. Righties need a(nother) reminder that our politicians are just as scummy as the other team's, if not more so.
Jimbo, on the other hand, is getting ahead of himself. Even if the House is retaken - even if a bill of impeachment passes - you've still got to get it through the Senate. Ain't no WAY the Senate's going to shift far enough next year to get 2/3.
But, never say never, I guess.
As an outsider (a Brit in Hong Kong) can I just say how much of a relief it is to find this page.
From the US TV news we see here it would seem that everyone loves Bush/Cheney and thinks that speaking against Gulf War 2 is tantamount to treason.
Thank You.
I wouldn't get too excited about the NY Times article. The Times has amply demonstrated that nothing in the paper past the TV listings can be taken at face value. Simply put, nothing in it can be believed. Even a sincere reporter might be under the sway of corrupt bosses or "misinformed" by a source.
It's an administration organ posing as a newspaper.
flip, they obviously haven't been giving you polling info on BushCo. Try http://www.pollingreports.com and find out how we really feel.
knemon, when they locked Democrats out of legislative discussion on crucial bills, and redistricted without new census info for the purpose of creating a thousand year Republican majority, it might have been a clue that the arrogance of these swine was completely out of control.
God bless hubris, it gets the bastards down.
From the New York Times piece...
Disclosing a covert agent's identity can be a crime, but only if the person who discloses it knows the agent's undercover status.
Bullshit.
Title 18, United States Code
Sec. 793. Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information
...
d) Whoever, lawfully having possession of, access to, control over, or being entrusted with any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note relating to the national defense, or information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicates, delivers, transmits or causes to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted or attempts to communicate, deliver, transmit or cause to be communicated, delivered or transmitted the same to any person not entitled to receive it, or willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it on demand to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it
...
Shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.
(g) If two or more persons conspire to violate any of the foregoing provisions of this section, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each of the parties to such conspiracy shall be subject to the punishment provided for the offense which is the object of such conspiracy.
I see the New York Times is still up to its hack bullshit, incompetent selves still.
So we are to believe that the Vice President and his chief of staff (who is also an advisor to Bush himself, not just CoS to the VP) would not know that exposing CIA WMD counter-proliferation assets to the public would not clearly fall under the above description?
Pull the other one, it has bells on it.
There is a chance that Bush may not issue pardons, or if he does, that they might be quite selective.
Remember, Joe and Valerie Wilson have every intent of filing a civil suit. And the Republicans have done us the favor of determining in court that even a sitting President has to give a deposition. No amount of pardoning will make any of these people immune from having to testify in a civil suit. Even if a pardon eliminates the threat of a public criminal trial, the pardonee still has to tell the truth in a deposition, and can be nailed for perjurious responses.
The truth will come out, one way or another.
flip - I gotta tell you two things about this place. First, this ain't no leftist site. Left of center, yes, long in opposition to most Bush policies, yes, but you've come across a highly respected source and author here.
And second, the comments in tonight's thread are truly astounding, and imo they indicate a sea change in media and public attitude toward the entire Bush administration, a sea chanage that seems to be swelling by the hour.
As much as I thrill at the long-overdue awakening of the public to the dark heart of the Bush-Cheney administration, I fear this regime's last throes. Is there some way we can all let them down together (meaning practically I suppose in substantial majority), and with a little grace, healing rather than further tearing the fabric of the American politic? Yes, slam the book at them, by all means. Nobody is above the law.
But do so as citizens, not as partisans. Condemn and rid both parties of the sins and sinners of such betrayals of the public trust and fidelity.
Anyway, what a invaluable thread this is, and, as so many others have said here, Steve, what a great, necessary service you perform with your even-handed, level-headed, and deeply informed treatment of these difficult and trying times.
And I second Louise's illuminating perspective, however accurate it may prove.
torridjoe: Very clever post, and what a line!: "[Bush 41] knows quite a bit about squeezing between the pylons on a national security scandal...".
And finally, the official Judge award for tonight goes to Knemon. Never say never, indeed. May your honest reassessment and willingness to condemn the crimes and misdemeanors of the Bush administration be a leading edge in a groundswell of principled Republican and conservative opposition to this very bad barrel of apples.
Yes, we are to believe Cheney and others broke the law and knew they were breaking it. That's where the conspiracy to start a "super double secret background" whispering campaign with journalists came in--apparently led by Libby and certainly with Cheney's knowledge. That demostrates the "mens rea" of knowing this was not legal.
Stick your head in the ground all you want, it won't change things. If PF has enough evidence to get indictments, the odds of conviction are very, very high.
The next big question is what the consequences were, and thus the severity of punishment. If a WMD intel network was destroyed, then execution for treason would fit the crime.
I think Louise is on to something, but I am not quite ready to go all the way with it. Bush the Elder is someone with a few scruples--and a few scruples loose. His son is dry drunk with a history of causing problems in the family name. He has been bailed out before. And I think Bush the Elder was involved deeply in Iran-Contra and has never liked being associated with the perception of being a "wimp", so acting on his loose scruples is hardly beyond him. But would he have the influence to sway affairs to save his son's butt today? I guess I am just a bumpkin, but I think that would be a full-time job. A good investigator (journalist, not prosecutor) would have to look at this travels and contacts for about a year into the past to see if that were true--pre-tsunami. Bush the Lesser has the power of office and all that goes with it. He resents his father (my opinion). He has the power to make messes far exceeding his Dad's capacity to clean them up.
Remember, NADAGATE!
>>Remember, this is NADAGATE. There ain't no crime, Plame had a desk job, statute of limitations, attempt to out a covert agent can't be proved and the agent weren't covert. No indicts. No crime. No report. No news. Nada.
You seem to have forgotten that false statements and perjury are crimes in themselves. Remember Mr. Clinton?
In addition, lying to Congress to get them to okay a war falls in the area of "high crimes and misdemeanors." This is an impeachable offense.
In describing the Times statement that ignorance can be bk=liss about a person's covert status, Mitch forgot to highlight this:
which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation.
Any idea at all where Libby's notes have been all this time, and why they are emerging now?
Mitchell,
You put the nail in the coffin, good sir. Where this myth of foreknowledge of the individual's "covert" status came from, and why it continues, is inconsequential to the actual criminality of these acts. If Cheney, Libby, etc. did not know V.W. was covert, why go through all the trouble of "exposing" her? What sense would any of this make if they thought she was just another WINPAC analyst? Zip! They had to realize what they were doing in order to do it. Case closed.
Thank you all for a valuable and meaningful debate here on these pages. Have an extra shot of espresso for me.
Isn't the plan to get a VP in the White House who can run for president in 2008? are we still one step behind Karl Rove's next game move? and just who are 'the lawyers' in today's NYT's article?
Steve:
Here's my take on how this info got to Cheney. The key thing, I think, is the date, just two days after the date on the INR memo, which Grossman used as background for a meeting at the WH. So presumably Dick heard what Grossman said at the meeting (not clear whether he saw the memo), and contacted Bolton to get the memo itself or at least more details.
Just a note to Loupy - Google shows that this "viewing notice" about spreadsheets as well as .pdfs is boilerplate also included on the Temple Sinai and US Trustee Program sites. So it might have been copied over from templates when the install was done. But still exciting because its possible they knew the site would require these sorts of downloadables.
in terms of dynamics, I found the Scowcroft comments and 41's apparent accedence stunning. What are they up to ?!? The above posted scenarios are certainly plausible. But my initial gut response was - Is 41 attempting to salvage Jeb's 08 prospects? Is he willing to slime 43 to preserve 44? In looking at the collateral damage wrought by Katrina, some of us saw Jeb as a casualty. (oh the delightful irony hurricanes having enhanced Jeb's stature in the past, could suddenly shift direction and destroy both he and his brother politically)
Haven't read the New Yorker article, more importantly, haven't read Dowd's BUSHWORLD yet. Can't wait to read her take on the Scowcroft comments - she's rarely off the mark about this group.
Oh well, I was just running down this alley to distract myself from my Fitzmas jones
I agree with Emptywheel...if I were Fitzgerald, I'd be working hard to connect the leak to the INR memo, which was written June 10, and the Cheney/Libby meeting was June 12. This seems too coincidental. It is very possible that Cheney had a copy of the memo (compliments of Bolton?) in his hands during that meeting with Libby.
I first arrived in Washington in '73 on the day Spiro Agnew resigned. Therafter, it was one shoe dropping after another. These were heady times, and we would gather in the Guards in Georgetown to discuss the day's disclosures.
In short, it was just like now--except today's debates run a little short on civility. Civility vanished with the arrival of Newt Gingrich. Nowadays one hears the word "traitor" bandied about as if it were a mild rebuke. Not pretty.
But as fascinating as ever.
In a sense, this new information is not, as Steve says, "deeply, deeply disturbing." After all, many of us have known for quite a while that Bush and Cheney lied us into, among other bad things, a war. Finding out that Cheney was involved in the Plame affair merely fills in one of the details about the processes by which those lies were - and still are - being carried out. So, I'm past the point of just being deeply, deeply disturbed. I'm now deeply, deeply outraged and ready for these criminals to be brought to justice.
You guys can't win an election so you have to celebrate this stuff.
2 years of investigation and it comes to speculation about speculation.
I think the left, you guys, will have a field day with this when Rove and Libby get indicted, which I am certain they will.
*Shocking, Rove and Libby are nasty guys. WHOA??????
You guys stay with this for 2006, and Reps will stay even in senate and only lose 4-6 in house...
but you will still have your post here?
If rove and libby were in such a bad way, would they have not gotten out of the White House after 2004? Get away from the President and VP...
come on guys, you think the White House has moron lawyers?
I again call your attention to Presidential Findings on Syria. It wouldn't be the first time that a New War would distract the public from other events, like, say, Fitzmass?
Just asking...
Suppose there will be a double-impeachment trial?
Every phenomenon needs an historic first time.
The minute I laid eyes on it I suspected that I was witnessing Condi walking the presidential photo op walk in her ol' hometown.
If Cheney is not named as an unindicted co-conspirator by Fitzgerald, what about REVOKING BIGTIME'S SECURITY CLEARANCE? Misuse of classified info? How about a national movement --Move ON, etc. to do just that? An interim measure. At least until this can be documented: "Cheney then passed off the information to Libby along with a few expletives about Wilson, implying that the @#$%@%er should be done in."
The notes, taken by Mr. Libby during the conversation, for the first time place Mr. Cheney in the middle of an effort by the White House to learn about Ms. Wilson's husband, Joseph C. Wilson IV, who was questioning the administration's handling of intelligence about Iraq’s nuclear program to justify the war.
Does anyone know (maybe addressed above) why Cheney keeps up the facade of not knowing who Wilson was prior to the Niger trip? Cheney was Sec. of Defense when Wilson was the last U.S. representative in Iraq prior to the first Gulf War. Of course he's known Joe Wilson for more than a decade.
Great post Steve - thanks.
Certainly, the father must know what the son has done - brought us to war on false pretenses, which he knew to be false, and repeatedly lying to the American people in order to achieve his ends.
The father participated in buttering up the American people for war in the summer of 2002. Paula Zahn did a fluff piece on GHWB's glory days as a fighter pilot in World War II. GHWB participated in the interview as it was interspersed with photos of him as that young pilot. He extolled the virtues of such a noble calling, implying that it would be a good choice for many young persons to enlist in the armed forces. This was in the summer before the "final decision" to go to war was allegedly made. When I saw this fluff piece, I turned to my mother and said, "They've already decided to go to war. Now they're just trying to butter us up." Turns out I was right. GHWB is as complicit as his son. Indict him too, I say.
I read this morning (sorry, can't find the link) that Tenet has denied that he ever discussed Plame with Cheney. So, I guess that would leave the famous memo ... the one with the SECRET designation right there above the paragraph that describes Plame.
May they all rot in hell....
thanks for hitting the times' BS on revealing classified information, mitch.
to make matters worse, kristof had his head firmly up his back pocket in his column, parroting the "runaway prosecutor! inspector javert!" meme. he even actually said inspector javert.
and they also had the predictable "secrets are a dime a dozen" article front page of week in review sunday. which included such bald-faced BS as saying c'mon, it's not like they keep classified info in a separate drawer or anything...
it really is unbelievable. almost like some kind or reverse "i am spartacus!" scene where the entire rest of the paper tries to prove that judy miller's not the only one who can stovepipe a good talking point.
I detest what these cretins have done to this country. I loathe them for attempting to destroy what millions have fought to protect and preserve.
And, you know what? Not that long ago, they would have gotten away with it with little or no mention at all. The one thing this administration has failed to take into consideration is that mainstream media such as the Washington Post and The New York Times is almost secondary to the national discourse. The internet is becoming the new and reliable source of news. Forums such as this are effecting change in this country. People are becoming involved, informed, and interested in the actions of their government. To quote Martha Stewart, "THIS IS A GOOD THING."
I hope they all get their due. Bush, Cheney, Rove, Libby, Rumsfeld .... all involved need to be taught a lesson. The country needs to set an example of these people. That in the end, is the necessary change ... we need to punish to the fullest possible extent so this crap doesn't continue. Failing to do so in my opinion is tantamount to abrogating our responsibility as citizens, with the end result being a loss of our country.
please write special councel fitzpatrick and ask him to turn up the heat.thank him for his work.
keep the faith!
anton alfred newcombe
nyc 2005
p.s. i have a super quick blog running on myspace that's getting pretty heated.
Office of Special Counsel
Patrick J. Fitzgerald
Special Counsel
Chicago Office:
Dirksen Federal Building
219 South Dearborn Street, Fifth Floor
Chicago, Illinois 60604
(312) 353-5300 Washington Office:
Bond Federal Building
1400 New York Avenue, NW, Ninth Floor
Washington D.C. 20530
Please address all correspondence
to the Washington Office
my blog location:
come on guys, you think the White House has moron lawyers?
Mark, Mark, Mark!
Two words: HARRIET MIERS
No, make that five words: the above two plus TORTURE MEMO GUY (aka Alberto Gonzalez, the one who vetted Bernie Kerik for the post of Homeland Security honcho).
But what I really want to discuss is my inability to let go of the fact that The Dick showed his hand so early on and no one, not the courts, not the court of public opinion, most certainly not the media, put a halt to his subversion of what to me is the most sacred document on earth: the Constitution of the United States of America.
The Dick searched far and wide (from one side of his desk to the other) to find a veep for the Shrub. Then, at the last possible hour on the last possible day, he declares that he really isn't a resident of Texas after all. No matter that each and every criterium by which you or I would establish our residency placed his in Texas. Don't believe what you see, believe what I say: my vacation cabin in Wyoming is really my official residence. So what if my children wouldn't qualify for in-state tuition at a Wyoming college or university. So what if my homesteader's exemption is in Texas, not Wyoming. So what if my drivers license, employer, property taxes, income taxes, vehicles taxes are all in Texas. And especially so what if the Constitution says me and The Shrub have no right to the Electoral College votes from Texas. I'm The Dick and I can do anything I want.
You're right in thinking that I haven't quite been able to "get over it." I will never get over that man's disdain for my beloved Constitution.
It is with this back story, never far from my rawest nerve, that I consider how it wasn't enough for The Dick to subvert the Constitution: he needed to subvert the Republic itself. He'll go to his maker soon enough. In the meantime I'm humming a joyful tune:
Oh Schaudenfraude,
Oh Schaudenfraude,
How sweetly we are feeling.
Oh Schaudenfraude,
Oh Schaudenfraude,
Of all the deals most thrilling
To see them squirm and note the sweat,
is better than a winning bet,
Oh Schaudenfraude,
Oh Schaudenfraude,
Perp walks will have them reeling.
The signs are there for all to see,
That this regime is history.
Oh Schaudenfraude,
Oh Schaudenfraude,
We sweetly are we feeling.
Jeff II -
For the same reason he denied ever meeting John Edwards when they had met on at least two occasions and once ate breakfast next to each other.
Because, as a factual matter, he will lie when he thinks it suits him. He will lie when someone asks if he's met someone in order to be dismissive and win points in a debate. And he will like when he's trying to spin a story that might claim the political lives of him and his cronies.
If you go back to the days before the war you will remember that big question was whether a "preemptive" war could be morally justified.
We, the citizenry, have no concept of what war does to people. If you've seen Private Ryan and think that you understand war you are wrong.
Recently I was looking for pictures of the soldiers that died and ran across a powerpoint that talked about how advances in medical technology are saving soldiers lives. I clicked through about ten slides and the ninth and tenth were so disturbing that I had to stop. The ninth was a picture of a soldier with their lower legs blown off. The tenth was one where the soldier's face was completely blown off. I only viewed it for an instant, but it is now burned into my consiousness.
I will never be the same again.
That's OK though. If soldiers can survive this type of horror I have no right to feel sorry for myself over witnessing pictures of their bodily distruction.
Justification for preemtive war. That is what the Plame affair is about. We owe it to all those who were murdered and mutilated to find the truth.
Thomas DePaine
"the official Judge award for tonight goes to Knemon. Never say never, indeed. May your honest reassessment and willingness to condemn the crimes and misdemeanors of the Bush administration be a leading edge in a groundswell of principled Republican and conservative opposition to this very bad barrel of apples."
(a) Don't hold your breath
(b) We shall see what we shall see.
If the wilder predictions/phantasies here are true - if Cheney, Rove, "Scooter," Bolton, both Bushes, and why not throw in Billy Graham, are wearing orange jumpsuits by year's end, then you can break out the champagne. A NYT article is not indictments are not convictions.
This could go either way - it could fizzle into a big nothing, or it could be Watergate II. Time will tell.
All three of them agreed that the scenario I have described about Fleitz being the source of information about Plame's covert WINPAC role -- and this information then passing from Fleitz and/or Bolton to Scooter Libby "is not unbelievable."
Even more so since Plame didn't work at WINPAC, but in a Directory of Operations position dealing with related matters. Anyone inside (Libby) reporting Plame as "working at WINPAC" might just have confused her position by making logical jump with the position of the guy who he learned it from: Fleitz.
Kremon - ah, I know it's tough to convert, and then be feted by your former enemy. I shoulda been more gentle, not rubbed it in perhaps. May I quote you again? We shall see what we shall see. And I'm actually breathing a lot easier these days, thanks.
Reader Comments (77) - post a comment