Footnotes: The Joseph Wilson / Valerie Plame Timeline

Check This!

Google Ad

Newsmakers - Right

Newsmakers - Unclaimed

Newsmakers - Left

Media

Useful Stuff

Memeorandum

Blog powered by TypePad

Prediction Markets

InTrade Prediction Markets: 2012 Republican Nominee

« Butler Report Excerpt on Uranium | Main | John Edwards / Imus Excerpt »

July 14, 2004

The Joseph Wilson / Valerie Plame Timeline

I intend to put the key elements of the story in one place, and update as necessary, with brief commentary.

These are meant to be in chronological order. I welcome suggestions for new links in the comments section; I discourage Dick Cheney style suggestions.

This post adds material and updates links from Alex Parker and a previous post of mine.

This is *mostly* original source material; I have included some commentary to provide perspective. If you are struck by a suddden tone-shift around Sept 30, 2003, it is because I "excerpted" a big chunk of Alex Parker's work there. He has retired from Bloggerdom, and if his site goes, I don't want to lose this material.

That said, the casual reader will quickly notice that I am not Joe Wilson's biggest booster. Mark Kleiman is not exactly a Wilson booster either, but he is a Bush critic who brings a useful alternative perspective to this; his library of links and commentary can be found here. Diana Smith has played no role in this, but we thank her anyway.

The Espionage Act
This law prohibits the disclosure of "classified material" that damages national security; it is not as often metioned as the Intelligence Identities Protection Act in relation to this case, but may be applicable.

The Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982 or here for a definition of "covert":
This is the law which could convict the leakers; it was enacted in response to rebel agent Philip Agee's publication of several CIA agents' identities. (Note: the law's defenses, and its definitions---of special note is the clause stating that a covert agent must have been in operation outside of the U.S. during the last five years in order to applicable.)

March 7: IAEA March 7, 2003 Security Council presentation (or here): discusses forgeries, dismisses trade delegation theory. (MUCH later, see Butler report for follow-up).

May 6, 2003: "Missing in Action: Truth", The New York Times, Nicholas Kristof: This column was the first to reveal the Feb. 2002 Niger trip; it doesn't mention Wilson, but we later learn (WaPo, Oct 12, 2003) he was a source. (See also Vanity Fair, Jan 17, 2004)

June 12, 2003: "CIA Did Not Share Doubt on Iraq Data", The Washington Post, Walter Pincus (or WaPo link): The Washington Post elaborates on Kristof's column, describes what happened with the CIA report; Wilson was also a source on this piece, which will get mentioned in the Senate Intelligence report.

June 13, 2003: "White House in Denial", Nick Kristof
Condoleezza Rice was asked on "Meet the Press" on Sunday about a column of mine from May 6 regarding President Bush's reliance on forged documents to claim that Iraq had sought uranium in Africa. That was not just a case of hyping intelligence, but of asserting something that had already been flatly discredited by an envoy investigating at the behest of the office of Vice President Dick Cheney.

Oooh, that didn't stand up to the final Senate report. My commentary.

June 19, 2003 - The New Republic article by John Judis and Spencer Ackerman recounts the Iraq nuclear story and includes this:

One year earlier, Cheney's office had received from the British, via the Italians, documents purporting to show Iraq's purchase of uranium from Niger. Cheney had given the information to the CIA, which in turn asked a prominent diplomat, who had served as ambassador to three African countries, to investigate. He returned after a visit to Niger in February 2002 and reported to the State Department and the CIA that the documents were forgeries. The CIA circulated the ambassador's report to the vice president's office, the ambassador confirms to TNR. But, after a British dossier was released in September detailing the purported uranium purchase, administration officials began citing it anyway, culminating in its inclusion in the State of the Union. "They knew the Niger story was a flat-out lie," the former ambassador tells TNR. "They were unpersuasive about aluminum tubes and added this to make their case more persuasive."

July 6, 2003: Enough prequel! The article that started it all: Ambassador Wilson, "What I Didn't Find in Africa".

July 6, 2003: Joe Wilson also speaks (again) to Walter Pincus of the Washington Post in "Ex-Envoy: Nuclear Report Ignored". Note that Messrs. Pincus and Leiby are wrong on just what allegation Wilson "debunked" - did Wilson prove that Iraq had not "tried to obtain uranium there for nuclear weapons", as they put it? Or did Wilson prove that Iraq had not *succeeded* in purchasing 500 tons of yellowcake, as Wilson wrote in his op-ed? Sorry, rhetorical question, you know the answer.

July 11: George Tenet, Director of the CIA, comments on "The Wilson Report", among other things. Key points - Tenet describes the content of the Wilson report differently from Wilson's July 6 account; and Tenet describes the selection of Wilson as having been a CIA idea.

British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw describes the Wilson report here.

July 12, 2003: Press Gaggle with Ari Fleischer, The National Hospital, Abuja, Nigeria : Mr. Fleischer backs off of the "16 Words":

"So what we have said is it should not have risen to the level of a presidential speech. People cannot conclude that the information was necessarily false.

That went well.

July 13: Condi Rice w/ Wolf Blitzer. They discuss the "16 Words", and Joe Wilson. A flavor of Wilson's early impact on the press coverage is here:

BLITZER: But 11 months earlier, you, the Bush administration, had sent Joe Wilson, a former U.S. ambassador to Niger, to find out whether it was true. He came back, reported to the CIA, reported to the State Department, it wasn't true, it was bogus. The whole issue was bogus. And supposedly, you never got word of his report.

July 14: Robert Novak "outs" Ms. Wilson, aka Valerie Plame, in "Mission to Niger". The fateful sentences, with emphasis added for sources. Note the absence of a specific source in the first sentence:

Wilson never worked for the CIA, but his wife, Valerie Plame, is an Agency operative on weapons of mass destruction. Two senior administration officials told me Wilson's wife suggested sending him to Niger to investigate the Italian report. The CIA says its counter-proliferation officials selected Wilson and asked his wife to contact him.

July 16: David Corn writes about the Novak column in "The Nation".

His question:

Did senior Bush officials blow the cover of a US intelligence officer working covertly in a field of vital importance to national security--and break the law--in order to strike at a Bush administration critic and intimidate others?

It sure looks that way, if conservative journalist Bob Novak can be trusted.

His key excerpt from Novak drops the third sentence beginning "The CIA says...":

Novak's July 14, 2003 column presented the back-story on Wilson's mission and contained the following sentences: "Wilson never worked for the CIA, but his wife, Valerie Plame, is an Agency operative on weapons of mass destruction. Two senior administration officials told me Wilson's wife suggested sending him to Niger to investigate" the allegation.

Wilson caused problems for the White House, and his wife was outed as an undercover CIA officer.

July 17/22: TIME magazine, "The War On Wilson", since revised, dated July 17, 2003. I noticed the revision on July 22.

...some government officials have noted to TIME in interviews, (as well as to syndicated columnist Robert Novak) that Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, is a CIA official who monitors the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. These officials have suggested that she was involved in her husband's being dispatched Niger to investigate...

Notes: First, the parenthetical information that TIME's sources also talked to Novak was added in a revision. Secondly, TIME seems to distinguish, in the rest of the story, between "Administration officials", and "government officials". I mention this, because Professor Krugman will, eventually, misrepresent the TIME reporting in his own column. And, David Corn will (July 23) write a follow-up arguing (pretending?) that TIME's "government" equals Novak's "senior administration". TIME may tell. And TIME may be on my side!

July 18, 2003: White House briefing explaining the "16 Words" process.

July 18: Howard Dean puts this question at number four of "16 Questions" as the "scandal" gets a bit of attention.

July 22: Prof. Krugman calls attention to the charges and mis-states the TIME reporting in "Who's Unpatriotic Now?".

July 22: Newsday provides "Intelligence officials" who confirm that Ms. Wilson had a clandestine role at the CIA. This increases the stakes, since identifying a covert agent can be a felony, as noted by Mr. Corn. It also (eventually) wins these two reporters a subpoena.

July 22: A non-responsive Scott McClellan provides a White House press non-briefing. Word search down for "Novak".

July 23: Newsday: Probes Expected in ID of CIA Officer

Durbin (D), Rockefeller (D), and Hatch (R). But Hatch is unimpressed with the allegations.

July 23: David Corn of "The Nation" writes again. Little new info, which suggests that people are not talking. He does conflate Novak's "senior administration officials" with TIME's "government officials", and I hope TIME is on my side here, as mentioned on July 17. We extract this:

July 23: White House Press Briefing: Another brick in the stonewall. But Ms. Wilson was the first question! It is interesting watching the press try to ask the question in a way that does not provoke a response of "I answered that already." Without new food supplies, the pack will starve, or move on.

July 23: Don Luskin speaks to some "Washington contacts", and thinks this is big, the White House is involved, and it is not going away.

July 23: Howard Kurtz of the Washington Post notes the Newsday story.

July 24: Wilson on the talk show circuit. "Today Show w/ Katie Couric";
The Ambassador will be caught with dangerously over-inflated hypotheticals, as noted here.

July 24: Sen. Charles Schumer calls for an investigation, and reminds us that we did this just one year ago. Since the shoe was on the other foot, all roles reverse.

July 25: Sen. Schumer gets results! From Newsday:

Susan Whitson, an FBI spokeswoman, said the agency would "look at the issue and make determinations about whether there is an investigation that is warranted."

July 29: Jonathon E. Kaplan writes in The Hill. Good coverage, many lawmakers quoted.

July 30: Josh Marshall in The Hill. His description of Ms. Plame's role is (roughly) confirmed by Nick Kristof on October 11.

Aug 4: Ambassador Wilson appears on "Late Edition" with Wolf Blitzer, and recycles old hypotheticals.

Aug 8: NY Times, Douglas Jehl: Good Wilson quotes.

Aug 10: St. Petersburg Times:

[Ambassador Wilson] said he believes that political operatives in the White House gave his wife's name to Novak, and he thinks he knows who they are. But he's "not ready, yet" to name them. He hopes an investigation - by the FBI, Congress or both - will take care of that.

He does not know who they.

Aug 15: John Dean, Nixon's former counsel, on the law; more David Corn on the process. Briefly, Corn's argument: until the CIA decides there was a security compromise, no investigation occurs. Tenet will be loyal to Bush, game over.

Aug 26: Mark Kleiman excerpts Wilson at an event:

"At the end of the day, it's of keen interest to me to see whether or not we can get Karl Rove frog-marched out of the White House in handcuffs. And trust me, when I use that name, I measure my words." Stay Tuned!

Sept 17 - Slate - Surprise! Ambassador Wilson tells Slate that Rove was a metonym for "senior WH official". Also, a WH reporter asks WH press sec'y McClellan directly, "was it Karl Rove?". McClellan won't answer.

Sept 18/24: Josh Marshall's two part interview with Ambassador Wilson.

BIG BREAKTHROUGH IN MEDIA - we switch to Alex Parker.

Sept 26, 2003: "CIA seeks probe of White House", MSNBC.com [or TruthOut], Alex Johnson and Andrea Mitchell:
Reports the CIA's request of a Justice Department probe, which means that the CIA admits that she is an undercover employee, and that a crime may have been committed.

The CIA has asked the Justice Department to investigate allegations that the White House broke federal laws by revealing the identity of one of its undercover employees in retaliation against the woman's husband, a former ambassador who publicly criticized President Bush's since-discredited claim that Iraq had sought weapons-grade uranium from Africa, NBC News has learned.

"Bush Administration Is Focus of Inquiry," The Washington Post, Mike Allen and Dana Priest, 9/28/03 (alternate - scroll down)
The story that made the scandal. It reported a senior administration official as stating that Novak's sources had called 6 other reports before the story broke, and that their motives had been either to smear him or for revenge. The Sr. Official modifies his story as to motive in a subsequent WaPo appearance (DATE? Pincus/Allen, Oct 12).

At CIA Director George J. Tenet's request, the Justice Department is looking into an allegation that administration officials leaked the name of an undercover CIA officer to a journalist, government sources said yesterday.

The operative's identity was published in July after her husband, former U.S. ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, publicly challenged President Bush's claim that Iraq had tried to buy "yellowcake" uranium ore from Africa for possible use in nuclear weapons. Bush later backed away from the claim.

Sept 29, 2003: "Bush Aides Say They'll Cooperate With Probe Into Intelligence Leak", The Washington Post, Mike Allen:
This article quotes Joseph Wilson as claiming that several reporters called him to tell him that they were contacted by admin. officials about his wife---later, he would clarify that they called him after Novak column ran. It also reports that Plame was "a case officer in the CIA's Clandestine Service," which apparently came from a senior intelligence official, or the administration source from its earlier article.

Sept 29, 2003: "Spy Games," The National Review Online, Clifford May:
May claims that Plame was well-known in Washington circles to be a CIA officer---says he learnt of her position in July from "someone who formerly worked in the government."

Sept 29: Via PBS Newshour, Brokaw denies Mitchell received leak:

TOM BROKAW: NBC News correspondent Andrea Mitchell has been identified by some as one of the recipients of a leak about the undercover agent. But tonight, Mitchell said that was not the case, that her first discussion with an administration official about the matter was after the Robert Novak column was published. And that discussion, she said, was off the record.

Sept 30, 2003: "Bush Vows Action if Aides Had Role in Leak", The Washington Post, Mike Allen and Dana Milbank (alternate):

President Bush's chief spokesman said Monday that the allegation that administration officials leaked the name of a CIA operative is "a very serious matter" and vowed that Bush would fire anybody responsible for such actions.

The vow came as numerous Democratic leaders demanded the administration appoint a special counsel to investigate the charges that a CIA operative's name was divulged in an effort to discredit her husband, a prominent critic of Bush's Iraq policy. The White House rejected those calls, also saying it has no evidence of wrongdoing by Bush adviser Karl Rove or others and therefore no reason to begin an internal investigation.

This article continues to cover the events, reports that an anonymous journalist claims to have received Plame's name from an administration source before the Novak column.

Sept 30, 2003: Message from White House Counsel Alberto R. Gonzales to the White House Staff
The White House counsel directed WH employees to turn over all evidence relating to the case, although Democrats said there was an improper delay in the counsel's request. Oddly, the message tells staffers to turn over any documentation of Newsday reporters Knut Royce and Timothy M. Phelps, who did not disclose Plame's position until after Novak had written his column.

Sept 30, 2003: Transcript of PBS Newshour
Larry Johnson, a former CIA officer, is the first CIA-affiliated person to openly reveal his association with Plame in this interview. He claims she worked for the CIA during "three decades," and that leaking her name could potentially harm all of her former contacts.

Oct 1, 2003: "The CIA Leak," syndicated column, Robert Novak
Novak backpedals furiously, claims that he did not receive a planted leak, but rather that it was an "off-the-cuff remark;" he also claims that he erred in calling her an operative, because she was in fact described as an analyst. He also states that when he went to the CIA for confirmation, they never stated that anyone's life would be in danger from her disclosure:

During a long conversation with a senior administration official, I asked why Wilson was assigned the mission to Niger. He said Wilson had been sent by the CIA's counterproliferation section at the suggestion of one of its employees, his wife. It was an offhand revelation from this official, who is no partisan gunslinger. When I called another official for confirmation, he said: "Oh, you know about it." The published report that somebody in the White House failed to plant this story with six reporters and finally found me as a willing pawn is simply untrue.

Oct 1, 2003: "Justice Dept. Launches Criminal Probe of Leak," The Washington Post, Dana Milbank and Susan Schmidt
The story continues to chronicle the developments---mentions that the CIA answered an 11-question form from the Justice department which confirmed that Plame's position with the CIA was classified information. (An MSNBC story from 9/29 also mentioned this, but I have been unable to find it---anyone who could e-mail me a link to the story, or to the questionaire itself?)

October 2, 2003: "The Plame Game", Howard Fineman. Originaly titled "Victoria's Secret" (Ooops!), this lays out a motivation for the leak - a CIA/Admin tug of war over Iraq policy.

October 2, 2003: "The Spy Who Loved Him," The New York Times, Maureen Dowd
Reveals, through an interview with Wilson, that Plame revealed to Wilson her CIA position "somewhere around their first kiss," leading others to speculate that she wasn't keeping her identity secret, as is required by the law in question, even though, in the column, Wilson remarks that "I had security clearance."

Oct 2, 2003: "Robert Novak's desperate damage control," Salon.com, Eric Boehlert
This is one example of many articles which cite an intelligence source confirmation of Plame's status as an undercover operator.

Oct. 4, 2003: "The Wilsons for Gore," syndicated column, Robert Novak, 10/4/03
In a follow-up column, Novak reveals that in 1999 Plame gave $1,000 to the Gore campaign, and that according to FEC records she listed her occupation as an "energy analyst" for Brewster-Jennings, which does not seem to have really existed and thus is probably a CIA front.

Oct. 4, 2003: "The Spin is Not Holding," The Nation, David Corn
This mostly repeats the Newsweek 10/6 piece but also gives more clues as to the the senior intelligence aide's identity, describing him or her as a "National Security Council staffer," and also claiming that he thinks he knows who this official is, but will not say because he or she might still be undercover.

Oct 6, 2003: "Secrets and Leaks," Newsweek, Evan Thomas and Michael Isikoff, 10/6?/2003
This piece sums up the events to that point and makes a few more revelations: two sources claim that Karl Rove called television commentator Chris Matthews after the 7/14 leak, and told him that he thought Plame's position with the CIA was relevant; also, it reports that a senior intelligence aide worked closely with Plame in the past.

Oct 8, 2003: "The Spy Next Door," The Washington Post, Richard Leiby and Dana Priest
This is a human-interest story about Joseph Wilson and Valerie Plame; implies that she traveled on "business trips" during the last five years.

Oct 8, 2003: Oct 8, 2003: "Criminal or Just Plain Stupid?" Newsweek web exclusive, Michael Isikoff and Mark Hosenball
This story reports that some "close to the events" believe that the initial Robert Novak leak was a misstep by one official, and that the other phone calls reported were by White House operatives after they had read Novak's piece.

Oct 10, 2003: "Leak of CIA officers leaves trail of damage," Knight-Ridder, Warren B. Strobel
Strobel gives more background on Plame, reports that address records indicate she may have worked with a European embassy at that time, although the State Department records do not show her name.

October 10, 2003: Boston Globe, "Apparent CIA front didn't offer much cover": Chill on the Brewster-Jennings revelation -

Plame's exposure as an intelligence operative has become a major controversy in Washington. Former intelligence officials confirmed Plame's cover was an invention and that she used other false identities and affiliations when working overseas. "All it was was a telephone and a post office box," said one former intelligence official who asked not to be identified. "When she was abroad she had a more viable cover."

Oct 11, 2003: "Secrets of the Scandal," The New York Times, Nicholas Kristof
Kristof makes several revelations: Plame's identity may already have been compromised by Aldrich Ames in 1994; Plame was steadily moving from non-official cover to official cover from the State Department; it was somewhat known in Washington that Plame had CIA connections, but her exact position was a well-guarded secret.

Oct 12, 2003: "Probe Focuses on Month Before Leak to Reporters," The Washington Post, Walter Pincus and Mike Allen
This article reveals that Wilson was a source for the Kristof 5/6 piece and the Post's 6/12 piece, also reveals that a Post reporter was contacted by administration officials about Plame on 7/12, and the anonymous source from the Post's 9/28 piece re-confirms his statements. Also mentions that investigators are looking into the NSC staffer who might have known of Plame's connection to Wilson.

Eventually, this story will be one of the reasons Pincus gets subpoenaed - he mentions an Admin source that gave info about the leaker on Jul 12.

Oct 17, 2003: "Memo May Aid Leak Probe," The Wall Street Journal, David S. Cloud
This article claims that an an internal CIA memo reveals Plame's connection to Wilson's Niger trip; it also reveals that Plame was involved with the clandestine network which monitors Iraq.

Oct 27, 2003: "NOC, NOC. Who's There? A Special Kind of Agent," TIME Magazine, Michael Duffy and Timothy J. Burger
This article reveals a few more tidbits about Plame: She only revealed her position to Wilson after several months of dating a thorough background check, and it confirms that she had non-deep non-official cover, (meaning that her background info was not elaborately designed), and she worked under official cover in a European city in the early 90s, and that her non-official cover was beginning to unravel due to her high-profile marriage.

Oct 27, 2003: "The Stovepipe", New Yorker, Seymour Hersh. Important for flavor. More on the forgeries, the handling of intelligence (some of which stood up), and Wild CIA Conspiracy theory - rogue CIA planted the forgeries. Vigorously debunked in "Seymour Hersh’s Pipedream" by Dennis Hans.

Oct 31, 2003: "Unfair Game / Joseph Wilson on the cost of telling the truth in Washington", LA Weekly, Ben Ehrenreich

Excerpt: Q: Do you think it’s possible that the president himself did not know the information that you brought back from Niger before he gave the State of the Union speech?

WILSON: I think it’s highly likely that the truth was kept from him. The question for me is who so betrayed the president as to allow this lie to get into the State of the Union address? It wasn’t me. It was somebody from his own staff. It was a manipulation of intelligence, a twisting of intelligence, the selective use of facts or fiction to bolster a political decision that had already been made.

Dec 3, 2003: Whopper: Joseph Wilson. Tim Noah, formerly sympathetic, turns on Wilson viciously. But hysterically!

Feb 10, 2004: One x Two x Six: The NY Times "Top Bush Aide Is Questioned in C.I.A. Leak", David Johnston; and the Washington Post, "Bush Aides Testify in Leak Probe", Mike Allen and Susan Schmidt.

These two stories need to be read side by side to capture the true hall-of-mirrors aspect of the scandal, which has devolved into the press covering the attempts by the prosecutor to learn what the press already knows - who leaked?

Great detail from the Times, near the end:

...But more recently, prosecutors have focused on a Sept. 28, 2003, article in The Washington Post, which said the newspaper had been told that "yesterday, a senior administration official said that before Novak's column ran, two top White House officials called at least six Washington journalists and disclosed the identity and occupation of Wilson's wife."

The Sept. 28 WaPo article is featured above, and carries Mike Allen's byline. Mr. Allen also wrote the Feb 10 piece updating the investigation. However, WaPo readers were not informed that the investigators were pursuing leads generated by the WaPo reporter. Is thathow big-time reportes cover a story?

January 17, 2004: Vanity Fair profile, which confirms his leak to Kristof:
In early May, Wilson and Plame attended a conference sponsored by the Senate Democratic Policy Committee, at which Wilson spoke about Iraq; one of the other panelists was the New York Times journalist Nicholas Kristof. Over breakfast the next morning with Kristof and his wife, Wilson told about his trip to Niger and said Kristof could write about it, but not name him.

May 3, 2004: Joe Wilson on Larry King Live to promote his book. An excerpt to aid future Google searches:
WILSON: They didn't. As the story started circulating Dr. Condoleezza Rice, national security adviser, was interviewed on "Meet the Press" in June and she said that well, maybe someone in the bowels of the agency, referring to the CIA, might have known something about this but no one in my circle. That was simply not true. As it turns out, not only by what I knew then, but as it turns out in the aftermath of the article that I published.

May 23, 2004: "Don't Tread on Joseph Wilson", John Dean's review of Wilson's book in the NY Times. Dean has articles sympathetic to Wilson cited above.

July 9, 2004: Senate Intelligence report. A section devoted to Niger provides lots of news on Wilson.

July 10, 2004: Washington Post, Susan Schmidt, "Plame's Input Is Cited on Niger Mission"

July 10, 2004: A vicious, self-indulgent reprise by yours truly.

July 10, 2004: Pejman rounds up some links.

July 13, 2004: "Will Nick Kristof Come In From The Cold?":
My commentary pulling together earlier stories and the new Senate report.

July 14, 2004: NY Times: How Niger Uranium Story Defied Wide Skepticism; By James Risen
The RSS perma-link is not available, so here is an excerpt from their Wilson coverage:

Instead of assigning a trained intelligence officer to the Niger case, though, the C.I.A. sent a former American ambassador, Joseph Wilson, to talk to former Niger officials. His wife, Valerie Plame, was an officer in the counterproliferation division, and she had suggested that he be sent to Niger, according to the Senate report.

That finding contradicts previous statements by Mr. Wilson, who publicly criticized the Bush administration last year for using the Niger evidence to help justify the war in Iraq. After his wife's identity as a C.I.A. officer was leaked to the news media, Mr. Wilson said she had not played a role in his assignment, and argued that her C.I.A. employment had been disclosed to punish him. The F.B.I. is investigating the source of the leak about Ms. Plame, which was classified information.

More excerpts here.

July 15, 2004: Wall Street Journal, "The Yellowcake Con": The Wilson-Plame "scandal" was political pulp fiction. [Excerpts, my commentary]

July 15, 2004: LA Times, "Merit Seen in Claims That Iraq Sought Uranium"
Reprises Joe Wilson's saga; my excerpts, commentary.

July 16, 2004: Joe Wilson responds: "The Senate's bad intelligence", Salon (Back-up here, or here.)
Commentary from Jonah Goldberg; Capt. Ed Morrissey, yours truly, Memeorandum.

July 16, 2004: Joe Wilson's letter to the Washington Post. Bob Somerby comments on this.

July 18: Mark Steyn, "How a serial liar suckered Dems and the media"
An amusing tirade that makes the political connection to Kerry.

July 18, 2004: "New Reports Again Question Whether Iraq Sought Uranium in Niger", Richard W. Stevenson and David Johnston, NY Times.
My commentary.

July 18, 2004: The Wilson-Plame Affair (Cont'd)
Michael Getler, the WaPo ombudsman, responds to Wilson's letter to Post.
...Wilson, in his letter, refers to "the Republican-written" report. It is a bipartisan report. Wilson says "the decision to send me to Niger was not made, and could not be made, by Valerie." Neither the report, nor the story, says she made "the decision."

July 18, 2004: CNN Late Edition, Wolf Blitzer. Wilson reviews the allegations against him.
BLITZER: So when the committee says that you told them you had misspoken, what did you misspeak?

WILSON: Well, actually, what I misspoke was, when I misspoke to the committee, when I spoke to the staff -- this interview took place 15 months after The Washington Post article appeared. I did not have a chance to review the article. They did not show me the article.

They threw it out there, and the question I took as being a rather generic question: Could you have misspoken? Yes, I am male, I'm over 50. By definition, I can misspeak. I have gone back since and taken a look at this particular article. It refers to an unidentified former government official. If it is referring to me, it is a misattribution, of facts that were already in the public domain and had been so since March.

My first public statement on this, in my own words, was on July 6th.

July 19, 2004: Weekly Standard, "A Little Literary Flair", Matthew Continetti
Lots of media clips catching Joe in action. A Lexis-Nexis bonanza!
Kristof, the first of Wilson's many journalistic victims, accepted Wilson's claims at face value. "I do know from talking to people directly involved in the Niger deal that information did go to the vice president's office and did go to the national security staff in the White House and went to the top of the CIA," he told an NPR interviewer on June 25, 2003.

July 19, 2004: "Defending Joe Wilson", David Corn, The Nation

July 19, 2004: Paula Zahn interviews Joe Wilson, who explains his press problem - they all misquoted me!
ZAHN: I want you to respond to that very specific allegation in the addendum to the Senate report, which basically says that your public comments not only are incorrect, but have no basis in fact.

WILSON: Well, I'm not exactly sure what public comments they're referring to. If they're referring to leaks or sources, unidentified government sources in articles that appeared before my article in "The New York Times" appeared, those are either misquotes or misattributions if they're attributed to me.

July 20, 2004: Bob Somerby, The Daily Howler. A lefty media critic buries Wilson. For language and content , rated "R" - Democratic reader discretion advised.

July 24, 2004: Weekly Standard, "Dupes R Us", Matthew Continetti
Follows up with Pincus, Kristof, and The New Republic on Continetti's July 19 piece.

OVER THE LAST FEW DAYS, ever since Ambassador Joseph Wilson's credibility was thrown into question by the Senate Select Committee's report on prewar Iraq intelligence, the ambassador has taken to the airwaves to defend himself. How do you respond, he's been asked, to charges that, in numerous conversations with reporters over the last year, you inflated your role in "debunking" foreign government intelligence reporting which suggested Saddam Hussein's Iraq sought uranium from Africa? And Wilson gave his answer. He blamed the reporters he had snookered only months before.

Thing is, the reporters don't seem to mind.

Aug 10 - VPW - Reporters Subpoenaed

Aug 13, 2003: VPW - Judith Miller Of the NY Times Subpoenaed in Plame Investigation

Sep 16 - Post Source Reveals Identity to Leak Probers; Susan Schmidt. The Baseball Crank has a summary.

Nov 26 - The When and How of Leak Being Probed; Susan Schmidt, WaPo.

Editor and Publisher follows up: New Twist in Plame Game: When Did Novak Column Move on the Wires?

From the WaPo: "While Novak's column did not run until Monday, July 14, it could have been seen by people in the White House or the media as early as Friday, July 11, when the Creators Syndicate distributed it over the Associated Press wire."

For an alternative perspective: The Mark Kleiman Archive - a collection of commentary and links from the left.

Comments

Tom,

I'd add the July 18, 2003 White House "Background Briefing" where the National Intelligence Estimate excerpts were declassified. The NIE points up the uncertainty and conflicting estimates regarding Iraq's nuclear program. The press briefing walks through the SOTU vetting process, points up Wilson's report of the trade delegation meeting, and places his report in perspective. Best bit:

"The information came back saying that a government official denied a transaction with Iraq. It's not too surprising that somebody might deny something like that. Secondly, in that document what it did say was that the person that we later learned out to be Ambassador Wilson said was that the person acknowledged that the meeting took place, and that he thought the meeting was about yellow cake, which confirms what is being said, which is "they're seeking." It didn't say there was a transaction. We never said there was a transaction. Said they were seeking it.

"So if you get this one data point and you look at that, you can't draw a conclusion that we were warned by Ambassador Wilson that this was all dubious. It's just not accurate."

Posted by: Cecil Turner | July 18, 2004 at 12:08 PM

Good point, and done.

Posted by: TM | July 20, 2004 at 06:32 AM

A couple of links for:

Ex-envoy not afraid to speak out

By Richard Leiby / Washington Post

WASHINGTON -- Former diplomat Joseph Wilson used to tell reporters he felt certain how his obituary would read. It went: "Joseph C. Wilson IV, who was the last American diplomat to meet with Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, died ..."

But "it seems to change," Wilson says, smiling across his desk in his Washington office. He has kept mentally revising the obituary to keep up with the political maelstrom over Iraq policy and White House leaks that is swirling around him.

A recent version began: "Joseph C. Wilson IV, the Bush I administration political appointee who did the most damage to the Bush II administration ..."

The current version goes: "Joseph C. Wilson IV, the husband of the spy the White House outed, ..."

http://www.detnews.com/2003/nation/0310/02/a04-286881.htm

http://www.brothersjudd.com/blog/archives/008229.html

Posted by: TM | July 24, 2004 at 08:59 PM

http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=222

Bushs "16 Words" on Iraq & Uranium: He May Have Been Wrong But He Wasn't Lying

Annenberg Fact Check

Posted by: TM | July 27, 2004 at 11:43 PM

Seymour Hersh, March New Yorker on the forgeries:

http://newyorker.com/fact/content/?030331fa_fact1

WHO LIED TO WHOM?
by SEYMOUR M. HERSH
Why did the Administration endorse a forgery about Iraq’s nuclear program?
Issue of 2003-03-31
Posted 2003-03-24

Last September 24th, as Congress prepared to vote on the resolution authorizing President George W. Bush to wage war in Iraq, a group of senior intelligence officials, including George Tenet, the Director of Central Intelligence, briefed the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Iraq’s weapons capability.

Posted by: TM | August 01, 2004 at 09:39 AM

Joe Wilson's story is that he didn't speak out about the SOTU right away because, despite calling some State dept contacts, he only later learned that "Africa" meant "Niger".

This State Dept sheet from Dec 2002 identifies Niger. Troubling.

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2002/16118.htm

Illustrative Examples of Omissions From the Iraqi Declaration to the United Nations Security Council

...Nuclear Weapons

The Declaration ignores efforts to procure uranium from Niger.*
Why is the Iraqi regime hiding their uranium procurement?

Posted by: TM | August 01, 2004 at 09:42 AM

Lots of links at Joe's:

http://www.politicsoftruth.com/news_archive.html

Posted by: TM | August 01, 2004 at 01:31 PM

French Probe Led to
'Fake Niger Uranium Papers'
By Mark Huband

http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/justify/2004/0802niger.htm

Isn't this Marshall's big scoop?

Also, some lefty's timeline (I may be repeating)

http://www.missouri.edu/~quinnl/news/wilson.html

Posted by: TM | August 08, 2004 at 06:58 PM

Fox News - John Hurley of Kerry campaign "backpedals" on first Purple Heart:

Asked earlier this month about whether the wound may have been unintentionally self-inflicted, Kerry defender and National Director of Veterans for Kerry (search) John Hurley said: "Anything is possible, but what you have to remember is that John Kerry that night was on a small boat, a 14 to 15 foot Boston whaler, with two other men, going into an inlet where intelligence had told them the VC was using as a crossing, trafficking in contraband. They went in there; they saw VC; they popped a flare; they took them under fire. At some point John Kerry felt a stinging burning sensation in his arm, and was injured."

He added that the only men who would know for sure what happened were the three men on that operation — Kerry, Pat Runyan and Bill Zeladonous.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,129838,00.html

Posted by: TM | August 25, 2004 at 12:43 AM

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A45277-2004Aug29.html

Bush's Leadership Style: Decisive or Simplistic?

By Mike Allen and David S. Broder
Washington Post Staff Writers
Monday, August 30, 2004; Page A01

With his speech Thursday night to the Republican National Convention, President Bush will be inviting voters to endorse not only a set of policies -- but also a style of leadership.

Republicans draw a sharp contrast between what they portray as Bush's directness and what they call rival John F. Kerry's tendency to worry issues to death. White House aides describe a president who gathers a small circle of trusted advisers, listens to brief debates and then offers swift, gut-based solutions to problems.

Posted by: TM | August 30, 2004 at 03:34 AM

Hmm, where are you getting the five years outside U.S. thing? I don't see it there. I see five years imprisonment. But this lawyer gets tired of looking at statutes so if it is there please point it out.

Posted by: Rob W | February 10, 2005 at 06:55 PM

Hey Rob,
It's from the definitions subsection of the national security code:
"(4) The term ''covert agent'' means -
(A) a present or retired officer or employee of an
intelligence agency or a present or retired member of the Armed
Forces assigned to duty with an intelligence agency -
(i) whose identity as such an officer, employee, or member
is classified information, and
(ii) who is serving outside the United States or has within
the last five years served outside the United States; or" . . .

Posted by: Cecil Turner | February 12, 2005 at 08:25 AM

The following articles can't be discounted in this matter as they address CIA and Senate Intelligence Committee leaks prior to the situation and afterward which reference the Niger incident.

White House Silenced Experts Who Questioned Iraq Intel Six Months Before War

by Jason Leopold
June 12, 2003
Antiwar.com
http://www.antiwar.com/orig/leopold6.html

Ray McGovern, "Cheney, Forgery and the CIA," CounterPunch, June 27, 2003; Seymour Hersh, "Who Lied to Whom?," New Yorker, March 31, 2003; Josh Marshall, "A rose is a rose is a rose," The Hill, July 1, 2003

Wilson working on book on life as a diplomat – and the leak
By Jennifer C. Kerr
ASSOCIATED PRESS
2:01 p.m. October 8, 2003

Wilson's publishers state they negotiated a book deal with Wilson BEFORE the leak controversy was made public. (How could he make a book deal about a leak when the leak was made public the same day?)

Above are all leaks allegedly prior to the "outing" -

After "outing"

7/8/03 the President is in Africa at the time of the Wilson public disclosure about Niger

Bush starts mission to Africa; President is looking for oil and help in war on terrorism, writes Tim Butcher, Africa Correspondent.(News)
«Read the Full Article, Sign up today»

Daily Telegraph (London, England); 7/8/2003; Butcher, Tim

Search for more information on HighBeam Research for President Bush Africa mission.

GEORGE W Bush arrives this morning for a five-nation tour of Africa, in what is widely seen as the start of a new engagement between America and the continent.

Wolfowitz Committee Instructed White House To Use Iraq/Uranium Reference
—By Jason Leopold, Information Clearing House

July 2003 Issue Utne http://www.utne.com/web_special/web_specials_2003-07/articles/10705-1.html

Senators of Intelligence Committee and CIA official leaking information about the Niger incident.

Same Article, dated July 17, 2003 www.antiwar.com

Same title 7/16/03 - http://www.dangerouscitizen.com/Articles/762.aspx

CIA agents Leaking to Hirsch

Same title 7/16/03 Leopold listing himself as Online Journal Assistant Editor (Same one that reported Burkett allegations and subsequent similar forgeries http://www.apfn.net/messageboard/7-17-03/discussion.cgi.17.html

Online Journal Link, not working:

http://www.onlinejournal.com/Special_Reports/07-16-03Leopold/07-1603leopold.html

Most fascinating of all the reporters covering this the hardest, Leopold--his onlinejournal.com is involved in two situations of forged documents, the Niger forgeries AND the Burkett forgeries. Leopold is very close to Diane Feinsten and Barbara Boxer, both on intelligence committees and is located in San Francisco where both maintain offices.

Posted by: L. Bruzzone | June 02, 2005 at 05:33 AM

A few weeks back, about the time that things were heating up in the news, I read somewhere that Matt Cooper had written a TIME "online" article on the Wilson/Niger issue. It said that while Miller had not published articles on the Plame affair, Cooper indeed had written an online piece, but that he did not mention Plame's name.

I am unable to find a) the date/time of Matt Cooper's online article and b) the text of the article.

Anyone know these details? I'm especially curious whether he posted his article before Novak's July 14, 2003 "Mission to Niger".

Posted by: M. Marion | July 15, 2005 at 09:50 AM

The timeline doesn't mention that this Wilson/yellowcake/CIA agent wife story had no legs until after Joe Wilson met with Chris Lehane (according Wilson's own statements) in May of that year, and unofficially joined the Kerry campaign as a foreign policy adviser.

Posted by: DD Shaw | July 17, 2005 at 11:49 PM

The 7/21/2003 Newsday article is no longer available. Here's a link to a reprint:
http://foi.missouri.edu/voicesdissent/columnistnames.html

Posted by: Jack Ford | July 23, 2005 at 09:25 PM

In all of this laborius writing there is no mention of a leak from the grand jury that on Airforce One before the Novak column, the President was reading a report about the uranium story. In it was one small paragraph about who was Valerie Plame, Wilson's wife.
On the plane were a number of reporters, Rove and of course the President. Who's to say that it wasn't the President who inadvertaently shared "off the record" the written report, and is indeed the unwitting culprit!??!

Posted by: Dora Knell | July 24, 2005 at 10:32 PM

Check out this timeline...I put in a few things about Rove / Novak history of dirty tricks and ...more...
http://www.newsfollowup.com/leakgate1.htm
SCF

Posted by: Steve Francis | August 03, 2005 at 04:54 PM

Here is Editor and Publisher chatting with Walter Pincus, May 31, 2005:

http://64.233.179.104/search?q=cache:2JnCqXQh_OgJ:archives.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/search/article_display.jsp%3Fschema%3D%26vnu_content_id%3D1000938744%26WebLogicSession%3DQuoAd6o06KlZ9CtoOb8StDlpbhdrZqWbNKlJWPf6uCZyKiEqKIQa%257C-2394037397435817964/181605427/6/7005/7005/7002/7002/7005/-1+%22Libby+was+not+my+source+but+was+someone+%22&hl=en

Was It Proper for 'WP' Reporter to Talk to Plame Prosecutor?

By Allan Wolper

Published: May 31, 2005 11:35 AM ET

NEW YORK Washington Post investigative reporter Walter Pincus insists his two-hour deposition in the Valerie Plame CIA-leak case was within ethical guidelines, even though it remains hidden from public view. "My source's lawyer spoke to my lawyer," Pincus told me. "The special prosecutor knew who my source was."

Pincus asked E&P if he could respond to David Kidwell, a reporter for The Miami Herald, who criticized him for cooperating with Special Prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald's crusade to out the Plame leaker and imprison some of the reporters to whom he leaked. "When reporters cut deals, when they rationalize themselves by testifying, they are acting as a government snitch," Kidwell had told me for an April column. "What is a judge to think when [Tim] Russert and the others have said that principles are not that important?"

Pincus, Russert, Glenn Kessler of The Washington Post, and Matt Cooper of Time Magazine all testified in the case. Cooper was subpoenaed a second time and was found in contempt by a federal court judge along with Judith Miller of The New York Times, who has refused to provide any testimony. Meanwhile, Fitzgerald, a U.S. Attorney in Chicago, disclosed in court papers that his investigation into the leak had been virtually completed last October.

Pincus, Russert, Kessler, and Cooper all were accompanied by their lawyers when they testified and can discuss everything that they told the special prosecutor. Pincus, a 71-year-old reporter who is also an attorney, said he has provided reporters with copies of the statement he read to the prosecutor before his deposition, which said: "As someone who covers national security and intelligence I depend on confidential sources more than most reporters. My sources take a chance when they trust me with information that could cost them their jobs or have other serious consequences. In turn, I will protect them."

He repeated that in an interview with the Columbia Journalism Review. But none of the reporters who testified have provided any details other than to say their sources gave them permission to testify.

What did Pincus tell Fitzgerald? "He never asked me the name of my source, because the prosecutor knew who my source was," Pincus said. "The prosecutor asked me what time I received a telephone call from my source and did I talk to more than one source."

Pincus said that Fitzgerald asked him about Lewis (Scooter) Libby, chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney. Libby, a source in the case to Russert, Kessler, and Cooper, signed a waiver giving them permission to testify.

"Libby was not my source but was someone I spoke to on a confidential basis," Pincus said. "I had written about Wilson's trip [to Africa] and spoke to everyone involved in it." Wilson is Ambassador Joseph Wilson, husband of Valerie Plame.

Pincus added, "My case is different than the other reporters because I wrote about the conversation I had with my source [in The Washington Post]. And my source came forward to Fitzgerald. And when a source discloses himself to a prosecutor and then releases you from confidentiality with that prosecutor, I don't think a reporter has a leg to stand on."

Legally or ethically? "Both," Pincus responded. "I have a law degree. The privilege doesn't belong to the reporter. It belongs to the source. We're citizens like everyone else."

How did Pincus know whether the White House pressured his source to sign a waiver to give him the right to testify? "I don't believe in waivers," Pincus said. "But a source can do anything he wants to do. When a source comes forward, who are you protecting?"

Posted by: TM | December 10, 2005 at 04:00 PM

Missed in the timeline?
July 8 2003 Documents declassified
Is this accurate?

Posted by: Thomas Esmond Knox | April 20, 2006 at 02:21 AM

Always yield to temptation, because it may not pass your way again. Thanks good site.
http://airlinefares.sprayblog.se find discount airline fares from philadelphia to sacramentohttp://cheapairticketss.sprayblog.se fheap airline ticketshttp://debtcnsolid.sprayblog.se low debt consolidationhttp://airlinefares.sprayblog.se y up airline fares

Posted by: lhyameeo | June 27, 2007 at 04:18 PM

Always yield to temptation, because it may not pass your way again. Thanks good site.
http://tgfdg.flyboard.ru tylenol 4

Posted by: rzrvswrk | July 01, 2007 at 05:39 PM

Posted by: Freeadultsexx | July 13, 2007 at 09:25 AM

Posted by: Freeadultsexx | July 13, 2007 at 09:32 AM

Posted by: Freeadultsexx | July 13, 2007 at 11:57 AM

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

Posted by: |

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:

Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Footnotes

Check This!

Private Collection

Google Ad

Newsmakers - Right

Newsmakers - Unclaimed

Newsmakers - Left

Media

Blog Roll

Useful Stuff

Memeorandum

Prediction Markets

July 14, 2004

The Joseph Wilson / Valerie Plame Timeline

Comments

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

Post a comment

Poll

Sell Out (1)

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Archives

Traffic

Wilson/Plame

Plamaniacs

Amazon