Memeorandum


Powered by TypePad

« Libby And Rove - Check The Markets | Main | I Red-Pen Murray Waas (Again) »

October 18, 2005

Comments

Devin McCullen

Wait a minute. The goofy brother from the Mummy movies? He's in the middle of all this?

Steve J.

Like Howard Fineman said, the tip of the lance that will pierce this criminal Administration is their lies about Iraq.

flackcatcher

GOOD GRIEF! Do you folks know how crazy you sound.(And people wonder why I got out D.C.)

Patrick R. Sullivan

The Rawstory article is co-authored by Jason Leopold, who I'm proud to say called me a right wing nazi in the comments section of Brad DeLong's blog where I was starring in a humiliation of Paul Krugman over Krugman running with one of Leopold's other fictions; that then Sec'y of the Army Tom White had engaged in multi-million dollar securities fraud while at Enron.

Leopold managed to get fired from Salon over it. I'm guessing he's up to his old tricks with this on Hannah.

http://www.j-bradford-delong.net/movable_type/archives/000947.html

TCO

wow. This doesn't sound good for the home team.

I actually don't consider the leaking that bad. (I'm sure that the "outing" was accidental...people did not know Plame was NOC and it did not do real damage*). But if they leaked and then got called on it...they should have admitted it and took their lumps immediately. Cover up is unconsionable. I don't want liars in my white house. (And I'm a repug.)


*That said, I agree that even inadvertant releases of classified information are wrong and prosecutable.

Toby Petzold

I've read a lot of melodramatic and self-important crap about how terrible it is that Valerie Plame's identity was exposed and what it means for God, country, and the CIA. I'm not impressed. If that woman ---Mrs. Wilson--- was so concerned about her secret identity, then she should have dissuaded her husband from betraying the trust that her employers put in him when he went and told his story in the pages of the New York Times. But, as should be clear to all, the Wilsons had no interest in preserving her secret identity because that would have defeated their purpose: achieving martyrdom and celebrity.

Let these indictments come. It'll give us all a chance to revisit the many lies of Joe Wilson ---and, maybe in the bargain, expose Big Media's extreme interest in sabotaging our war efforts.

macranger

Christopher Dickey, sort of confirms a theory of mine (sort of confirmed by Agency friends), that Ahmed maybe the source.

Man would that be a 'pisser'....

Sue

A pisser for who?

TCO

Who is ahmed. And dish a little more, company man...

red dog

Per the main part of the thread...Ahmed Chalabi

TCO

Ok...I don't know who that is...but ok...will figure it out. (and he was barely mentioned in the thread...had to look for the name pretty hard).

On other topic, I think TM is getting a bit pedantic to hold out for the use of "senior" as proving wrong a labeling of Hannah. Senior is in the eye of the beyolder. Besides, Novak already said that he misused the word "operative" and now you want to trust him for word precision?

Syl

What in hell is the BIG DEAL about getting intelligence analyzed that originated from the INC? I know in information gathering circles, data from defectors has to be especially scrutinized because of motive. But you can't simply IGNORE it either.

And it doesn't look like Hannah got the raw stuff anyway. The State Dept. analysis (INR?) should indicate degree of plausibility.

And this goes right to the battle between INR and WINPAC over Iraq intelligence. INR didn't want to believe it, WINPAC (most of them) did.

See my comment here regarding INR vs WINPAC.

That WINPAC won the battle over INR is maddening to the Left and anti-war types...especially since the intelligence provided by Chalabi turned out to be mainly false and no WMD stockpiles were found.

Obviously Hannah et al erred on the side of caution.

And what's this bit in the Newsweek article about 'imminent threat'. That bs rears its ugly head again.

Iraq was not an imminent threat to America. That only comes in to play IF we attack Saddam and he attempts to retaliate. It has nothing to do with the threat we feared Iraq would become if we left him alone.

The Iraq war was never a question of 'yes' or 'no'. It was simply a matter of 'now' or 'later'. And 'later' was deemed to be too late.

topsecretk9

Waas has abandoned the Cheney line and is back on Libby, Maybe too many giddy with thought of VP Condi.

Rick Ballard

Toby,

I almost agree with you in hoping for at least one indictment. An affirmative defense would probably involve having Victoria's Secret Flame Wilson on the stand explaining why all the press hounds were at her hubby's soiree two days before the NYT elevated him to "worst liar ever to appear on the editorial page". I'd especially like to see her explain the length and depth of her relationship with Corn, Pincus et al. It would be, at minimum, entertaining and possibly very enlightening.

topsecretk9

and hey, TM never took up the AP and Reuters 3 sneakies saying Val didn't work WINPAC but "covert" DO

CaseyL

"Let these indictments come. It'll give us all a chance to revisit the many lies of Joe Wilson ---and, maybe in the bargain, expose Big Media's extreme interest in sabotaging our war efforts.

Excellent, Toby! You're an invaluable member of the "I Know Wilson's Gonna Be Indicted, I Just KNOW It" Club.

I think you and Seven Machos should get together and concoct the Super Secret Super Truth, about how Joe Wilson and Valerie Plame are the real reasons Iraq went FUBAR. Extra points if you can blame them for 9/11, too!

Syl

Wilson's Corn article was disinformation. I think Wilson was trying to panic those who revealed his wife worked at the CIA.

Perhaps force them to attempt to cover-up. And move focus away from his wife's real work for the agency.

Brad DeLong

Patrick Sullivan should have given this URL as well: http://www.j-bradford-delong.net/movable_type/2003_archives/002969.html. It's recommended to those who are curious about Tom White's role at ENRON.

topsecretk9

Syl

so the cia guy, harlow, who spoke to Novak 2ce screwed up?

topsecretk9

this is a semi- wrinkle in the raw story

"Mr. Bennett called Mr. Tate on Aug. 31. Mr. Tate told Mr. Bennett that Mr. Libby had given permission to Ms. Miller to testify a year earlier. "I called Tate and this guy could not have been clearer - 'Bob, my client has given a waiver,' " Mr. Bennett said."

topsecretk9

oops--meant Waas story, my bad

topsecretk9

Lessons on Millers note taking skills

new newsweek

.. "For some reason none of us had a tape recorder, so on the flight back to Casablanca we compared our notes from the one interview we’d had with a Moroccan general a few hours before. We wanted to be sure the phrases we’d scribbled down were accurate. But there was a problem. Judy had many more quotes in her notebook than I and another reporter had in ours. And Judy’s were much better. Then I realized why. I’d done a lot more homework on that particular story than she did, and I was asking much more detailed questions. She’d written them down, and now she thought they came from the general, but many of the quotes actually were from … me." ...

"Given the way Judy takes notes, I’m not surprised that she can’t remember who first gave her the name of “Flame.” I’ve even seen speculation that it came from one of her other not-so-reliable sources, Iraqi exile leader (and now vice president) Ahmad Chalabi, who peddled so many of the WMD rumors that wound up as facts in the Times. Ahmad keeps close tabs on his enemies, and I know first-hand that he counted many people at the C.I.A. on that list. When I e-mailed one of Chalabi’s aides to ask point blank if Chalabi was Judy’s source for Plame’s name, the aide responded: “Come on Chris … get back to serious work.” That seemed like a non-denial denial, so I asked again. “I'm not going to dignify it any further,” was the reply. “It is utter rubbish and you really should know better than to even listen to such rehashed '...' claptrap.”

So, I don’t know if Ahmad was the source. But I do know this. His agenda was to get Saddam ousted at any price..."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9742110/site/newsweek/

jukeboxgrad

Syl said "Iraq was not an imminent threat to America."

Maybe you weren't paying attention when Bush said "the Iraqi regime could launch a biological or chemical attack in as little as 45 minutes after the order were given."

Or maybe you have a peculiar definition of "imminent." Or maybe you're acknowledging that Bush was full of it.

TM

TM never took up the AP and Reuters 3 sneakies saying Val didn't work WINPAC but "covert" DO

Good point, and if anyone sees any sensible guess as to what that means, clue me in.

My only stab at it now - since Fred Fleitz was at WINPAC, *MAYBE* someone confused "Fred knows her from WINPAC" with "Fred works with her at WINPAC".

TCO

Wasn't Krugman at Enron?!? When I was at McKinsey, the place was thick with Democrat types who touted Enron all the time. It was all part of their New Economy shill. And Gupta was thick with the Clintons...

TCO

If Iraq was an imminent threat, then why did we take 14 months to argue the war before going in? I agree that Bush admin was wrong in Iraq having missiles on the rails. But the main issue was "now or later".

I gave Bush2 the bene of the doubt on the WMDs since I had disbeleived Bush1 about them with the previous war and then we found out it was worse than we thought. And never forget that the pacifist Senate demos voted against GW1 in droves (44 of them) even though Iraq had entered Kuwait and 5 miles into Saudi Arabia.

ATM

Wasn't it Blair who said the 45 minute thing?

Rick Ballard

"Good point, and if anyone sees any sensible guess as to what that means, clue me in."

Geez, Tom, why can't we use NYT/WaPo journalism standards and just make somethin' up? Or can I write it up on my blog and ask Syl to cite it?

Syl

JBG

Your reading comprehension skills are the reason you're usually out in la-la land. Read my comment again.

'Imminent' threat only comes to bear IF we attack Saddam and he retaliates. Iraq as imminent threat was never used as a justification for removing Saddam.

Seven Machos

I have no idea about the validity of this. However, Hannah definitely and without any question falls into the "senior administration official" category. He is also "no partisan gunslinger." Of course, so is Chalabi.

My hunch is that this is important news, but that the left is making way too much hay with it and trying too hard (as usual) to make it into some kind of death blow against the administration (proabably because BUSH LIED!!!!). I note that Hannah, A TARGET, has not spent the equivalent of a day with the grand jury. That's how it's done, kids. Make a note of it. Especially you, Geek, because it may come up on one of your law-school exams.

Neither Libby nor Rove will be indicted.

Syl

topsecretk9

"so the cia guy, harlow, who spoke to Novak 2ce screwed up?"

That's never been in doubt. Valery's status was NOC and Harlow should never have confirmed anything.

Tollhouse

This is getting even better.

It's like the roulette table. Pick any person from the Bush admin, and someone will manage to point the finger that way.

Rove, Libby, Bolton, Cheney, Fleischer, Rove, Bolton, Hannah, Harry, Houdini, Bush, Rice, Rove, Ramirez, Rather, Miller, Libby....

Around and around we go. :) Getting whiplash.

topsecretk9

That's never been in doubt. Valery's status was NOC and Harlow should never have confirmed anything.

yes I knew that, what I should have said is really, really screwed up

macranger

At least the MSM isn't hiding the agenda anymore...

"Special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald's CIA-leak inquiry is focusing attention on what long has been a tactic of U.S. President George W. Bush's administration: slash-and-burn assaults on its critics, particularly those opposed to the president's Iraq war policies."

More http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/10/18/leakprobe.ap/index.html

Heh....

topsecretk9

NYT's story- of course seen as bad news for Bush, but considering he has no obligation and the secrecy with GJ

No Final Report Seen in Inquiry on C.I.A. Leak

By DAVID JOHNSTON and RICHARD W. STEVENSON
WASHINGTON, Oct. 18 - The special counsel in the C.I.A. leak case has told associates he has no plans to issue a final report about the results of the investigation, heightening the expectation that he intends to bring indictments, lawyers in the case and law enforcement officials say.

The prosecutor, Patrick J. Fitzgerald, is not expected to take any action in the case this week, government officials said. A spokesman for Mr. Fitzgerald, Randall Samborn, declined to comment.

A final report had long been considered an option for Mr. Fitzgerald if he decided not to accuse anyone of wrongdoing, although Justice Department officials have been dubious about his legal authority to issue such a report.

By signaling that he had no plans to issue the grand jury's findings in such detail, Mr. Fitzgerald appeared to narrow his options either to indictments or closing his investigation with no public disclosure of his findings, a choice that would set off a political firestorm.

With the term of the grand jury expiring Oct. 28, lawyers in the case said they assumed Mr. Fitzgerald was in the final stages of his inquiry.

The focus of Mr. Fitzgerald's inquiry has remained fixed on two senior White House aides, Karl Rove, who is President Bush's senior adviser and deputy chief of staff, and I. Lewis Libby Jr., who is Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff. Both had conversations with reporters about a C.I.A. officer whose name was later publicly disclosed.

It is not clear whether Mr. Fitzgerald has learned who first identified the C.I.A. officer, Valerie Wilson, to the syndicated columnist Robert D. Novak in July 2003.

Some of the lawyers in the case say Mr. Fitzgerald seems to be wrestling with decisions about how to proceed, leaning toward indictments but continuing to weigh thousands of pages of documents and testimony he has compiled during the nearly two-year inquiry.

In recent days, Mr. Fitzgerald has repeatedly told lawyers in the case that he has not made up his mind about criminal charges.

http://nytimes.com/2005/10/19/politics/19leak.html?ei=5094&en=adcf3adabff56617&hp=&ex=1129694400&partner=homepage&pagewanted=print


22 months and it's still not clear cut

syn

Bush said "we cannot wait until Saddam BECOMES an imminent threat" but some doofus reporter over at the NY Times bastardized the quote to invoke a completely different message that Saddam was an imminent threat.

And, that was Blair who mentioned the 45 minute threat.

Sheeple, get your Hilter's straight!:)

TCO

sorry...not a Plameaholic. What is the AP and 3 sneakies a ref to? Linkie thingie?

Lee

Does anybody have information if the CIA has ever stated if Plame was indeed "covert" at the time she was mentioned in the Novak article? I believe Novak wrote that he contacted the CIA and said that he was going to use Plame's name in an article and the CIA had no problem with him using her name. If that is the case, what is all this "disclosing an covert operative, deep cover, super spy" bullshit all about. If she was driving to work everyday to Langley, going to parties with Joe "I'll have another sweet mint tea, please" Wilson and posing for Vanity Fair, how undercover or covert could she be. If she was just a desk jockey at CIA, this whole investigation is nothing but a JOKE!

TCO

Did Rove and Libby tell the press spokesmodel that they had "nothing to do" with the Plame outing? If so, and they did, then they need to get fired just for that. I will listen to an argument that they weren't really involved or that there was some miscommunication. But if there was deliberate dishonesty (or Clintonian deception) with the spokesguy, I want those guys gone.

Is that clear?

ordi

The Administration FULL quote is

And according to the British government, the Iraqi regime could launch a biological or chemical attack in as little as 45 minutes after the order were given.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/09/20020926-7.html

and

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/09/20020928.html

As to President Bush saying Iraq was an 'Imminent' threat, it is revisionist spin!

In President Bush's State of the Union Address in January 03,

'Some have said we must not act until the threat is imminent. Since when have terrorists and tyrants announced their intentions, politely putting us on notice before they strike? If this threat is permitted to fully and suddenly emerge, all actions, all words, and all recriminations would come too late.'

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/01/20030128-19.html

Reading comprehension and honstly quoting President Bush on the left is seriously lacking.

Syl

We may never know more than we know at this moment.

Would Fitzgerald issue indictments just to avoid a political firestorm?

Nope.

So either indictments are coming, or they're not, based only on Fitzgerald's determination a crime was committed and he could prove it in court.

It may mean nothing, but the Democrats recent noises and requests for a report may indicate they suspect the case is weak and may just go away.

Sue

For the record, I had nothing to do with the italics this time. :)

topsecretk9

uh-oh we have italics, syl not gonna like it

TCO- here is one, the AP has 3 anonymous

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051018/ts_nm/bush_leak_dc;_ylt=AtiUEe2QbfIV0hGWx4193J934T0D

Syl

Italics alert!!

TCO

AP and 3 sneakies here.

LEE

You're WAY behind. You've got to catch up.

Syl

syn

"Sheeple, get your Hilter's straight!:)"

LOL!

Sue

off

Sue

Did it work?

ordi

You gotta check this out Byron York posted

'TWAS THE NIGHT BEFORE FITZMAS

The inhabitants of some quarters on the Left are almost beside themselves with excitement tonight as they contemplate the possibility of indictments against Karl Rove, Lewis Libby, and perhaps others in the Plamegate investigation. In fact, they've been in a state of high agitation for weeks now.

As they say read the whole thing!

http://corner.nationalreview.com/05_10_16_corner-archive.asp#080020

It is too funny!

Lee

Sorry for the italics, new to this stuff. Still, no one from the CIA has answerd the question of when Novak called the CIA and stated that he was going to use Plame's name in an article and the CIA did not have a problem with it. If she was covert or undercover don't you think that the CIA would tell Novak that by publishing her name he would be committing a crime. My thinking is that she was not undercover or covert at the times in question and this is nothing more than a turf battle between the CIA and the Bush Adminstration. And yes, I am WAY behind on the story, I 'd rather be on the golf course.

topsecretk9

1.A final report had long been considered an option for Mr. Fitzgerald if he decided not to accuse anyone of wrongdoing, although Justice Department officials have been dubious about his legal authority to issue such a report.

2.Mr. Fitzgerald appeared to narrow his options either to indictments or closing his investigation with no public disclosure of his findings, a choice that would set off a political firestorm.

It isn't appropriate to issue a report, in that the evidence is secret and it could be dubious to witnesses and "players" that do not appear favorable. There is a better legal way to say this, Lawyer? It isn't considered fair to put out bad parts about people who may not had a chance at a full airing? IE Wilson

Seven Machos

Lee -- For the record, the crime originally thought to be at issue cannot be committed by (most) journalists. Novak could not have committed it. The perp has to be someone with a security clearance who knowingly outs someone currently or recently undercover.

That's a ballpark correct answer to your question, anyway.

I have long argued that Plame was not covert when anyone "outed" her. I am in a minority. We shall soon see if I have been right or wrong.

topsecretk9

Lee

Harlow was CIA guy, spoke to Novak 2ce...told Novak he should not use her name, but did not demand either. I think the appropriate response would be "can't confirm or deny" if she was "covert".

The Heretik

RE: In President Bush's State of the Union Address in January 03,

'Some have said we must not act until the threat is imminent. Since when have terrorists and tyrants announced their intentions, politely putting us on notice before they strike? If this threat is permitted to fully and suddenly emerge, all actions, all words, and all recriminations would come too late.'

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/01/20030128-19.html

Reading comprehension and honstly quoting President Bush on the left is seriously lacking.

Honstly : While I attempt to comprehend the melodrama of paranoia hiding behind a bravado of omniscience that sold this war, words fail me. At such times, I remember the wit and the wisdom, perhaps now paraphrased: We don't want the next smoking gun to come in the form of a nuclear cloud.

Oy.

topsecretk9

And BTW, if after 22 months, there are no indictments and he issues no report and the media has it's expected spaz, shouldn't they talk to Miller and Cooper and all the Friends of the Court Briefers for stretching this stupid thing out

Syl

Lee

According to what we've read, Harlow (the CIA press spokesman) confirmed information Novak told him he was going to print. Then Harlow went to check Valery's status, discovered she was NOC (covert) and called Novak back and told him not to print her name.

Procedures dictate Harlow check Valery's status FIRST before confirming her employement (via Novak's info). Harlow did not. He goofed. Novak got his confirmation, he was not responsbile for Harlow's goof and knew it, Novak went to print.

It does seem that Valery has a covert status. That people can see her go to work at the CIA is neither here nor there.

Lee

Thanks for the info. If Plame was indeed covert at the time, why has the CIA not produced documentation that she was or wasn't covert. That little bit of information would help the public know if this investigation is really about revealing a covert agent's name, which is something someone should be taken to the woodshed about, or if this is some other political/turf battle that Fitzgerald is in the middle of?

ordi

Heretik,

You proved my point! FYI you need to add to your paraphrase!

Knowing these realities, America must not ignore the threat gathering against us. Facing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof -- the smoking gun -- that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud.
http://archives.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/10/07/bush.transcript/

Toby Petzold

Casey:

Excellent, Toby! You're an invaluable member of the "I Know Wilson's Gonna Be Indicted, I Just KNOW It" Club.

All I've ever said is that Wilson is just as "guilty" of outing his wife as any of these other schlubs. If Fitzgerald doesn't get around to indicting him, fine. It gets done, anyway, in the court of informed opinion.

Syl

The Heretik may believe that nuclear isn't a threat. That's fine.

If he wants to live with things on American soil such as anthrax and airplane fuel and blown-up malls...

not so fine.

TCO

How about the Cheney resignation rumors?

Syl

Bold alert!

TCO

[/bold] test?

Syl

TCO

Did you read the 3 sneakies thingy?

I really don't know what to make of it.

TCO

test

TCO

test

CaseyL

"[W]hy has the CIA not produced documentation that she was or wasn't covert.

What sort of documentation did you have in mind?

topsecretk9

victoria whats-her-name

"Fitzgerald cannot write a report. It is forbidden by law as the information he has accumulated is grand jury material prohibited by law from disclosure. There is no longer an Independent Counsel statute, which permitted this type of report. I have never heard of a federal judge ordering a prosecutor to write a report of a grand jury investigation and then make it public. A court does not have the authority to do so."

Geek, Esq.

Murray Waas's latest is here

It's becoming clearer and clearer that Libby is in BIG trouble.

Check this out:

"But Libby also testified that he never named Plame nor told Miller that she worked for the CIA, because either he did not know that at the time, or, if he had heard that Plame was a CIA employee, he did not know whether it was true."

That folks, isn't bad memory. That's a lie.

Syl

Geek

That can't be proven from what we know. Miller's notes say WINPAC which means Libby could have been passing along a rumor he didn't know was true or not.

It ain't a slam dunk.

TCO

I agree that that does not look good for Libby. I actually see the Tate/Abrahms stuff as more serious. Miller and Libby could have different recollections of the conversation-granted. But on the Tate/Abrams stuff, those guys are lawyers. One of them is lying about Libby trying to dissuade Miller from testifying. And logic says that it is more likely Libby's lawyer that would be the liar (would a Miller lawyer risk such a falsehood?) If Libby really did try to keep Miller quiet (and that is the Occam's Razer explanation for her being in jail) that means he likely either did something wrong in the conversation or perjured himself in describing it.

topsecretk9

"But Libby also testified that he never named Plame nor told Miller that she worked for the CIA, because either he did not know that at the time, or, if he had heard that Plame was a CIA employee, he did not know whether it was true."

Did Libby talk to Waas about this?

this is a semi- wrinkle in the Waas's story

"Mr. Bennett called Mr. Tate on Aug. 31. Mr. Tate told Mr. Bennett that Mr. Libby had given permission to Ms. Miller to testify a year earlier. "I called Tate and this guy could not have been clearer - 'Bob, my client has given a waiver,' " Mr. Bennett said."

Geek, Esq.

"That can't be proven from what we know. Miller's notes say WINPAC which means Libby could have been passing along a rumor he didn't know was true or not."

Libby claiming that he himself didn't know doesn't pass the laugh test.

clarice

Re Harlow:(1)The appropriate response is to neither confirm nor deny;(2)When the CIA thinks a paper is going to print something which is secret, it's normal procedure is to call the publisher and get them to shitcan the story.

Nothing in this was handled normally.

Geek, from Miller's report, Libby never did mention Plame's name. Of course, she's nuts and I don't know that the prosecutor should consider anything she said .How do you explain sitting in jail for 85 days to protect sources whose names she can't recall? N.U.T.S.

Syl

I think the 3 sneakies aren't who we think they are.

Lee

CaseyL, anything that can attest to the fact that she was covert at the time of her so called outing. That should not be a problem now that everyone in the world knows who she is and where she worked. Hell, she posed for Vanity Fair with her hubby, how concerned was she with her covert status or the contacts she delt with while overseas or in the states using that covert status, if she is willing to pose for the cover of a major magazine (face exposed) while her husban was at war with the White House.

topsecretk9

Syl
Not Wilson, Plame and the friend that bumped into Novak?

jukeboxgrad

"If Iraq was an imminent threat, then why did we take 14 months to argue the war before going in"

Because Blair managed to convince Bush that it was a good idea to try to get some legal, moral and political cover via UN inspectors. Of course this attempt at "wrongfooting" Saddam backfired when he called Bush's bluff, and actually cooperated with the inspectors.

"Wasn't it Blair who said the 45 minute thing?"

Blair said it first, and then Bush happily picked up the meme. Syn, pay attention.

Ordi said "honstly quoting President Bush on the left is seriously lacking"

I realize you think it doesn't count because he used his "I don't really think it's true, I'm only saying it because Blair is saying it" disclaimer. Just like he did in the SOTU. Sorry, I'm not impressed.

Syl said "'Imminent' threat only comes to bear IF we attack Saddam and he retaliates."

Nice job trying to rewrite history. Bush didn't say "Saddam might attack us at the drop of a hat, but only if we attack him first." Syl said that, not Bush. Bush said (paraphrase) "Saddam might attack us at the drop of a hat."

"Iraq as imminent threat was never used as a justification for removing Saddam."

It was never used as a justification, except when it was. And Bush's "45 minutes" bogeyman was indeed precisely an example of "Iraq as imminent threat [being] used as a justification for removing Saddam."

Look it up. I'd give you the cite, but I don't want to antagonize Kim, who claims I link too much. Oh good, someone else posted the cite. Let Kim kick them around.

"Libby could have been passing along a rumor he didn't know was true or not"

Nice try.

Let's say you happen to know that the password for our nuclear arsenal is Rosebud. Let's say you walk around Time Square with a big picket sign that says "I'm just passing along a rumor, I don't know if it's true or not, but the password for our nuclear arsenal might be Rosebud."

I'll send you a postcard in jail.

Tollhouse said "Pick any person from the Bush admin, and someone will manage to point the finger that way"

I think you're being inadvertently candid when you list Miller as "a person from the Bush admin."

Clarice said "Libby never did mention Plame's name."

Please, this silly point should have been retired long ago. There is no legal, moral or practical difference between the words "Wilson's wife" and "Valerie Plame."

Seven Machos

Geek: Here's a little "lawyer tip" for you: the "laugh test" is not recognized law and doesn't help to establish or dis-establish fact, a concept which you seem very enamored by but don't really grasp.

Syl

"Not Wilson, Plame and the friend that bumped into Novak?"

Nope. Friends of Libby and/or Rove.

Showing that, yes, Mrs. Wilson was covert. But they did not know it. They were listening to rumors...that were wrong.

kim

Hannah may well be why Fitz had Miller dead to rights. Note however that he has claimed ignorance of the covert status. With any luck, Hannah has led Fitz to the skunk, Joe.
===============================================

kim

Go ahead, JBG, antagonize me.
====================================

jukeboxgrad

Wait your turn.

topsecretk9

Syl

spooky sympathies

kim

Agonizing anticipation of antagonism.
======================================

Syl

Here's where my thinking is at this point in time. Others have already come to this conclusion but I had to see it for myself.

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

Wilson tricked the administration into 'outing' his wife.

It didn't much matter to Wilson and Valery that she continue working for the agency anymore for whatever reasons. We could take our pick (and have some fun) with what those reasons might be.

He knew there would be some sort of response to his op-ed in which he lied about the forged documents as well as implying that Cheney had sent him then ignored his report.

He knew if the administration dug around at all, they'd find his wife's connection to his trip.

Fine. The bait.

He knew his wife was covert. He also knew it was a very closely guarded secret. He was well aware of the fact of previous incidents and people would think she was already 'outed' and therefore be less shy about talking about her.

To be sure Valery would be outed Wilson spread around, while shopping out his phony Niger debunking story, that Valery was WINPAC. Since WINPAC is not covert, reporters and anyone to whom they related that info, wouldn't think twice that 'outing' Valery was anything to worry about.

The Bait looks very tasty.

Novak called him to tell him what he was going to print. Wilson had no comment but called the CIA to give them a heads up.

Harlow didn't make a mistake. He was instructed to verify. Checking Valery's status later was just to cover himself.

Novak goes to print.

The Hook is in the water. The bait is being nibbled.

Wilson then, through Corn, screams that his wife has been outed and gives details to indicate its importance. Brewster-Jennings. Valery Plame. Both of which are red herrings. Brewster-Jennings had long been exposed along with Valerie Plame.

Her current work had nothing to do with the above and had not for a long long time.

The Corn article was meant to frighten the administration into thinking they had really really goofed and thus attempt to engage in conspiracy to cover-up.

The jaws closed around the hook.

---------
I came to this conclusion when it occurred to me that the 3 sneakies were not Plame, Wilson, and Johnson but 3 sneakies sympathetic to the administration.


topsecretk9

I just throw this out,

but to the Cheney rumor...I thought Pres and VP can not be indicted but impeached for crimes while in office?

would that not require Fitz making that recommendation?

not saying this is right for all the hysterics, if wrong just say so.

topsecretk9


Syl

all sounds good to me, except for that little ending in the email...I didn't take the bait

Go Metro

I have a sort of off-topic question that I dont want to spoil the TM's new thread with. When did Joe Wilson ever claim that anyone other than the CIA sent him on the Niger mission? I've seen the tricky edit job Freepers have done on his Lateline appearance with Wolf Blitzer, but was there ever a time when he actually said that he was asked by someone other than the CIA? Just curious.

TM

How do you explain sitting in jail for 85 days to protect sources whose names she can't recall? N.U.T.S.

Maybe she experienced memory loss while sitting in jail?

kim

Was the bait alive to the scheme?
==================================

kim

Some one is simply assuming the sources Judy wanted to protect were the same ones she can't recall. Cute, but meaningless. Was that the Juke?
==========================================

Syl

topsecretk9

"I didn't take the bait"

Good point.

Except Rove's 'bait' and Wilson's 'bait' may be referring to different things.

Lotsa bait in D.C. ;)

Rove, at that point wasn't getting into a defense of the intelligence Novak refuted. They were still getting their ducks in a row concerning that. Remember Condi seeming confused the following week on MTP or something?

Rove was warning Cooper off Wilson from the other direction, saying his wife had something to do with his trip.

(And, remember, Novak's article hadn't come out yet.)

To me, the line that somebody had to be pushed across was CIA confirmation. If Harlow had so 'no comment' from the git go, Novak couldn't have printed what he did.

A non-conspiratorial person would simply say Harlow goofed. But a conspiratorialist (which I think I'm becoming..har har) would find that confirmation extremely convenient.

Especially since Wilson says he gave the CIA a heads-up that Novak would be calling.

(Do we know for a FACT that Wilson called the CIA beyond his say so?)

Especially since Wilson says he gave the CIA a heads-up that Novak would be calling.

(Do we know for a FACT that Wilson called the CIA beyond his say so?)

Nope. Other than sometime after the 10th Wilson said he told Valerie and she alert some PIO kind of office

later Wilson depicted it as Valerie was "working" with this office because they anticipated calls

and also they assumed this office quash any report with her name

ordi

JBG,

You prove my point again. You quoted me as saying Ordi said "honstly quoting President Bush on the left is seriously lacking"

What I actually wrote was Reading comprehension and honstly quoting President Bush on the left is seriously lacking.

If you can't even quote me correctly WHY would I trust you in quoting POTUS? Kim, asks you to link but you are suddenly shy!

You make inferences of what POTUS stated. What you are attempting and not successfully is to rewrite history. It is not working!

You may not be impressed but you also are not impressive.

Syl

blank

Whoever you are ;)

Thanks for the info re Wilson/Plame contacting CIA re impending Novak inquiry.

I'm really not a conspiratorialist.

I really kinda believe that Harlow just goofed.

So Wilson wasn't planning for the administration to out his wife. There would be no guaranty of that happening if the CIA, properly, wouldn't confirm that info.

So scratch that.


Cecil Turner

If Harlow had so 'no comment' from the git go, Novak couldn't have printed what he did.

It seems to me this is closing the barn door after the horses leave. Once a reporter calls CIA asking about a NOC, the cover is blown. (Since obviously more than one person already knows about it, and they're already talking.) CIA can't continue to use that agent, even if their names never show up in print. At best, the PR officer can delay the story until they have a chance to do a quick cleanup on her public cover.

I agree the policy ought to be "no comment," and that Harlow goofed, but don't see how that had much of an effect on the bigger picture.

NARCISO

IRONICALLY, MR. HARLOW'S NOVEL, WAS ABOUT A WMD PLOT, LAUNCHED FROM LIBYA, AGAINST ANNAPOLIS.

jukeboxgrad

Kim: "Was that the Juke?"

No.

jukeboxgrad

Ordi: "If you can't even quote me correctly"

The fact that I didn't regurgitate every single word in your original message doesn't mean that I didn't quote you correctly. If you can't understand that, too bad.

"Kim, asks you to link but you are suddenly shy!"

I've been called lots of things but that's not usually one of them. I have to give you credit for being original.

As far as posting the link, you posted the relevant link yourself, here, shortly after I first raised the subject of the 45 minutes, here. So I don't know what your problem is.

"You make inferences of what POTUS stated"

No inference is required. He said what he said (here): "The danger to our country is grave. The danger to our country is growing. The Iraqi regime possesses biological and chemical weapons. The Iraqi regime is building the facilities necessary to make more biological and chemical weapons. And according to the British government, the Iraqi regime could launch a biological or chemical attack in as little as 45 minutes after the order were given."

Sounds pretty fucking "imminent" to me. As you recall, this started with Syl saying "Iraq was not an imminent threat to America."

Syl's statement is correct, but it's also incongruent with the message Bush was sending.

"rewrite history"

Indeed.

kim

Sorry about that, then, J.
==========================

The comments to this entry are closed.

Wilson/Plame