The 'Hubris' Of Richard Armitage

Newsweek sneak previews an upcoming Isikoff/Corn book confirming the non-news that then-deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage was Bob Novak's primary source for the Plame leak.  We certainly believe Armitgae was Novak's primary source for the Plame leak; the rest of his story we are taking with multiple grains of salt:

In the early morning of Oct. 1, 2003, Secretary of State Colin Powell received an urgent phone call from his No. 2 at the State Department. Richard Armitage was clearly agitated. As recounted in a new book, "Hubris: The Inside Story of Spin, Scandal, and the Selling of the Iraq War" Armitage had been at home reading the newspaper and had come across a column by journalist Robert Novak. Months earlier, Novak had caused a huge stir when he revealed that Valerie Plame, wife of Iraq-war critic Joseph Wilson, was a CIA officer. Ever since, Washington had been trying to find out who leaked the information to Novak. The columnist himself had kept quiet. But now, in a second column, Novak provided a tantalizing clue: his primary source, he wrote, was a "senior administration official" who was "not a partisan gunslinger." Armitage was shaken. After reading the column, he knew immediately who the leaker was. On the phone with Powell that morning, Armitage was "in deep distress," says a source directly familiar with the conversation who asked not to be identified because of legal sensitivities. "I'm sure he's talking about me."

David Corn has more at his blog:

One mystery solved.

It was Richard Armitage, when he was deputy secretary of state in July 2003, who first disclosed to conservative columnist Robert Novak that the wife of former ambassador Joseph Wilson was a CIA employee.

A Newsweek article--based on the new book I cowrote with Newsweek correspondent Michael Isikoff, Hubris: The Inside Story of Spin, Scandal and the Selling of the Iraq War--discloses that Armitage passed this classified information to Novak during a July 8, 2003 interview. Though Armitage's role as Novak's primary source has been a subject of speculation, the case is now closed. Our sources for this are three government officials who spoke to us confidentially and who had direct knowledge of Armitage's conversation with Novak. Carl Ford Jr., who was head of the State Department's intelligence branch at the time, told us--on the record--that after Armitage testified before the grand jury investigating the leak case, he told Ford, "I'm afraid I may be the guy that caused the whole thing."

Well - one mystery solved, other mysteries unresolved.

First, let's note that the outline of Armitage's story (he had no idea he was Novak's source until he read an Oct 1 Novak column, after which he huddled with Colin Powell and the State Department counsel and then called the FBI to apprise them of his role) merits a bit of skepticism.

Keep in mind - Armitage "forgot" to tell Special Counsel Fitzgerald about his leak to Bob Woodward until after the Libby indictment in Oct 2005, even though Woodward asked him for permission to move with a story during 2004.

Can anyone think of a motive for that?  Well, by waiting until after the indictment, Armitage got a pretty good idea of the evidence gathered by Fitzgerald and the testimony provided by other reporters.  And why might he care?  *MAYBE* there were other reporters also protecting Armitage. 

Just for example, Judy Miller spent months in jail resisting her subpoena from Fitzgerald until she had assurance that Fitzgerald would only grill her about her interactions with I. Lewis Libby.  Having received that assurance, Ms. Miller then produced notebooks strongly suggesting she had discussed "Valerie Flame" with other; alas, her memory failed as to who that might have been.

However, Ms. Miller has plenty of by-lined stories with State Department sources, and both she and Mr. Armitage were members of the Aspen Institute (he is still with the Aspen Strategy Group).  Is it possible that Mr. Armitage has *still* forgotten to mention to Special Counsel Fitzgerald that he leaked to Ms. Miller?

Or from another tack - per the Newsweek story, Armitage learned about Ms. Plame from the famous INR memo, which did not mention her undercover background and named her as Valerie Wilson.

But Armitages's biography strongly suggest an intel background, so it seems fair to guess he had contacts in the intel community.

And by uncanny coincidence, Robert Grenier, a top CIA official who was heading the Iraq Issue group at the time, had a chat with Lewis Libby.  This is from the indictment:

7. On or about June 11, 2003, LIBBY spoke with a senior officer of the CIA [later revealed to be Grenier] to ask about the origin and circumstances of Wilson's trip, and was advised by the CIA officer that Wilson's wife worked at the CIA and was believed to be responsible for sending Wilson on the trip.

I don't think that Grenier was relying on the INR memo for the news that "Wilson's wife... was believed to be responsible for sending Wilson on the trip".  But I do think that Grenier, as a top CIA guy, was a bureaucratically appropriate contact for a chap like Armitage.  As a bonus, since he had been with the CIA forever I bet that Grenier met Ms. Plame back when she *was* Ms. Plame, and remembered her by that name rather than her more recent married name.

Just speculation, of course.  But I bet that the Armitage story on display here is only the first fallback - at no other point in this story has he been candid or forthcoming about his role and I doubt he was in October 2003 (did he mention his Woodward chat to Powell, and did Powell urge a cover-up of that?  I doubt it.)

Last bit of speculation - if (I say *IF*) the "Plame" name came to Novak via Armitage and Grenier, where did "Operative" come from in Novak's famous column?

Good question, and let me ask another - where did Andrea Mitchell get "operative" in her July 8, 2003 report?  She attributes it to CIA sources in a story about who might get blamed for allowing the "16 Words" into the State of the union address:

MITCHELL: Well, people at the CIA say that it's not going to be George Tenet; and, in fact, that high-level people at the CIA did not really know that it was false, never even looked at Joe Wilson's verbal report or notes from that report, didn't even know that it was he who had made this report, because he was sent over by some of the covert operatives in the CIA at a very low level, not, in fact, tasked by the vice president.

That jibes with Tenet's official statement a few days later:

In an effort to inquire about certain reports involving Niger, CIA's counter-proliferation experts, on their own initiative, asked an individual with ties to the region to make a visit to see what he could learn.

Emphasis added, or, in other words, don't blame us top guys for that Wilson trip - we had no idea what the underlings were up to.

So where did "operative" come from?  Andrea Mitchell cites CIA sources, and her report certainly reads like high level CYA from the CIA.  Reuters had something similar the same day:

A U.S. intelligence official said [Joseph] Wilson was sent to investigate the Niger reports by mid-level CIA officers, not by top-level Bush administration officials. There is no record of his report being flagged to top level officials, the intelligence official said.

Was Reuter's "intelligence official" with the CIA, as per Andrea Mitchell, or did Reuters have a different source?  Did Novak share a source with Andrea Mitchell, or catch her on the news, or via Lexis?  My impression is that reporters are not avid users of footnotes.

Well.  Bob Novak has not convinced us yet, although his latest story was that he got the "Plame" name from Who's Who.  Maybe Armitage will have some answers.

MORE:  Links to follow, sorry.  And I want to rattle on about the One x Two x Six link eventually.

BUTTER WOULDN'T MELT IN HIS MOUTH: I love this from David Corn:

When Armitage testified before the Iran-contra grand jury many years earlier, he had described himself as "a terrible gossip." Iran-contra independent counsel Lawrence Walsh subsequently accused him of providing "false testimony" to investigators but said that he could not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Armitage's misstatements had been "deliberate."

I believe Armitage leaked to Novak, all right; I just don't believe a whole lot else about his story.

I NEED SOME HELP HERE:  David Corn tries to rationalize the notion that the Armitage leak reflects White House machinations.  OK, it is a stretch, but I think he also advances his case by making stuff up:

The Armitage leak was not directly a part of the White House's fierce anti-Wilson crusade. But as Hubris notes, it was, in a way, linked to the White House effort, for Amitage had been sent a key memo about Wilson's trip that referred to his wife and her CIA connection, and this memo had been written, according to special counsel Patrick Fitzgerald, at the request of I. Lewis Scooter Libby, the vice president's chief of staff. Libby had asked for the memo because he was looking to protect his boss from the mounting criticism that Bush and Cheney had misrepresented the WMD intelligence to garner public support for the invasion of Iraq.

The memo included information on Valerie Wilson's role in a meeting at the CIA that led to her husband's trip. This critical memo was--as Hubris discloses--based on notes that were not accurate. (You're going to have to read the book for more on this.) But because of Libby's request, a memo did circulate among State Department officials, including Armitage, that briefly mentioned Wilson's wife.

Is Corn trying to tell us that there are *two* memos, the one requested by Libby and the famous INR memo (.pdf) that circulated within State?

And what does Corn mean by "this memo had been written, according to special counsel Patrick Fitzgerald, at the request of I. Lewis Scooter Libby"?  What is the source for that?  Per the indictment, Libby was advised orally about the memo, but apparently did not get a copy:

6. On or about June 11 or 12, 2003, the Under Secretary of State orally advised LIBBY in the White House that, in sum and substance, Wilson's wife worked at the CIA and that State Department personnel were saying that Wilson's wife was involved in the planning of his trip.

And although that was in the indictment, Libby disputed (p. 5 of 29) that the conversation occurred:

During his grand jury appearances, Mr. Libby testified that he did not recall any conversations with Mr. Grossman about Mr. Wilson’s wife. The defense is absolutely entitled to investigate whether the conversation alleged by Mr. Grossman actually occurred and to test Mr. Grossman’s memory and credibility about what he did or did not say to Mr. Libby at trial. Like every fact alleged in the indictment, the facts surrounding Mr. Grossman’s alleged conversation with Mr. Libby have not yet been established – they are in dispute.

Surely if the prosecution had a memo addressed to Libby on this topic, the defense would not be going down this road.  What am I missing here, or what is Corn going on about?  [TS9 opines that Corn is telling us that Marc Grossman of State asked for a memo because he needed answers for Libby; that is 'almost' like Libby asking for a memo, then, right?  Uh huh.

Let's summarize - Libby asked a lot of questions, thereby triggering a leak from Armitage.  Hmm, why not blame the inquiring press, or Joe Wilson himself for chatting with Pincus and Kristof?  Seems like there were lots of folks other than Libby that set Armitage in motion.]

KEEP HOPE ALIVE!  Corn is pretty funny here:

The outing of Armitage does change the contours of the leak case. The initial leaker was not plotting vengeance. He and Powell had not been gung-ho supporters of the war. Yet Bush backers cannot claim the leak was merely an innocent slip. Rove confirmed the classified information to Novak and then leaked it himself as part of an effort to undermine a White House critic.

"Rove confirmed the classified information to Novak"!  Well, yes, but did he know it was classified?  If so, how did he learn that?  C'mon, it's over - if Corn or Fitzgerald had any evidence that Rove knew of Ms. Plame's classified status, we would have heard it by now.

LET'S ASK AGAIN: Can Armitage keep his seat on McCain's Straight Talk Express?  Clarice Feldman notes that Sir Richard Armitage kept quiet and protected his own sorry situation while the Special Counsel probed hither and yon for two years.  Armitage could have let a lot of air out of the political balloon a long time ago.

Bob Novak was right on "Meet The Press" today when he said that "I believe that the time has way passed for my source to identify himself".

WHAT DID COLIN POWELL KNOW and when did he know it?  One of the requests by the Libby defense team (p. 19 of 39) was for

Any notes from the September 2003 meeting in the Situation Room at which Colin Powell is reported to have said that (a) everyone knows that Mr. Wilson’s wife worked at the CIA and that (b) it was Mr. Wilson’s wife who suggested that the CIA send her husband on a mission to Niger.

September still precedes October, yes?  And Colin Powell was asking about the Plame question in the Situation Room, if this is accurate.  But he never asked Armitage about her before October 1?

Or if Powell did discuss the Plame leak with Armitage, what did Armitage tell him, back in September before his memory was jogged?

Let me hat tip TS9 for a very good question.  Now, IIRC, the prosecution had no notes that were responsive to this request, but I welcome clarification and a memory jog of my own.

BYRON YORK WONDERS WHAT AN "AGGRESSIVE" INVESTIGATION LOOKS LIKE:

And Fitzgerald "aggressively investigated" Armitage?  Did he have the Armitage calendars from June 2003, recently obtained via the Freedom of Information Act by the Associated Press, showing that Armitage had met with Bob Woodward during that time?  If so, why was the aggressive investigator surprised when Woodward came forward to reveal that he, too, had been told about Plame?

Comments

[Other Tom]

Which is more of an "outing": Armitage's disclosures to Woodward and Novak, or Rove's subsequent question to Novak, "Oh, you know that too?" (That's Novak's version; Rove says it was, "Oh, you heard that too?") I still maintain that, if I were Rove and I were asked under oath if I was Novak's source, I would say "No."

[Cecil Turner]

But Armitages's biography strongly suggest an intel background, so it seems fair to guess he had contacts in the intel community.

Certainly he had contacts within State's intel community, including its boss, who'd rewritten the memo on the day before the Novak interview. Ol' Bill Ockham would probably like the Newsweek version.

I'm having similar difficulty with the "operative" argument. CIA officers call themselves "officers" and aren't supposed to be admitting specific NOCs even exist, let alone talking about their qualifications. This looks a lot more like someone getting it second or third-hand and trying to describe someone who works in the "Operations Directorate."

[topsecretk9]

Byron York asks the obvious

And Fitzgerald "aggressively investigated" Armitage? Did he have the Armitage calendars from June 2003, recently obtained via the Freedom of Information Act by the Associated Press, showing that Armitage had met with Bob Woodward during that time? If so, why was the aggressive investigator surprised when Woodward came forward to reveal that he, too, had been told about Plame?

[JorgXMcKie]

I'm only a lurker, but maybe Fitz was on a mission, and Armitage just wasn't part of it? "None so blind as they who will not see" and all?

[Cecil Turner]

And the funniest part of this, assuming the INR memo is in fact the source, is that Plame/Wilson did it to themselves. Plame hosts the meeting in Feb 2002, and the INR guy writes her identity in his notes. The notes resurface in response to Wilson's article, and Armitage passes it on, apparently innocently. Makes the Dem hyperventilation over "outing" and demands for independent counsel look pretty silly, eh?

[megrez80]

I think someone's covering for Armitage. This excerpt from the Newsweek article:

"But now, in a second column, Novak provided a tantalizing clue: his primary source, he wrote, was a "senior administration official" who was "not a partisan gunslinger.""

seems wrong. Wasn't the phrase "not a partisan gunslinger." in Novak's first article?

[Neuro-conservative]

Can anybody square this circle?:

From the indictment:

21. On or about July 10 or July 11, 2003, LIBBY spoke to a senior official in the White House ("Official A") who advised LIBBY of a conversation Official A had earlier that week with columnist Robert Novak in which Wilson's wife was discussed as a CIA employee involved in Wilson's trip. LIBBY was advised by Official A that Novak would be writing a story about Wilson's wife.

From today's article:
In the early morning of Oct. 1, 2003, Secretary of State Colin Powell received an urgent phone call from his No. 2 at the State Department. Richard Armitage was clearly agitated...But now, in a second column, Novak provided a tantalizing clue: his primary source, he wrote, was a "senior administration official" who was "not a partisan gunslinger." Armitage was shaken. After reading the column, he knew immediately who the leaker was. On the phone with Powell that morning, Armitage was "in deep distress," says a source directly familiar with the conversation who asked not to be identified because of legal sensitivities. "I'm sure he's talking about me."

[Patton]

I've worked in the intel community for over 25 years and I have never heard anyone call themselves or others on our side an 'operative'.

I think Novak just used the term the same as he uses it for 'political operative'.

If the Plame story had been a picture: We would find ghost images, duplication, smoke added, fake rockets, fake casualties and rusty holes claimed as new damage all in one picture.

[megrez80]

Patton, you're correct. Novak has written as much.

Regarding my previous post on the "not a partisan gunslinger." phrase, I was wrong. I found, and read, Novak's first article, and it's NOT in there.

[Don]

So how in the hell did the White House manage to let its own DOJ indict Cheney's #1?

I still don't get it.

[topsecretk9]

FirdogLake says this only deepens the mystery and something is "missing". I'm actually embarrassed for her now.

[jerry]

I think a Plame picture would show Rove and Libby gleefully scheming to use Woodward's conversation with Armitage to push out an article attacking the Wilson and his wife - enter Novak, Cooper, etc....

[Don]

Never mind, I see Byron York is all over it:

"The question that responsible authorities should answer now is why the investigation was allowed to go forward for three more months, and then why Patrick Fitzgerald was appointed, and then why his investigation went on for more than two and a half years...

There are many, many questions that need to be answered about this case."

I agree, with the caveat that President Bush is the responsible authority. This whole investigation has been conducted by his own DOJ!

[clarice]

Grest TM. I blogged this and added your suspicions-I think Armitage deserves to be shunned forever in D.C> and have demanded McCain Boot him from the Straight Talk Express or signal that he prefers self-serving perfidious people to loyalists with integrity.

Patton--love that remark.

Isn't it ironic that Corn who set the revenge outing of a covert agent is making money off of this? PHEHE and double Pheh,

York's comment is good, too, but then I think that in the end Fitz and Armitage should go down in flames over this outrage.

[windansea]

I think a Plame picture would show

Val & Joe cavorting in their Jaguar??

Joe looking serious and Val in her pajamas?

[clarice]

Don. It's time for a long hard talk with Comey. What did he know and when did he know it? Hint: I think his office was a snakepit every bit as determined to sink the V-P's office as the CIA and State were to sink Rumsfeld and the President.

(Can't wait for Rome to be on HBO again. It's so familiar to those of us in D.C>)

[topsecretk9]

Don...for Fitzgerald insight - has a tendency to not understand things, such as "victim" of crime vs. committing crime

http://www.bizjournals.com/washington/stories/2005/11/21/daily7.html”>Before and http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/17/AR2006031701814.html”>after

[clarice]

http://americanthinker.com/comments.php?comments_id=5951

[Ian]

This has been a non-story since day one. No one cares about this story except the media itself with its typical narcissism.

[sad]

Clarice

Love your AT article and agree with your call to McCain. What is the deal with Armitage? Is he a sniveling coward or someone who outroved Rove?

[Rick Ballard]

"I'm only a lurker, but maybe Fitz was on a mission, and Armitage just wasn't part of it?"

JorgXMcKie,

Comey's creation of PROSECUTOR UNBOUND would be the place to start looking concerning that aspect. Fitz's staircase to political fame is now missing quite a few steps.

[Jane]

I'm just angry. It's not like we didn't know all of this, but I'm angry at a country so divided that it devours its own. I'm angry at people who waste time, money and reputations for sport. I'm angry at the fact that BDS is rampant and it all is a big game to so many. I'm really angry at the MSM, and their lack of seriousness. I'll get over it, but every once in a while, it just comes pouring out.

[Don]

TS9 and Clarice-so it turns out this thing is a massive exerise in negigent supervision of employees.

One employee leaks classified info without intent.

Other employees run with it truth be damned.

Many of your employees have to hire lawyres and go to grand jury proceedings.

A presumably key employee gets indicted for God knows what.

So, I'm sorry-but at some point you have to ask the boss-what the hell kind of shop are you running?

[noah]

Gee Don are you arguing for a unitary executive or do you just have your head up your ass?

[Lew Clark]

But Clarice,

Shouldn't David Corn get money out of this? It was he who invented the "crime" of outing a non-covert agent. Doesn't an inventor get royalties from their invention?

[Don]

Who needs a unitary executive to argue that Bush is the boss of every single DOJ employee? It's just a fact.

Here's another one for you Noah- the DOJ knew by October 1, 2003 that Armitage was the leaker.

But Bush still hires a lawyer and submits to over an hour of questioning by Fitzgerald!

what the hell is up with that?

[Chirp]

Don:

"One employee leaks classified info without intent."

Fitz has never alleged that anyone leaked any classified info. He has stated that no one knowingly did so, but has never said that the info was classified. He's walked all around the 'classified' issue, but if memory serves, he refused to comment when asked directly if classified information was released.

If Fitz can't say that classsified info was leaked, how can you?

[JM Hanes]

Per Bob, on the previous Armitage thread, with a link to the Meet the Press transcript:

MR. RUSSERT: The article goes on to quote State Department Intelligence Chief Carl Ford as saying Armitage said, “I’m afraid I’m the guy who may have caused all this,” and that he had met with one Robert Novak on July 8, Mr. Armitage did. Are you now prepared to say, confirm Newsweek that Richard Armitage was one of your sources?

"MR. NOVAK: I told Mr. Isikoff, the investigator—he’s a very good investigative reporter, by the way—but I told him that I do not identify my sources on any subject if they’re on a confidential basis until they identify themselves. I don’t say that somebody was or wasn’t. I’m going to say one thing, though, I haven’t said before. And that is that I believe that the time has way passed for my source to identify himself."

Waaaay past time, indeed. Merely identifying himself is the least of it.

[Bob]

"MR. RUSSERT: The article goes on to quote State Department Intelligence Chief Carl Ford as saying Armitage said, “I’m afraid I’m the guy who may have caused all this,” and that he had met with one Robert Novak on July 8, Mr. Armitage did. Are you now prepared to say, confirm Newsweek that Richard Armitage was one of your sources?

"MR. NOVAK: I told Mr. Isikoff, the investigator—he’s a very good investigative reporter, by the way—but I told him that I do not identify my sources on any subject if they’re on a confidential basis until they identify themselves. I don’t say that somebody was or wasn’t. I’m going to say one thing, though, I haven’t said before. And that is that I believe that the time has way passed for my source to identify himself."

Transcript from http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14452115/page/7/>Meet the Press

as I posted on the other thread

[jerry]

windandsea, you're back! Hahaha, you're right about the Wilson glossies... but I think I'm right about the WH plot.

[Bob]

I gave up on JH! thanks

Bob

[windansea]

Don...if we build you a giant wall will you STFU?

I want you to know I am down here in Mexico making gazillions while recieving free health care....feel better?

or maybe you're just a mole trying to stifle turnout??

[Don]

Chirp-ok it wasn't classified. I don't know all the Plame details nor do I even care.

Only 2 things have ever aroused my interest:

1. Why did Ashcroft recuse himself?

2. Why is the White House letting this investigation unfold the way it is?

This is a DOJ investigation. The executive branch is investigating itself.

That's why this increasing "Bush is a victim of DOJ prosecutors" theme is so BS. Bush IS the head of the DOJ.

So I'm with York-there are many questions that need to be answered-about the investigation-not the leak.

[noah]

Well Don you have made a case for wrongdoing at DOJ. Bush cannot prevent others from doing wrong.

Utopias do not exist. Get over it young man. (You must be very young to have such high expectations...be prepared to be disappointed.)

[topsecretk9]

--but I think I'm right about the WH plot.--

Yes and Jerry your plot looks more and more real with each passing day, sort of like Field of Dreams -- If you believe it, it might come true

[Bob]

don... Ashcroft recuse himself to avoid the Dems claiming a cover-up. He did the right thing. And the Admin is letting it unfold this way because they knew what a joke it was. This has hurt the Dems more than they (you) are willing to admit!

[JM Hanes]

Don:
"So how in the hell did the White House manage to let its own DOJ indict Cheney's #1?"

Because, as the Isikoff article clearly states, Gonzalez & the White House played it by the book and refused to interfere with the investigation.

Bob:

Better twice than never!

Jane:

Ditto that. Somehow finally reading it in print (and then watching Corn tap dance all over it) brings the outrage to a head.

[Don]

Very incisive Bob!

I bet they let get Cheney get indicted to ensure a Republican president in 2008!

[clarice]

I'm told Yoo is writing a book about what was going on at DoJ--And I suspect more will come out of the DoJ's war against the Administration.

Perhaps some of the NSA leaks will be sourced there.
Certainly Comey's conduct warrants more scrutiny than it has so far received. He set up this super special prosecution, appointed his friend Fitz to the post, made it ongoing with special sauce funding and knw early on it was a crock.

I share Jane's outrage.

I think the Judge made an enormous mistake it not pitching it on the basis of an unconstitutional appointment. Frankly, the Comey-Fitz esp limitation on authority argument was so preposterous, had I been the Court I'd have demanded Comey's appearance and testimony on the appointment process .

I also think as I have for some time that Fitz skated from the outset on patchy, thin ice..and if he had a grain of sense he'd drop the case now with an apology to Libby whose life has been upended while partisan crooks and self-serving masters of perfidy go on their way.

[Don]

Mr. Hanes-ok that's a thesis-but if there's nothing to investigate, as seems increasingly clear, how the hell did they let Libby get indicted?

At some point-you might need to supervise even a "hands-off" investigation.

[windansea]

Don

what is it about the concept of independent prosecutor that you do not understand?

do you think Fitz has been sending weekly reports to Bush about what facts his investigation have revealed?

[topsecretk9]

BTW...remember that bit Libby's lawyers submitting a transcript or something that is Colin Powell saying "Everybody knows..." in the Situation Room...they and Fitz disagree about what Powell is referring to...anyways...when was this meeting to have taken place, anyone remember off the top? I'm thinking after the investigation started.

[Jim Treacher]

This whole fiasco is as intricate and full of nothing as a bale of cotton candy.

[Patrick R. Sullivan]

What a piece of work is David Corn:

'The outing of Armitage does change the contours of the leak case. The initial leaker was not plotting vengeance.'

He means the contours don't change for those committed to circular reasoning.

[Don]

Actually I do, windansea. At least I know he is obligated to periodically report to Gonzalez, who is quite free to share any and all info with the President.

[noah]

Just as I suspected Don...you actually know nothing. Gonzales has distanced himself from the investigation completely.

[clarice]

No, Don--Not under the super special prosecution terms Comey cooked up. Indeed, Congress doesn't even have the right to oversee the budgetting of this operation under these super special terms.

[Other Tom]

"I think a Plame picture would show Rove and Libby gleefully scheming to use Woodward's conversation with Armitage..."

Are we sure that either Rove or Libby knew about Armitage's conversation with Woodward? When and how did they learn of it?

Don--I'm not so sure that as of October, 2003 DOJ knew that Armitage was "the" leaker. And once an investigation is begun, all percipient witnesses are advised (and are ethically required) not to discuss the matter with one another. (Try to imagine the outrage if it is later discovered that they did so.) And I'm not so sure that any president, whether Clinton or Bush (or Carter or Reagan) is at liberty to shut down an investigation, given the shitstorm Nixon created when he tried to.

[mark c.]

how ironic that it appears the only gov't entity willing to keep a "secret" under their hat was the white house. you know, the ones that are accused every day of a vendetta.

[noah]

"head up your ass" is winning Don.

[topsecretk9]

Oh..Oh..Oh...with this little bit today, Armitage worried and calling Powell, sure Novak was referring to him....remember Novak's little bombshell that a "3rd" party called Novak after the investigation had been initiated to say that the sources leak was inadvertent...

going to repeat York's question here

And Fitzgerald "aggressively investigated" Armitage? Did he have the Armitage calendars from June 2003, recently obtained via the Freedom of Information Act by the Associated Press, showing that Armitage had met with Bob Woodward during that time? If so, why was the aggressive investigator surprised when Woodward came forward to reveal that he, too, had been told about Plame?

and ADD that Fitzgerald was also not vexed by the 3rd party Novak witness tampering...but saw Libby's letter as an attempt.

Does Armitage just have compromising photo's of Fitz or something...because with Fitz' slim standard in Libby's case one would think Armitage would have major problems

[JM Hanes]

PatrickRS:

LOL! Circular reasoning, AKA spin.

[Bob]

"head up your ass" is winning Don.

...it's got my vote noah!

[Rick Ballard]

MJW,

If you're around (haven't seen you for a while), thank you for your work on identifying Armitage. That was actually investigative reporting, rather than the simple regurgitation of Dem talking points by the scum floating at the top of the MSM cesspool.

A tug on a thread....

[noah]

OT: Wretchard has a hilarious juxtaposition or the captured Fox guys with their right index fingers raised in the air during their forced conversion to Islam vs. John Travolta in Saturday Night Fever..."Staying Alive" dance number.

[windansea]

it looks to me like Corn (with Wilson as source) and his article is the first to out Val as a "covert" CIA employee.

I seem to remember Corn saying he called Wilson after he wrote the article for a reaction....sounds like most liars i know who always offer up too much information.

[clarice]

Maybe the WH could get more favorable coverage if they just kidnapped reporters once in a while, sat on their heads and made them under gun point switch to the Republican party.
Just saying...

[clarice]

OT But perhaps we ought to start a wit and wisdom of Joe Biden thread:
"WALLACE: And, finally, Senator Biden — finally, we've got about 30 seconds left, but I can't let you go without some politics. As we've mentioned, you're in South Carolina right now, on the campaign trial. Thirty seconds or less, what kind of a chance would a Northeastern liberal like Joe Biden stand in the South if you were running in Democratic primaries against southerners like Mark Warner and John Edwards.

BIDEN: Better than anybody else. You don't know my state. My state was a slave state. My state is a border state. My state has the eighth-largest black population in the country. My state is anything from a Northeast liberal state."

[noah]

Good point windansea, but to our BDS impaired fellow citizens the only thing that matters is hypothetical states of mind. How moralistic!

[JM Hanes]

Clarice:

Well done!

In re:

Had he spoken out earlier could anyone have missed the tensions between the Department of State and the White House which was certainly the basis of innumerable anonymously sourced stories harmful to the white House?

And not just anonymously sourced material either. I was amazed at how many times Powell, in oh-so-measured tones, publicly undercut the Administration at strategic junctures. I think no one really noticed, because unlike so many around him, Powell was not the usual partisan idealogue. Powell's political prority was Powell.

[jerry]

Are we sure that either Rove or Libby knew about Armitage's conversation with Woodward? When and how did they learn of it?

Woodward interviewed someone in the WH on June 20 2003 and planned to ask about Mrs. Wilson (because Armitage had mentioned her). He apparently has the question in his notes, but I don't know if who he met with is public or if there is a tape of the talk.

I'd guess that Woodward mentioned Mrs. Wilson to whoever he met, and then the WH proceeded to insert Plame into their attack on Wilson. I just read something saying Libby told Miller about Mrs Wilson on June 23, if this is true it fits my explanation. What they deliberately set out to do was find a legal way to out Plame (thus the events with Novak, Cooper, and others).

I don't think the events regarding Woodward are public, so we don't "know for sure," it's my speculation.

[JM Hanes]

Oops! Well done!

[noah]

How thoughtful of you Jerry to label your speculation as such. I am sure nobody else noticed!! Just more hyposthetical piled upon hypothetical piled upon...

Where is Jeff? He's the master.

[clarice]

Thanks JMH.
Jerry, Woodward says that person was Libby. He meant to ask him he said, but doesn't recall if he did and his notes don't reflect an answer.
Perhaps he TOLD him and Libby confused Woodward with another reporter--say, Russert.

Odd that you should forget that.

[Rick Ballard]

"Where is Jeff?"

Out at the dump, helping Kristof and Pincus try to find their reputations.

[Jane]

Okay, so come Monday morning how does this play out?

Where should Libby's lawyer's squeeze?

On one hand we know nothing has changed since Fitzy appears to have been in on the scam. But will seeing the light of day put some added pressure on him? And in what form does that pressure come? With the hurricane, the plane crash and the release of the hostages, there is no play of this story in the news. The dems don't want any publicity, so will the story just die?

How will this information play to the Judge. Did he already know this? Does it have no bearing on the criminal case? Is the guy in the tank?

I suspect Judge Banks will take a very different path in the civil case, which will be fun to watch, but how does this news play out in the criminal matter?

[Cecil Turner]

I'd guess that Woodward mentioned Mrs. Wilson to whoever he met, and then the WH proceeded to insert Plame into their attack on Wilson.

Oh, that makes sense. Once she's outed, we can out her again! That'll teach 'em!

[windansea]

Jane...I mean Madam President

On Monday Fitzy will have a presser in which he uses football instead of baseball analogies

insert witty football analogy here

[clarice]

Banks seems to have their number. You can see him laughing as he dismissed their privacy motion.

Maybe even Judge Tatel has figured out he was had...

It's past time for the DoJ Office of Professional responsibility to get to work though they won't.
Ditto all the way around with Gonzales.

The criminal case Judge should be banging his head in the shower for not dismissing the case on constitutional grounds.

And the reporters have no reason to keep Fitz on the pedestal so it should be getting lonelier for him. But I don't see him acting to dismiss.

McCain starts shunning Armitage or suffers for it, and once he does, everyone does.Toast.

Maybe the most we can hope for is a bump in contributions to the Libby defense fund and a very amusing examination of Armitage and cross of Miller.

[noah]

And the Left might rightfully inquire why we are putting such faith in Corn. Well, true to type he did manage to insert an ad hominem hypothetical into the narrative! (And jerry, bless him, adopted it without further appraisal...its so easy ya don't even have to think!)

[windansea]

jerry's busy working out the arbitrage on Armitage :)

[maryrose]

Let's try to look at this logically and clearly. I find it hard to believe that any White House employee would waste their time trying to hurt Wilson or out his wife. These are two nobodies who are dying to be somebodies. Why would anyone worry about their status or their false conclusions? Plame violated her own oath to uphold the confidentiality of her job. She should have been fired immediately. Wilson as a partisan gunslinger should have been booted out the door with a thanks but no thanks.

[noah]

"When the going gets tough, the tough gets going"?

Or,

"No hill for a climber"?

[noah]

OT: But does anyone else but me have a problem with Typepad remembering name and e-mail address? (It doesn't really lose them, it just won't use them!)

[Jane]

I wish I knew as much about this case as you (and others do) Clarice, because maybe the next move would be clearer to me. Libby's lawyers can't file a motion to dismiss because he's not actually indicted for leaking her name. But it seems to me a flurry of activity is called for on behalf of the defendant if only to keep the pressure on Fitzgerald and the Judge. My fear is that nothing changes and this just fades from view, altho the Newsweek piece will help because that will be arriving on doorsteps all week.

Bush should make a statement, altho he doesn't usually dwell in those tawdry depths.

And windansea it's a damn good thing I'm not the bloody president, because I'm in the mood for a few public exections right about now.

My only ray of hope lies with Judge Banks. Altho my guess is that he will be a lot more juducial than is called for.

[Jane]

I just thought about Chermansky (or whatever the little dweeb's name is) and it made me laugh.

[Sara (Squiggler)]

I'm just angry. It's not like we didn't know all of this, but I'm angry at a country so divided that it devours its own. I'm angry at people who waste time, money and reputations for sport. I'm angry at the fact that BDS is rampant and it all is a big game to so many. I'm really angry at the MSM, and their lack of seriousness. I'll get over it, but every once in a while, it just comes pouring out.

I'm with Jane. I'm furious over this. I know we all "knew" it was Armitage, but to think that he sat back and allowed a collegue to be indicted and put through hell, not to mention the expense, and he allowed Miller to sit in jail for weeks and weeks, is inconcienable. And I'm with Clarice that McCain has some 'spainin' to do if he keeps Armitage onboard. This guy should go down for something just because he is such a jerk, if nothing else.

But I'm also with Don (why are you all being so hard on him?). I'm not so juvenile as to think that the President, whether Bush or some other, has first hand knowledge of every single conversation or interaction of every executive branch department or employee, that's why there is a Cabinet and Cabinet Officers to run departments, but at some point the WH did know or should have known and this farce should have been called off. And now to Fitz ... I'm ready to have an SP appointed to go after him. It is looking more and more like he has been working for the CIA cabal/dems in this whole fiasco.

I wish Libby could sue the whole lot of them for his mential distress and his attorney fees. Now that would be justice.

Does anyone now see Libby's Aspen reference as a reminder to Judy that it was Armitage who gave her the info, seeing as how Armitage was part of that group too?

[Sara (Squiggler)]

inconscienable = unconscienable. Shouldn't type when I'm so angry.

[noah]

still misspeled it...unconscionable. There now .

[noah]

misspelled....LOL

[Sara (Squiggler)]

:: BLUSH :: Proves my point. :: BEAT READ ::

[Sara (Squiggler)]

Yikes! RED. I quit.

[windansea]

Does anyone now see Libby's Aspen reference as a reminder to Judy that it was Armitage who gave her the info, seeing as how Armitage was part of that group too?

yup

re Don...if you followed previous threads about Fitz and who he reports to you would have seen Comey saying something about following the investigation through the press and by Vulcan mind melding

[Jane]

And let's not forget Powell, in this whole mess.

[Fenrisulven]

That's why this increasing "Bush is a victim of DOJ prosecutors" theme is so BS. Bush IS the head of the DOJ.

So who does CIA work for? Because there is obviously a bias at CIA against Bush's foreign policy. They have been sabatoging it with constant leaks to the NYTs.

[Rick Ballard]

The President is responsible for clearing up a 100% press generated farce?

Comey's gone and as Other Tom noted, the last time a President touched a special persecutor the outcome wasn't pleasant.

The politician's who fanned this were Schumer and Conyer, one not running and one untouchable. Fortunately, their party isn't untouchable, nor is the reputation of the journo hacks responsible for keeping this rolling with the drooling lefties.

[clarice]

I still don't know about the Aspen reference. It's too ambiguous for me, but i agree with TM it is likely Armitage was Miller's first source and perhaps she and Fitz shared an onjective--keeping that from the grand jury--when he at long last agreed not to ask her about other sources but Libby as her get out of jail pass.

Oh, he did slip something in contra that agreement when he asked her about other references in her notes, but he let her I forget answer slip by apparently, and never seemed to even notice Wilson's phone number in her book.

Scenario:

Miller:I'll testify only if youonly ask about Libby.
Fiz: Absolutely. I won't ask about anyone else. And if I do accidently touch on that, I won't follow up at all.

And, yes, Jane , every other post I have to type in my name and addy. URGH

[boris]

The President is responsible for clearing up a 100% press generated farce?

He should sign an executive order banning BDS. Yeah that would work.

[RichatUF]

from clarice’s OT post:

BIDEN: Better than anybody else. You don't know my state. My state was a slave state. My state is a border state. My state has the eighth-largest black population in the country. My state is anything from a Northeast liberal state."

Didn’t he forget to mention that he likes fried chicken and greens, that Delaware has a NASCAR race, and that he (until this gem hits the wires) has black friends…Sen. Biden a real southerner—“My state was a slave state”—Congressional Black Caucus in 5,4,3,2,1…

Still working through the thread—how does everyone read it so quickly and with such great commentary (sucking up…)

L'Affair Plame-its like a car wreck-you just know those two cars are going to hit

RichatUF

[Don]

Noah-you're a moron; Clarice I believe you're misinformed.

Comey early stated Fitzgerald's investigation are governed by the appropriate CFR regulations:

Section 28 600.8 (c) reads: "At the conclusion of the Special Counsel's work, he or she shall provide the Attorney General with a confidential report explaining the prosecution or declination decisions reached by the Special Counsel."

Now you're saying Comey may have exempted Fitzgerald from these regulations-well how did that that happened? Who delegated that authority to Comey? Gonzalez? Under what authority did Gonzalez wash his hands of the whole thing? Did President Bush specifically order it?

if you got the details-let's hear them.

I'm with Byron York- the questions about the actual investigation are juicier than the results.

[Don]

Thanks Sara Squiggler.

I dont know why they hate me either. I think Fitzgerald is out of control!

But when an out of control dog is loose in the park I blame the owner.

[boris]

Comey's authority was amplified when Ashcroft recused himself. You just made a fool of yourself.

[boris]

I think Sara might be starting to understand why many here think Don is a fool.

[Fenrisulven]

/love your writing style Clarice.

McCain starts shunning Armitage or suffers for it, and once he does, everyone does. Toast.

I wonder if Armitage understands the concept of a blog swarm and what it would do to his career ...I'll bet McCain does.

How can a campaign have an effective internet outreach when the grass-roots despises someone on the staff? Within a week, every conservative pundit on the net and radio will have heard about this.

[Rick Ballard]

Comey's letter of appointment of Fitz on December 30, 2003 states:

"I direct you to exercise that authority as Special Counsel independent of the supervision or control of any officer of the Department."

which he further amplified on February 6, 2004:

"Further, my conferral on you of the title of "Special Counsel" in this matter should not be misunderstood to suggest that your position and authorities are defined and limited by 28 CFR Part 600."

And so, PROSECUTOR UNBOUND was created.

Don,

I'd suggest that you read up before posting here if I thought it would make any difference.

[jerry]

Thanks Clarice, what was old is new again? I'm going to have to re-read all the old articles and reboot.

Cecile. I'd say there's a big difference between the Armitage leak (which is bad in a formal way, though I read it goes on all the time) and the Rove/Libby leaks - a deliberate and coordinated strategy by WH officials to, at least, put multiple reporters onto investigating Plame's job. Their edgy behavior then, and difficulties with Fitzgerald later, tell me they well knew that they were skirting the law.

I don't get the people who criticize speculation, that's what we're all doing here, it's unavoidable as the topics are mostly all secret.

[Clarice]

It is not I who is misinformed. I have read everything about the appointment and its terms, well set out BTW in Libby's motion to dismiss and except for a claim that Comey was to learn about the case from the press and that they had an unwritten , unexpressed sense of the boundaries of the appointment (the esp theory of supervisory control), in this particular appointment no one at DoJ was to get any information about the proceedings.

In fact, Libby noted that when Fitz made his outrageous statements in the presser, had this been a statutory appointment rather than an extra-statutory one, he could have sought redress but could not under the Comey-Fitz fix.

[windansea]

here you go Don

The attorney general, in an abundance of caution, believed that his recusal was appropriate based on the totality of the circumstances and the facts and evidence developed at this stage of the investigation. I agree with that judgment. And I also agree that he made it at the appropriate time, the appropriate point in this investigation.

I have today delegated to Mr. Fitzgerald all the approval authorities that will be necessary to ensure that he has the tools to conduct a completely independent investigation; that is, that he has the power and authority to make whatever prosecutive judgments he believes are appropriate, without having to come back to me or anybody else at the Justice Department for approvals. Mr. Fitzgerald alone will decide how to staff this matter, how to continue the investigation and what prosecutive decisions to make. I expect that he will only consult with me or with Assistant Attorney General Ray, should he need additional resources or support

Comey presser

please, no whining about why Ashcroft recused himself...if we have to explain that again you are either naive or a mole

[kate]

Ah, so the "edgy" behavior of Rove/Libby confirms they were skirting the law. You just feel it. What law is that. Thou shalt not criticize the liar Joe Wilson.

When is "I heard that too" a coordinated attack. I am so sick of this nonsense.

Fitzgerald was set on Rove/Libby by the FBI. The media and Democrats coordinated on this scam. I can tell by their edgy behavior...oh, never mind.

[Sara (Squiggler)]

Re: blogswarm suggestion ... In the GOP straw polls, McCain polls lousy, even Gingrich scores higher. He is another media darling, but the Republcan base, for the most part, thinks he is a two-faced snake. His latest comments prove it too. Giuliani polls the highest, but I'd rather see him as Attorney General, Head of Homeland Security or the National Intelligence Czar than President. I'm supporting Romney, who is the smartest guy around, has great presence in front of large groups and the camera, is a hunk, and, unfortunately is the Governor of the State of the Kiss of Death.