Powered by TypePad

« Plame Open Thread | Main | Masterful Summation of Plame Situation »

February 11, 2007

Comments

topsecretkk9

Ken Duberstein?

Man, that dude just happens to be in the thick of it.

Good catch Mayb's

topsecretkk9
Lobbyist Ken Duberstein, a friend of Armitage who helped arrange Novak's meeting with him, said yesterday that Armitage's account precisely matches what Armitage told him in October 2003.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/13/AR2006091302066.html

1996

Politicians, media discuss 'Trouble'

A host of Washington insiders, including University alum and former President Gerald Ford, plan to wade through political issues and rhetoric Thursday at the "Trouble With Washington" conference.
The conference and luncheon are scheduled to be held at the Gerald R. Ford Library on North Campus and require a reservation. The event runs from 9 a.m.-3 p.m.

Speakers and panelists for the conference include former House Speaker Tom Foley (D-Washington), former Sen. George McGovern (D-South Dakota), former White House Chief of Staff Ken Duberstein, NBC News reporter Andrea Mitchell and Washington Post reporter Juan Williams. Topics for discussion at the event include pollsters, elected officials, Capitol Hill and changes in the political climate.

background.

Sara (Squiggler

TS -- Could Duberstein be the stranger on the street. Novak would know who he was.

MayBee

Sara- I don't think so. I don't know if there's any evidence that Wilson knew Duberstein.

You know what tops-- I didn't remember Duberstein said Armitage had told him. That's interesting. So he sat there that Sunday with Russert, knowing Armitage had blabbed. Interesting.

Ranger

Lobbyist Ken Duberstein, a friend of Armitage who helped arrange Novak's meeting with him, said yesterday that Armitage's account precisely matches what Armitage told him in October 2003.

I think we need some clarification on that statement.

Did Armitage actually tell Duberstein that he had leaked to Novak?

If so, why did he (Armitage) share that information with a democratic lobbyist, and not with the President?

MayBee

Yeah, it looks like it. One thing- Duberstein is a Republican. But how weird he was on MTP the week Russert got his Christmas.
Here's the more of the article, Ranger:

Armitage, in reply, said his disclosure to Novak was inadvertent and noted that Novak himself described it as "offhand" in an Oct. 1, 2003, column. Armitage said he could not recall whether he identified the CIA division where Wilson's wife worked. He added that he rejects any suggestion he was deliberately trying to plant the information, explaining that "I had no reason to wish him [Wilson] any ill" and that Wilson "was simply verifying what had already been reported [about Iraq] through State channels."

Lobbyist Ken Duberstein, a friend of Armitage who helped arrange Novak's meeting with him, said yesterday that Armitage's account precisely matches what Armitage told him in October 2003.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/13/AR2006091302066.html>Here's a link. The incredible Topper's didn't work for me.

MayBee

According to IMDB, that is the only appearance he has ever made on MTP.

MayBee

Oh wait, he was on at least one other time, for Reagan's funeral. I'll be quiet now.

MayBee

Oh, my Mr. Duberstein.
Look at this- he was on http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0510/28/sitroom.03.html>Wolf Blitzer the DAY the indictments came down. Look what he said:

DUBERSTEIN: Every president and everybody in the White House understands there's only one person that's indispensable in any White House and that's the president. And sometimes you have to do what you don't really want to do, but you must do. I think there are an awful lot of highly qualified people in the White House, but a second term, some people start getting tired, they've been there for five years. You need that new spark.

I'm not suggesting any wholesale changes, but I'm suggesting the staff be augmented, as Ronald Reagan did with Howard baker and Colin Powell and Carlucci and myself.

KING: And the president have this moment with the American people where he said this happened in my house, something bad happened in my house, I take full responsibility, at the same time he is saying Scooter Libby is innocent until proven guilty and Karl Rove, at least for a matter of weeks remains under investigation? How do you deal with that? You can't absolve or try to turn the page when this chapter is not done.

DUBERSTEIN: But I think the American people are looking for some acknowledgement of accountability and responsibility. This is nothing that the president of the United States did. It's nothing that the vice president did. These are some -- a staff problem with Scooter Libby, and yet everybody says the buck stops here, it stops in the Oval Office.

I think the president has to stand up for that, and say to the American people, if mistakes were made, there is an indictment, we're still having a trial, he is innocent -- Scooter is innocent until proven guilty, but if it happened, it happened on my watch.

BLITZER: If Scooter Libby did in fact commit perjury, lie before the grand jury, there are three possibility explanations. His explanation, which we heard from his attorney, an honest mis - he didn't remember exactly how this unfolded. He thought he heard it from Tim Russert and Judy Miller and Matt Cooper, he didn't remember that he heard it from others in the government.

That's his explanation. The other explanation is he's lying to protect himself, he was afraid that the more serious charge of releasing the identity of a covert officer could be used against him, or he's lying to protect the vice president of the United States. What do you think of those three explanations? Because the transcripts will show that what he said was not necessarily true, for whatever reason.

DUBERSTEIN: I think everybody has to stop hyper ventilating and wait for the trial to go forward, and then we'll find out what happened. We'll find out from a jury whether or not his story holds up or not.

BLITZER: You know Scooter Libby, you've known him ... DUBERSTEIN: Not all that well ...

BLITZER: But you know he's a very diligent, detail-oriented kind of lawyer.

DUBERSTEIN: Absolutely of the first rate. I mean, across the board, bright, aggressive, smart, savvy, understands White Houses, understands the political situation, nobody's fool.

BLITZER: If this president were to say Ken Duberstein, you helped Ronald Reagan when he was in trouble, I need your help right now, come back to the White House, what would Ken Duberstein say?

DUBERSTEIN: He would say never say never, but the answer is no.

BLITZER: Ken Duberstein being honest, as he always is.

Why was Duberstein booked for all these big post-indictment shows? Who chose him? Who booked him? How can he say these things knowing Armitage threw his President to the wolves?
What a scamp.

Jane

Wake Up Everyone! It's the best part of the day and I've got coffee!

Cecil Turner

I am not in charge of Cheney's calendar, but... my impression is that the CIA briefer is one of his first morning meetings. Which would suggest that Cheney would have gotten wind of the circulating DIA memo on the 12th but after the CIA guy has left.

Having done some similar work (Command Center Ops at a major military HQ) I'd suggest this is dubious. Information flow to decision-makers is tightly controlled, from the morning newspapers (summarized in the "Early Bird") to technical briefs on subjects of interest, to "talking point" memos for upcoming meetings . . . all are triaged by "action officers" who are familiar with the subject matter and presented to seniors in streamlined form. It has to be, or they'd be swamped in detail. And if he's got a dedicated briefer on a subject, all matters pertaining to that subject will generally be routed through the expert.

So when the SSCI says "CIA’s briefer did not brief the Vice President on the report," that means the VP never saw it. And the odds of the VP catching wind of a DIA memo before the next morning's brief are vanishingly small. Similarly, a "stovepipe" would be particularly pernicious, since the decision-maker would have no way of knowing important details were left out. If it were only true. But however much Sen Levin would like to pretend the DODIG report supports that conclusion . . . it doesn't.

centralcal

Yoo Hoo - Jane! Never mind the coffee, gather the group to offer a supplication to the WIFI GODS that Clarice gets connected today!

Ohm!

Jane

That's right! I forgot she was going!

clarice

Connected!!
Went thru security after Woodward this a.m. (He was wanded. Just now parties are arguing the Mitchell matter..)

clarice

Connected!!
Went thru security after Woodward this a.m. (He was wanded. Just now parties are arguing the Mitchell matter..)

clarice

Connected!!
Went thru security after Woodward this a.m. (He was wanded. Just now parties are arguing the Mitchell matter..)

hit and run

Does anyone here have teenagers?

I'm looking for baby sitters for next weekend.

Can't afford to take another weekend off from JOM.

Jane

That's right! I forgot she was going!

centralcal

Woo Hoo! Clarice is connected. Okay, gotta get ready for work, now, drat!

I assume there will be a new thread, when I return?

clarice

I've decided to take handwritten notes and post longer stuff on breaks..Right now they're fighting about Wells says he's calling Eckenrode..
He'll be here tomorrow depending on weather..

clarice

I've decided to take handwritten notes and post longer stuff on breaks..Right now they're fighting about Mitchell... Lang in R's 302 comes up ... Wells says he's calling Eckenrode..
He'll be here tomorrow depending on weather..

centralcal

Eckenrode, huh? Wow!

SunnyDay

Oooooh! this will be good.

hit and run

Wells says he's calling Eckenrode..

So am I.

Well, calling him names.

Any resistance from Fitz on Eck as a witness?

Jane

Plus we really needed the thread herder yesterday. Sheesh you are falling down on the job!

centralcal

H & R: you're the official thread herder, we need Clarice to start a new thread for today (when she has a moment, I mean).

Other Tom

I'm coming to the conclusion that Wells didn't feel he had a shot at getting anything from Rule 29 at the close of the gov't case.

hit and run

Jane, we buried Thread Herder out in the woods this weekend.

It was a short ceremony - just as he would have wanted - don't get hung up on the old stuff and move on to the new.

He looked very peaceful.

Pofarmer

Right now they're fighting about Wells says he's calling Eckenrode

Yeah, I bet they're fighting about it. Fitz doesn't want the lead investigator testifying? Priceless.

jwest

Apparently there are a great deal of similarities between thread and sheep herding.

It’s a lonely, isolated job. No one around for miles and it’s been a long time since he’s been to town……

Could someone check behind the bushes to see if our thread herder is abusing some innocent thread?

Jane

Jane, we buried Thread Herder out in the woods this weekend.

Time for a resurrection!

hit and run

We did find some unpublished thread herding writings under Thread Herder's pillow.

Use them if you wish. He would have wanted it that way.

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

Eb-dee eb-dee eb-dee ebdee Th-Th-Th-That's all folks!

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

Read my lips: No New Comments
Wouldn't be prudent.

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

One small click for a man
One giant leap for JOMkind

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

Go to the next thread. Go directly to the next thread. Do not pass Go. Do not collect $200.

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

I am a federal agent with CTU Los Angeles I need this space cleared NOW! Everybody move!

Chloe, I need two backup teams at this location now. Tell them to set up a two post perimeter. Nobody gets in. Call me back when they're in place.

I said everybody out!

hit and run

Jane:
Time for a resurrection!


Did you ever read Pet Sematary? It wouldn't be pretty.

Jane

Save em for after TM wakes up!

Alcibiades

Woo,

Not only is Clarice connected, she's triple connected.

Dan S

Be nice to Eckenrode (for now). He clearly has a big mouth. Big mouths are good on the stand.

Alcibiades

Is Jeralynn going to live blog - or only report afterwards?

Anyone know? I don't see that she has a thread up yet either.

Thread Herder

New Thread!!!














Made you look!

Jane

Sheesh - talk about abuse of power!

Dan S

"Walton: everything you say, counselor, has a ring of asking the jury to infer."

Ah, irony. As if Fitz hasn't been doing exactly that on motive the whole time. He has zero real evidence of motive, it's all based on circumstantial stuff. And every time he admits some the judge has to lecture the jury about how they can't consider the truth of what's there, just how it might affect motive.

This would make a great play, as long as that play was a farce.

Dan S

Gotta love this too:

"Fitz: Three small things. I assume Pincus is the next witness. Pincus co-author on article about Mitchell possibly knowing, I assume there won't be any question about Pincus.

Jeffress: that article was put in evidence by the government over my objections and certainly there will be questions on it. "

Ok, so I introduced that article, but you can't question its author about it!

topsecretk9

Ranger

--Did Armitage actually tell Duberstein that he had leaked to Novak?--

Yes. He also had Duberstein call Novak the minute an investigation was announced to "tell" Novak, Armitage's comments on Wilson's wife were "inadvertent". Some people call that witness tampering.

--If so, why did he (Armitage) share that information with a democratic lobbyist, and not with the President?--

Because he is a snake. And make Duberstein's comments on all these shows snakey too.

Dan S

Pinkus is on the stand, doing intro now.

Other Tom

Someone posed a very interesting question about whether the gov't had put in any evidence of materiality in its case. If it did, I'm unaware of it. Anybody have any insight or ideas?

Appalled Herder

Everybody out of here. New thread. Up to me, as Thread Herder is dead. C'mon...out of here. Final call. Thread's closed!

Jane

About bloody time!

Christopher Fotos

Folks, I have a Libby 101 question--I'm reading Carol Leonnig's story in WaPo today before I blog it (PostWatch corporate headquarters requires that for some reason) and Leonnig writes the following:

...That admission helped the prosecution suggest Libby was part of a White House campaign to discredit Wilson.

and

Woodward's testimony could help bolster Libby's contention that there was no White House campaign to discredit Wilson and that other reporters knew about Plame before the time that prosecutors say Libby began to discuss her.

One or two other times as well. Now obviously it is not per se illegal for the White House to try to "discredit" anyone, but my question is, does Libby contend "there was no White House campaign to discredit Wilson or are we just getting into a parsing match--e.g. Libby saying sure, we tried to counter false information being shopped by Libby.

Walter

Other Tom,

The full tapes of the grand jury appearances provide Fitzgerald with material from which he may draw in arguing materiality. That is, the questions asked by prosecutors and grand jury members demonstrate (a) in which subject they are interested and (b) how they intend to pursue that interest.

Kind of a bootstrap argument, but it is hard to argue that they didn't spend a great deal of time on the Russert thing.

sylvia

I think there is enough reasonable doubt now to conclude that Russert and Libby may have spoken about Plame. This is due to the fact that Russsert gave shady testimony in the past about his recollections to the media, possible rumors from other NBC reporters, and the silliness of the idea that they both spoke about Wilson and the subject of his wife was never even broached by either at all- when Fitz's whole idea was that Libby was on a mission to break Plame to the media. In fact, I would think that they must have spoken about Plame, or why would Libby be so retarded to ever pin it on Tim, considering they were not known to be particularly close. Russert may have lied out of excessive caution not to get involved and his idea that he really didn't "know" about Plame, having just heard rumors.

However even if there is some smoking gun found with, say, Mitchell, that doesn't release Libby from his problems. From the indictment count one about Russert "Russert did not ask LIBBY if LIBBY knew that Wilson’s wife worked for the CIA, nor did he tell LIBBY that all the reporters knew it" might be dismissed. But count ii. "At the time of this conversation, LIBBY was well aware that Wilson’s wife worked at the CIA; in fact, LIBBY had participated in multiple prior conversations concerning this topic" will probably not be. No matter what they prove about Russert- Libby's statement that he was hearing it "as if for the first time" will be a little hard to take. Everyone's tried to come up with many possible defenses to explain that statement, but really none of them really work. Ari Fleischer saying he had lunch with Libby, and Libby spilled the beans, a few days before, is going to seal the deal on that count.

So I'm still sticking with Libby gets hung on that one charge. It is after all the most significant charge because Libby saying he was not previously aware of Plame before Russert means that he is implying that no one told him before Russert. That is basically denying all those conversations with the other officials. However, Fitz can't really get Libby on that, because it may be difficult to charge someone for not "volunteering" something, and apparently Libby amended his testimony later when confronted with other testimony. So charging Libby about Russert is a back-handed way for Fitz to get him on not bringing up the conversations voluntarily with the other officials he had before Russert.

owl

Since I have to vacate.....I Have A Dream: Eckenrode is the man on the street.

Cecil Turner

Ari Fleischer saying he had lunch with Libby, and Libby spilled the beans, a few days before, is going to seal the deal on that count.

It would, if Ari were credible. I suspect he won't be by the end of the trial. That said, I'm with Dwilkers on the DC jury effect. They're prone to convict, and Team Libby had better come up with something fairly convincing, or they will.

Pofarmer

Ari Fleischer saying he had lunch with Libby, and Libby spilled the beans, a few days before, is going to seal the deal on that count.

Or maybe not. If Libby told Ari something off the record and "hush, hush" I really don't see why that's a problem. If Ari blabbed it, it's Ari's problem.

Libby saying he was not previously aware of Plame before Russert means that he is implying that no one told him before Russert.

He never said that. It's all in the GJ testimony.

Pofarmer

Ari Fleischer saying he had lunch with Libby, and Libby spilled the beans, a few days before, is going to seal the deal on that count.

Or maybe not. If Libby told Ari something off the record and "hush, hush" I really don't see why that's a problem. If Ari blabbed it, it's Ari's problem.

Libby saying he was not previously aware of Plame before Russert means that he is implying that no one told him before Russert.

He never said that. It's all in the GJ testimony.

JM Hanes

Christopher:

"Now obviously it is not per se illegal for the White House to try to "discredit" anyone, but my question is, does Libby contend "there was no White House campaign to discredit Wilson or are we just getting into a parsing match--e.g. Libby saying sure, we tried to counter false information being shopped by Libby."

If you go through Libby's grand jury testimony, you'll see that almost everytime Fitz tries to go with the discredit Wilson line, Libby essentially says no, we were trying to contradict him on substance with talking points x,y & z.

sylvia

"He never said that. It's all in the GJ testimony"

Yes I really need a link to that grand jury testimony. With all the flurry of posts here, I've probably missed it. However, my impression is that that cannot be so and Libby said Tim Russert told him first, and if he later admitted he was msitaken and Cheney etc told him first, that was afterwards and too late. If Libby had just said Cheney told him first - there would probably be no trial here.

JM Hanes

sylvia:

GJ Transcripts

"If Libby had just said Cheney told him first - there would probably be no trial here."

That would have been the logical decision, so I can see why'd you'd think that. Unfortunately, you'd be wrong.

Cecil Turner

If Libby had just said Cheney told him first - there would probably be no trial here.

Sylvia, that's just wrong. Per Fitz (at his press conference):

He said that, in fact, he had learned from the vice president earlier in June 2003 information about Wilson's wife, but he had forgotten it, and that when he learned the information from Mr. Russert during this phone call he learned it as if it were new.
Trial testimony was that Libby told the FBI agent in the first ten minutes of the first interview. (No link handy, but I don't think it was disputed.)

sylvia

"He said that, in fact, he had learned from the vice president earlier in June 2003 information about Wilson's wife, but he had forgotten it, and that when he learned the information from Mr. Russert during this phone call he learned it as if it were new."

Well, that's messed up. I can't even keep it straight now. Okay, so Libby fessed up about Cheney right away, but then when he was talking to Russert, he said he had forgotten at that time when Russert told him. What the hell was Libby thinking? Why would he even say that, and get Russert involved in his memory games when he didn't even have to? Especially when he should have known that the prosecutor would play gotcha with that. Now it even makes less sense than before. I think Libby should maybe now try an insanity defense.

Or... I suppose Libby was less concerned about getting the leak from Cheney and protecting Cheney than he was concerned about himself getting charged for leaking. All he had had to have said then though was that he didn't remember what he spoke to Russert about and then- no case against Libby. Again, it all doesn't make sense.

sylvia

Yes, thiking about it, I guess it must be some of the speculation that I've seen by TM on this thread above. I think Tim Russert and Scooter Libby are our modern day "Romeo and Juliet". Two star-crossed politicians at cross-purposes. Libby thought Russert would bring up Plame because they spoke about her, so he came up with a white lie to shift the blame to Russert. Russert thought Libby would NOT bring it up, so Russert came up with a little white lie to go along with what he thought Libby would do. But alas, their noble intentions were at cross-purposes, as they both got caught up in this web. Ahh when we first practice to deceive...

Cecil Turner

Well, that's messed up.

Yes it is. As a straight-up lie, it makes no sense. Ergo . . . it's either a fouled-up memory, or a fouled-up memory plus a lie.

sylvia

Okay my latest interpretation, after reading the Fitz doc you provided, is that Libby said that to get out of "knowingly" passing on classified info gained from official sources. If he could claim he forgot about it at the time when he was saying it - he can't be charged. Problem is, that idea doesn't fly too well. Unless he can claim some sort of documented condition of Alzheimer's, I don't think that was his best tactic there - that he just happened to forget for a few days, coincidentally at the time he happened to be talking about it. Libby is a high-priced lawyer and this was the best he could come up with? He should have just said he didn't remember who told whom first. Again, never overestimate the skill of an "expert".

AllAdobeOEMSoftDownload

All our products are covered by an unconditional 60-day money-back guarantee.
[b][u]FREE DOWNLOAD ADOBE ACROBAT 8 PROFESSIONAL 8.1 iso[/b][/u]
[b][u]FREE DOWNLOAD ADOBE ACROBAT 8 pro[/b][/u]
[url=http://www.4softsite.info]FREE DOWNLOAD CHEAP ADOBE ACROBAT reader[/url] - FREE DOWNLOAD CHEAP ADOBE PHOTO SHOP
[b][u]DOWNLOAD CHEAP ADOBE audition[/b][/u]
[url=http://www.4softsite.info/manufacturer-Adobe.html?session=146011198080532]DOWNLOAD CHEAP ADOBE application comprehensive creating[/url] - DOWNLOAD CHEAP ADOBE go live

QuarkXPressDownload

http://www.vrxracing.com/vrxtalk/forumdisplay.php?f=4
[b]QUARKXPRESS 5.0 FREE DOWNLOAD[/b]
[url=http://www.quarkxpress.downloadgreatoem.net/info-Quark_Express_6.0.html][b]QUARKXPRESS updates[/b][/url] - [b]this version of QUARKXPRESS is valid only for 'french'[/b]
[b]QUARKXPRESS upgrade[/b]
[url=http://www.quarkxpress.downloadgreatoem.net/info-QuarkXPress_7_Passport_Multilanguage.html][b]QUARKXPRESS crack[/b][/url] - [b]QUARKXPRESS 6.1 tutorial[/b]
[b]QUARKXPRESS 7.3 serialz[/b]
[url=http://www.quarkxpress.downloadgreatoem.net/info-QuarkXPress_7_Passport_Multilanguage_MAC.html][b]FREE lessons in QUARKXPRESS[/b][/url] - [b]QUARKXPRESS template[/b]
[b]QUARKXPRESS web design video[/b]

battery

thank you

cheap Final Fantasy XI Gold

So simple the cheap Final Fantasy XI Gold is.

eve isk

When you have eve isk, you can get more!

The comments to this entry are closed.

Wilson/Plame