Libby Did Not Tell Grand Jury About Key Conversation

National Journal ^ | October 11, 2005 | Murray Waas

[YaYa123]

In two appearances before the federal grand jury investigating the leak of a covert CIA operative's name, Lewis (Scooter) Libby, the chief of staff to Vice President Cheney, did not disclose a crucial conversation that he had with New York Times reporter Judith Miller in June 2003 about the operative, Valerie Plame, according to sources with firsthand knowledge of his sworn testimony.

The new revelations regarding Libby come as Fitzgerald has indicated that he is wrapping up his investigation and making final decisions as to whether criminal charges will be brought in the case.

Libby also did not disclose the June 23 conversation when he was twice interviewed by FBI agents working on the Plame leak investigation, the sources said.

Special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald apparently learned about the June 23 conversation for the first time just days ago, after attorneys for Miller and The New York Times informed prosecutors that Miller had discovered a set of notes on the conversation.

[Cicero]

Interesting conjectures.

Since you raise the issue of Plame's responsibility (and it would seem that the whole thing had to have started either with Plame or Wilson), what about other players in the CIA?

Maybe it's beyond Fitzgerald's brief. But who accepted Plame's suggestion that Wilson should be used by the CIA? Who authorized his junket? I doubt whether Plame had the authority to do more than suggest it. Were these higher ups in the CIA involved in the early planning of this conspiracy? Maybe Tenet himself?

Usually the CIA is insulated from such investigations, so I guess we may never know.

[cyncooper]

Waas has been used for Wilson propaganda before:

Plame Gate

2/12/04

[fantom]

i truly belive this was planned from the get go. these people have overreached but will not realize it until rove or someone is charged.then if this goes down , everyone must demand that the W H drop the new tone crap and unleash the dogs. no fooling this smells like an attempt . no rose garden , it will be time to roll. watch delay's operation push back , he is about to destroy that idiot earle. this should be the the model. i pray i'm wrong but just in case.

[wildbill]

Joe Wilson didn't write his famous article until July.

Since the supposed 'outing' of Ms. pflame occurred in July, after the Wilson article was published, how would any conversations between Libby and Miller be relevant to the scope of the special prosecutor. Therefore, it seems likely that Libby wasn't asked any questions about any June conversations between Libby and Miller.

Lawyers always tell their clients to answer the questions truthfully but not to go beyond the scope of the question.

[cyncooper]

Why does Waas leave out key facts?

You know why.

[cyncooper]

Thanks.

[muawiyah]

Remember, Fitzgerald's job started out with a CIA complaint to Department of Justice. That means they are faced with something that has a more complex solution than a bullet to the temple and a naked body in Fort Marcy Park.

I think that problem is the fact that Amb. Wilson is NOT a CIA employee~!

[Sunnyflorida]

"The universal MSM premise is that the Bush administration was actively seeking to destroy Wilson"

Look I like Bush. But I do have a complaint. He never seems to attack opponents. I mean Clinton would have strung up Nagin and Blanco would be dead meat. Kennedy would be in jail on DWI, etc.
So why would the go after this two bit hood with a bad case of faulty logic and pointy finger.

So the concept of blasting this guy of all people makes no sense.

[operation clinton cleanup]

And why did Wilson wait until July to write his article when the bone he had to pick was with the President's January State of the Union address?

[operation clinton cleanup]

Look I like Bush. But I do have a complaint. He never seems to attack opponents. I mean Clinton would have strung up Nagin and Blanco would be dead meat.

Bush may not be perfect, but he is no Clinton.

[cyncooper]

Lawyers always tell their clients to answer the questions truthfully but not to go beyond the scope of the question.

Exactly. And in fairness, the same would have applied to Judith Miller. Her previous subpoena was only for July 6-July 13 conversations and notes.

[rocklobster11]

He waited until July to write the story, but he spent several months before that blabbing to reporters as an "unnamed source". I think he talked about himself (on some panel) in the third person as an unnamed ambassador who had proved that Bush lied, etc,etc,etc.

[cyncooper]

I mean Clinton would have strung up Nagin and Blanco would be dead meat. Kennedy would be in jail on DWI, etc.

B.S.

[small voice in the wilderness]

Can a person be charged for not giving information about a question that is not asked? That is what this investigation sounds like.

[Sunnyflorida]

"Bush may not be perfect, but he is no Clinton."

I know. I know. That's why the whole concept of the story never made any sense. Why would the WH attack Wilson? He was quite unimportant. It the WH had an enemies list Wilson would be way, way down it.

[Sunnyflorida]

"Bush may not be perfect, but he is no Clinton."

I know. I know. That's why the whole concept of the story never made any sense. Why would the WH attack Wilson? He was quite unimportant. It the WH had an enemies list Wilson would be way, way down it.

[operation clinton cleanup]

That's why the whole concept of the story never made any sense.

Exactly... It all comes back to Joe Wilson and his motives... and ego.

[cyncooper]

The sequence goes:

SOTU end of January

Wilson makes some media appearances in February and March, before the war, on tv and a column in The Nation against the war but saying nothing about the uranium/Africa claim. And he does cite the SOTU, so we know he was aware of it.

In May we know he talks to Nicholas Kristoff about his story and in June the WaPo goes with a piece and then he outs himself in July.

At the same time in May in England the "sexed up dossier" charge is being made against Tony Blair. The charge, you might recall: Blair lied about intelligence. Sound familiar?

[operation clinton cleanup]

Can a person be charged for not giving information about a question that is not asked?

Depends on your definition of "asking" is "is"....

[operation clinton cleanup]

Thanks for the time line refresher. Didn't the source of the "sexed up" comment refute the quote and then do himself in? Sorry, but I have a hard time keeping track of this.