Joe Wilson In A Bind

American Spectator ^ | 10-31-05 | Clinton W. Taylor

[smoothsailing]

   

Joe Wilson in a Bind

By Clinton W. Taylor

Published 10/31/2005 12:07:45 AM

Last week I had the privilege of being lied to personally by Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, who spoke here at Stanford last Monday.

The fact that Joe Wilson is economical with the truth probably won't surprise many Spectator readers.

Nonetheless I assure you the horse I am beating, although it may be lying in the op-ed pages of the Los Angeles Times, is far from dead.

But this week there's new evidence of his lies to flog him with. When the indictment of Scooter Libby was unsealed on Friday, it finally placed one of Wilson's oft-repeated fabrications beyond the most hopeful partisan's credibility.

First the lie: In the Q&A after his talk last Monday, Wilson answered a question of mine with essentially the same statement about the origin of his mission to Niger that he relates in his L.A. Times op-ed:

Valerie was an innocent in this whole affair. Although there were suggestions that she was behind the decision to send me to Niger, the CIA told Newsday just a week after the Novak article appeared that "she did not recommend her husband to undertake the Niger assignment." The CIA repeated the same statement to every reporter thereafter.

The Newsday article he refers to notes:

A senior intelligence official confirmed that Plame was a Directorate of Operations undercover officer who worked "alongside" the operations officers who asked her husband to travel to Niger.

But he said she did not recommend her husband to undertake the Niger assignment. "They [the officers who did ask Wilson to check the uranium story] were aware of who she was married to, which is not surprising," he said. "There are people elsewhere in government who are trying to make her look like she was the one who was cooking this up, for some reason," he said. "I can't figure out what it could be."

This has been Wilson's story ever since the issue came up: he maintains his wife had nothing to do the CIA's decision to send him. It's important to his narrative that "outing" his wife was a bolt from the blue designed to intimidate and punish him.

The more plausible explanation is that the information came out because it cast Wilson's mission and his credibility in a new light. Evidence supports this interpretation. While the CIA may back Wilson's account to reporters, it has now twice contradicted him when the chips were down and the threat of perjury loomed.

The first contradiction, of course, occurred back in July 2004, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence devoted a few pages of its report on WMD intelligence failures to point out that Valerie Plame came up with the idea of sending her husband to Niger. Both a memorandum Plame wrote and the testimony of a CIA officer show that Wilson's trip was her idea. (The report can be downloaded here, and the relevant sections are on page 39, 40, and 72.)

That should have put an end to Joe Wilson's credibility, but it wasn't good enough for the diehard Wilson fans, like most of the audience at Stanford last week, or the editorial staff of the L.A. Times. But now the indictment of Scooter Libby has proved yet again that Wilson is full of it.

In order to claim that Libby had perjured himself and obstructed justice, the grand jury goes to great lengths to show how and when he had actually learned about the origin of Wilson's trip. To do so, they refer on page 4 of the indictment to a conversation between Libby and a "senior officer of the CIA" on June 11, 2003:

[Libby] 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.

And again on page 12 of the indictment:

[Libby] was informed by a senior CIA officer that Wilson's wife was employed by the CIA and that the idea of sending him to Niger originated with her.

This puts Wilson's fan club in a bind: either Wilson is lying, or the indictment is. Which is it? If it's the latter, then perhaps Scooter Libby didn't know what the indictment said he knew, and the indictment ought to be thrown out or at least amended.

Alas, most of the world sees it's the former. Wilson's lie, of course, wouldn't excuse any crime Libby might have committed, but it ought to be enough to prevent Wilson from ever being taken seriously again.

Clinton W. Taylor (clinton_w_taylor@hotmail.com) is a lawyer and a Ph.D. candidate in Political Science at Stanford.  

[Boazo]

Hey, that's no way to talk about his wife! LOL

[potlatch]

LOL, you nut!!

[devolve]

Makeup!

[potlatch]

That must be the 'before' picture! Makeup much improves him!

[Recovering Ex-hippie]

Well put! what a swarmy, phony and not very intelligent leftie with a blonde bimbo for a wife. Guess she didn't make it very far in her career.ha. Puleez...let his 15 mins of fame be up soon. I can't stand to watch him or hear him.

where does the left get these clowns? wilson? Sheehadi? sharpton? Byrd and Kennedy?...and of course, Scairy Kerry.
With characters like these who needs Halloween masks today?

[ntnychik]

fyi

[tsomer]

...in my view Joe Wilson has been right about everything except the most important thing - what it takes to defend this country.

Now that is entirely plausible. Liberals do take their freedom and their security for granted. This is their greatest sin.

But: why is it that no one seems to be questioning the sources behind Wilson's claims? The Nigerian government seems thoroughly corrupt. Wilson's familiarity to them as a former diplomat would have insured they provide a weekend with Rosy Scenario. I doubt he could have found any real scuttlebut if he'd wanted to. Yet he claims infallible knowledge of all that occurred, in the op-ed section of the daily wiper. Some diplomat. Some snoop.

[Just Lori]

Question: Didn't Wilson testify to the grand jury? And if he testified to these likely lies, why isn't he and other CIA personnel being charged with perjury?

I'm still trying to figure out how Sandy Burglar got away with stealing documents from the archives. Wouldn't you think that was a serious Federal offense? Why didn't anyone go after him?

[smoothsailing]

Oh my God! That's my next door neighbor, the retired college english professor. I'm printing this out so I can slide it under his door.

I swear! LOL!

[PhilDragoo]

WITLESS FOR THE PROSECUTION

[liberallarry]

But: why is it that no one seems to be questioning the sources behind Wilson's claims?

Yes, he and our other sources of intelligence could have been wrong (He, himself has said so). Intelligence seems to be a lot worse than we've been led to believe by Hollywood and bad novels. But prior to the war most intelligence was on his side and subsequent facts on the ground support him rather than the Administration.

[beyond the sea]

Such laughter is not of joy, but of ridicule and mockery.

Very clear now. It's good to know that the "hoot" you were suggesting was laughter of ridicule.

In my original post to you, I didn't really think you were laughing with Wilson, I was just basically venting about his appearances anywhere. He and a few others belong behind bars.

[bitt]

There must be a picture somewhere of Wilson and Clark plotting together..President Bush and his staff were fighting a war against the Islamofascists AND a war against their partisian intelligence agencies....

[NonLinear]

My understanding is that covert officers work in the Directorate of Operations, analysists work in the Directorate of Intelligence. That Plame worked in the former strongly suggests that Wilson's description of her is accurate.

No doubt that covert officers work at the Directorate of Operations, since that is the covert divison of the CIA. Your logic appears to be:

Covert officers work in the Directorate of Operations
Valerie Plame Wilson worked in the Directorate of Operation
ergo Valerie Plame Wilson was covert.

Sorry - doesn't wash. You need the word "ONLY" at the start of the first premise to support the conclusion.

[liberallarry]

Your logic appears to be:
Covert officers work in the Directorate of Operations
Valerie Plame Wilson worked in the Directorate of Operation
ergo Valerie Plame Wilson was covert.

My logic is
Covert officers work in the Directorate of Operations
Valerie Plame Wilson worked in the Directorate of Operation
She had enough power to participate in important decision-making
She and her husband say she was covert
ergo Valerie Plame Wilson very likely was, or had been, covert.

[NonLinear]

My logic is
Covert officers work in the Directorate of Operations
Valerie Plame Wilson worked in the Directorate of Operation
She had enough power to participate in important decision-making
She and her husband say she was covert
ergo Valerie Plame Wilson very likely was, or had been, covert.

Your logic is still faulty. The director of the DO has more power than she, and he is not covert. And ignoring that, after 22 months of investigation, the special prosecutor disagrees with your assessment. Your position is untenable. In fact, you have no position.


She had enough power to participate in important decision-making
You have been arguing in your previous posts that she did NOT participate in the important decision making.
Which is it?


She and her husband say she was covert
I have not seen where she says she was covert, but her husband has already been caught in at least three lies. His statements are worthless.

[SierraWasp]

Thank you for your very kind and very astute remarks, Recovering Ex-hippie... From a recovering citizen politician.

[tsomer]

But prior to the war most intelligence was on his side...

That's not saying much, by your own accounting.

and subsequent facts on the ground support him rather than the Administration.

Well, whose ground? I still believe that long term assessment will bear out on the side of the Administration. Part of the problem with this debate is that we subject this evidence to the same requirements we do in our courts. I don't think we have that luxury in a situation like this, certainly against this particular enemy. I think Saddam scuttled his program before the war-- some to Syria, some to God knows where. We won't have the full picture for years to come. Wilson was a bit player who, presuming to know better,publicly denounced the administration he claims sent him. When he gets a dose of his own medicine, when the revealer is revealed, he claims persecution. Maybe this legal technicality-- Plame's supposed covert status-- will sustain him. But know one in this administration has been charged for violating that; it doesn't appear that anyone will.

[Eagles Talon IV]

"I've heard this too but I can't imagine the reasoning. Can you post the pages where it appears?"

From the WP. Anything but a conservative source.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A39834-2004Jul9.html

"Wilson's assertions -- both about what he found in Niger and what the Bush administration did with the information -- were undermined yesterday in a bipartisan Senate intelligence committee report.

The panel found that Wilson's report, rather than debunking intelligence about purported uranium sales to Iraq, as he has said, bolstered the case for most intelligence analysts. And contrary to Wilson's assertions and even the government's previous statements, the CIA did not tell the White House it had qualms about the reliability of the Africa intelligence that made its way into 16 fateful words in President Bush's January 2003 State of the Union address."

IMO, if this loser institutes a civil action against Libby, it is likely he will wind up in jail after the defense gets through with nailing him in all his lies.

[Eagles Talon IV]

I never said it was a big deal as far as what you said, but it is important in that it shows how Wilson lied about this when he said that Cheney sent him AND that his wife had nothing to do with him going.

To be totally non biased about this it is clear in looking at the Wilson statements since he returned from Niger and checking them against the committee reports and the CIA statements that Wilson has lied numerous times. The question is WHY?