Posted on 10/30/2005 9:25:14 PM PST by 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.
BTTT
EXACTLY what I was thinking.
Wasn't clear to Fitzgerald apparently.
Therein lies the problem.
We need a spokesman from the administration to set the record straight.
This is a very good point.
The only way Libby can be charged with lying to the Grand Jury is the fact that he did learn (earlier than he said to the GJ) that Valerie Wilson did, in fact, suggest sending Joe Wilson on the trip to Niger.
The facts of the charges themselves imply Wilson is lying to this day about his wife's role.
This is a basic fact that the media cannot ignore any longer. 60 Minutes conviently left this out last night for example.
My thinking is, how in the world did a person like this ever become an Ambassador to anything? Even in a Clinton
administration.
Great Story!
The media will never even acknowledge that Wilson is not truthful. They ignore the 9/11 Commission Report when it's convenient and drag it out as gospel when it fits their agenda for Bush bashing.
liberallarry doesn't seem to be disruptive, so the question is, are his points valid? If yes, then we should pay attention. If not, then he provides good points to consider how they can be countered.
True, the words quoted from the memo Plame wrote could be interpreted as response to questions asked about her husband. But that assumes someone asked those questions. But you stripped the "offered up his name" quote from context. Here's where it belongs:
Some CPD officials could not recall how the office decided to contact the former ambassador, however, interviews and documents provided to the Committee indicate that his wife, a CPD employee, suggested his name for the trip. The CPD reports officer told Committee staff that the former ambassadors wife "offered up his name" and a memorandum to the Deputy Chief of the CPD on February 12,2002, from the former ambassadors wife says, "my husband has good relations with both the PM [prime minister] and the former Minister of Mines (not to mention lots of French contacts), both of whom could possibly shed light on this sort of activity."
Are you saying the CPD reports officer was lying when he said she "offered up his name"? Or are you saying he didn't really know, but thought she might have and assumed she did? By associating "offered up his name" with the memo, you are implying that the CPD reports officer merely read the memo and reported his interpretation of the memo to the committee knowing no other facts. That's your biased opinion, not shared by any reasonably objective reader.
No, he's not objective, he's a liar like Wilson, maybe not quite as bad.
NBC gave his position fifteen minutes and the truth, three.
Post of the day!
Sorry if it seemed that used the phrase "offered up his name" out of context. I had seen the phrase before in a different context and should have explained that.
Where the HELL is the CIA Officer??? Where the hell is NOVAK??? Why don't they come out and expose this fraud????
Nobody's objective, only relatively so. Making accusations about lying when - in my case at least - you're faced with differing perceptions and understandings only demeans you.
Why the hell wasn't Valerie called to the Grand Jury??? I think maybe the CIA wouldn't let her? If that's the case theycan lie all day long and NEVER be held accountable.
he was all over CBS and NBC tonight just lyin his aging A$$ off!!! And I'm sure they are eating it up. I guarantee there won't be any rebuttal to his lies either. That would take "courage" to put on both sides.
And when is Clinton FBI head Freeh going to be on anywhere?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.