I'm not finding where it shows that he and Wilson talked.
Corn cites Bush 41's commendation of Wilson for his leadership in Iraq using what appears to be language from an award. "Your courageous leadership during this period of great danger for American interests and American citizens has my admiration and respect. I salute, too, your skillful conduct of our tense dealings with the government of Iraq....The courage and tenacity you have exhibited throughout this ordeal prove that you are the right person for the job." I presume Wilson provided it to Corn.
Corn cites a June 12 WP article, "On June 12, The Washington Post revealed that an unnamed ambassador had traveled to Niger and had reported back that the Niger caper probably never happened. This article revved up the controversy over Bush's claim--which he made in the state of the union speech--that Iraq had attempted to buy uranium in Africa for a nuclear weapons program." I suspect that Corn had already spoken to Pincus and Kristof before the Wilson NYT article.
Corn writes, "Soon after Wilson disclosed his trip in the media and made the White House look bad. the payback came. Novak's July 14, 2003, column presented the back-story on Wilson's mission and contained the following sentences. This has been Wilson's mantra , i.e., payback.
Corn goes on to say, "So he will neither confirm nor deny that his wife--who is the mother of three-year-old twins--works for the CIA. But let's assume she does. That would seem to mean that the Bush administration has screwed one of its own top-secret operatives in order to punish Wilson or to send a message to others who might challenge it." It is amazing to realize that this language, which has come to dominate the attacks from the Left on Bush today, was written just two days after the Novak article.
"This is not only a possible breach of national security; it is a potential violation of law. Under the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982, it is a crime for anyone who has access to classified information to disclose intentionally information identifying a covert agent The punishment for such an offense is a fine of up to $50,000 and/or up to ten years in prison.. Journalists are protected from prosecution, unless they engage in a "pattern of activities" to name agents in order to impair US intelligence activities. So Novak need not worry." Two days latter, Corn is citing the law that Fitzgerald used to go after Libby and Rove. The CIA didn't send over the referral to the DOJ until much later.
"Is it relevant that Wilson's wife might have suggested him for the unpaid gig. Not really. And Wilson notes, with a laugh, that at that point their twins were two years old, and it would not have been much in his wife's interest to encourage him to head off to Africa. What matters is that Wilson returned with the right answer and dutifully reported his conclusions. (In March 2003, the International Atomic Energy Agency concluded that the documents upon which the Niger allegation was based were amateurish forgeries.) His wife's role--if she had one--has nothing but anecdotal value. And Novak's sources could have mentioned it without providing her name. Instead, they were quite generous."
"The Wilson smear was a thuggish act. Bush and his crew abused and misused intelligence to make their case for war. Now there is evidence Bushies used classified information and put the nation's counter-proliferation efforts at risk merely to settle a score. It is a sign that with this gang politics trumps national security."
It defies credibility to believe that Corn could have authored this article just two days after Novak divulged Plame's name without some close cooperation by Wilson, cooperation that predeated Novak's article. It is all too pat to be believed. It appears to me that Wilson knew his wife would be drawn into this once he published his July 6th article in the NYT. He was setting a trap for the WH. I would also note that Corn was physically present at Fitzgerald's press conference and even asked a question.