Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Woodward Says His Plame Source Not Libby
AP on Yahoo ^ | 11/16/05 | AP

Posted on 11/16/2005 11:07:47 AM PST by NormsRevenge

WASHINGTON - Vice President Cheney's former top aide, indicted last month on perjury and obstruction charges, reviewed documents Wednesday at a federal courthouse.

Accompanied by his legal team, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby walked into the courthouse without the crutches that he'd been using during a court appearance two weeks ago when he pleaded not guilty to charges stemming from the CIA leak investigation.

Libby's visit to the courthouse came hours after The Washington Post reported that at least one senior Bush administration official — who was not identified — told editor Bob Woodward about CIA operative Valerie Plame about a month before her identity was publicly exposed.

The newspaper reported that Woodward told Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald, who is investigating the leak of Plame's identity, that the official talked to him about Plame in mid-June 2003. Woodward and editors at the Post refused to identify the official to reporters other than to say it was not Libby.

Mark Corallo, a spokesman for Karl Rove's legal team, said Rove was not the official who talked to Woodward. Rove is a top deputy to President Bush and was referred to, but not by name, in Libby's indictment, as having discussed Plame's identity with reporters.

Libby was indicted last month on one charge of obstruction of justice and two counts each of false statement and perjury in connection with Fitzgerald's investigation.

Plame's husband, former U.S. Ambassador Joseph Wilson, had criticized U.S. intelligence efforts before the Iraq war. On June 23, Libby told New York Times reporter Judith Miller that Wilson's wife might work at the CIA. Robert Novak, in a column published July 14, identified Plame, as a CIA operative.

Woodward's testimony in a two-hour deposition Monday would mean that another White House official told a reporter about Plame before Libby revealed her identity to Miller. A spokesman for White House adviser Karl Rove told the Post that Rove did not discuss Plame with Woodward.

William Jeffress Jr., one of Libby's lawyers, told the Post that Woodward's testimony raises questions about his client's indictment. "Will Mr. Fitzgerald now say he was wrong to say on TV that Scooter Libby was the first official to give this information to a reporter?" Jeffress said.

Woodward, famous for his investigation with Carl Bernstein of the Watergate scandal during the Nixon administration, is now assistant managing editor of the Post. In October, he was dismissive of the outing of Plame, telling CNN's Larry King that the damage from her exposure was "quite minimal."

Meantime, The Associated Press on Wednesday joined other news organizations in asking U.S. District Judge Reggie Walton to deny a court motion by Fitzgerald for a blanket protective order keeping all pretrial evidence in Libby's case out of public view.

The special prosecutor is seeking a court order that would prohibit Libby and his legal team from publicly disclosing "all materials produced by the government."


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Foreign Affairs; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: cialeak; libby; plame; plamegate; source; woodward
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-89 next last
To: cricket

Not perjury. Making false statements. Quite different.


61 posted on 11/16/2005 12:49:23 PM PST by Safetgiver (Noone spoke when the levee done broke, Blanco cried and Nagin lied.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Semper Paratus

Woodward's source wasn't Rove, either.


62 posted on 11/16/2005 1:22:59 PM PST by popdonnelly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: edcoil
"Woodward is a big liberal - maybe since they did not get Bush's chief as the left had hoped, woodward is manufacturing data to get Rove anyway they can."

I think it might be just the opposite. Other posters have shown that Woodward was never a big fan of the Plame investigation, and his story of the run-up to the war was fairly even-handed. I don't think Woodward is prominent in the "Bush lied" camp. No, I think he's coming out with this because he thinks Libby is being done an injustice, and that either someone else is the real culprit or that the whole thing is much ado about nothing. Probably the latter, I think, since Woodward's testimony will tend to re-open the issues of how widely Plame's identity was known and whether Libby was indeed the first to divulge it to reporters. I think Woodward is trying to muddy the waters for Fitz, to create ambiguities, because he thinks this whole thing will be bad for journalism in the long run.
63 posted on 11/16/2005 1:23:31 PM PST by Steve_Seattle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

Comment #64 Removed by Moderator

To: Valpal1
"I think Woodward is deliberately messing with Fitz and the Libby prosecution."

I agree (see post 63). Woody is on record as not being a fan of this investigation. I think he thinks it's unfair to Libby, on one hand, and bad for journalism, on the other.
65 posted on 11/16/2005 1:28:38 PM PST by Steve_Seattle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Arizona Carolyn
Did you see him on Larry King the night they had on two senators, Woodward and one otherperson who escapes me right now.. the Dem Senator started giving a lot of 'hype' on the case, Woodward reached in his pocket and pulled out a piece of paper (saying he was prepared for this) showed the senator; who promptly said nothing more on the subject. Now, I'd really like to know what was on that piece of paper!

It was a copy of the indictment. The Rat Senator was trying to say the indictment proved Bush lied about the war and Woodward banged back that a load of crap and you need to red the indictment. Slammed him pretty good.

66 posted on 11/16/2005 1:30:55 PM PST by fedupjohn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Steve_Seattle

Is that the real Libby issue? Libby is not in trouble for leaking the name. My understanding of the charges is there was no underlying crime of releasing the name.

Libby's case is only about Libby not telling the truth of what he knew to the grand jury.


67 posted on 11/16/2005 1:37:45 PM PST by edcoil (Reality doesn't say much - doesn't need too)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: MinuteGal

yes, the last sentence of this article is unreal.


68 posted on 11/16/2005 1:39:16 PM PST by oceanview
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

Bob Woodward is no dummy.

He sees what a few others, namely Victoria Toensing, see:

1. The CIA is the agency that promised a "slam dunk" with the intelligence.

2. The CIA has been the agency that has been leaking like a sieve on "bad intelligence".

3. Plame, a CIA WMD specialist, is the one who got Wilson to go to Niger TO REFUTE THE 16 WORDS AND MAKE BUSH LOOK WORSE.

4. Why was the CIA not coming forward with the evidence that SUPPORTED their intelligence on WMDs?

IMO, some rogue elements in the CIA are fighting a war against Bush. Woodward recognizes this. And Woodward recognizes the big picture.


69 posted on 11/16/2005 1:40:31 PM PST by Bryan24 (When in doubt, move to the right....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steve_Seattle

that Larry King show on the night of the Libby indictment, I believe Woodward was talking down Sen Dodd - makes alot of sense now.


70 posted on 11/16/2005 1:41:07 PM PST by oceanview
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: edcoil
I am struck by the fact that Libby's story was consistent; all five indictments are basically for the same thing, telling the same story four times, and then Fitz added in obstruction of justice as a capstone for the perjury/false testimony indictments. So Libby really only has to undermine one of the indictments; if he does that, the others inevitably fall with it.

This gets down to {1) who Libby first heard about Plame from, and when; (2) Libby's memory about the sequence of events that were fairly close in time; (3) the extent to which other reporters knew about Plame independent of Libby; and (4) the degree to which Fitz gained some testimony only be agreeing to let witnesses NOT testify about other pertinent matters. All four of these approaches - and probably others I haven't even thought of - can be used to chip away at the certainty that Libby deliberately lied about a substantive issue.
71 posted on 11/16/2005 2:00:47 PM PST by Steve_Seattle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: Linda Sandoval

No it was Dodd. Quite the arrogant jerk he was; until Woodward showed him that piece of paper.


72 posted on 11/16/2005 3:47:25 PM PST by Arizona Carolyn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: cricket

Joe DiGenova today on John Gibson's show said by not knowing about Woodward Fitzgerald made a huge error and should have no recourse but drop charges against Libby -- he gave the statutes involved; said with the horrible presser Fitz did and then this it really makes Fitz look like he was just out to indict someone.... anyone.


73 posted on 11/16/2005 3:49:38 PM PST by Arizona Carolyn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye

What happens when you pick and choose who you want to talk to and who you don't -- how about Andrea Mitchell? She's said it was common knowledge who Plame was and everyone in Washington knew... which is why Woodward didn't think it was worth a second thought when he WAS told... why didn't Fitz talk to Mitchell and others who had another side of the story?


74 posted on 11/16/2005 3:51:41 PM PST by Arizona Carolyn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: cricket

It is pathetic, indeed.... and when they try to fight back it's like a cat trying to get out of a paper sack.... a lot of noise and not much action.


75 posted on 11/16/2005 3:53:29 PM PST by Arizona Carolyn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: Safetgiver

Crossed my mind. He told Cheney.


76 posted on 11/16/2005 3:54:02 PM PST by Arizona Carolyn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: fedupjohn

I liked that Woodward was prepared... the GOP could take a few lessons.. BTW, I think a lot of people are confusing Woodwards politics with Carl Bernsteins -- a rabid Democrat...


77 posted on 11/16/2005 3:56:11 PM PST by Arizona Carolyn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Steve_Seattle

Read my post here #73 -- De Genova explained why this case has to be sacked now.


78 posted on 11/16/2005 3:58:03 PM PST by Arizona Carolyn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: Arizona Carolyn
What happens when you pick and choose who you want to talk to and who you don't --

If you are a Republican (some exceptions for RINOs) you get indicted. If you're a lib you get whitewashed, spin dried and hailed as a hero.

79 posted on 11/16/2005 3:58:16 PM PST by TigersEye (Love that proclaims itself loudly loves only itself.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: quefstar
"Not so fast. The president allowed Woodward in to the Oval Office to research one of his most recent books."


The President didn't say that, I did.


" It never pays to try to make friends with a snake."


That is a certainty! ;)



80 posted on 11/16/2005 6:10:39 PM PST by G.Mason (The U.S. has two political party's ... Diseased Democrats and Republicans in pink chiffon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-89 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson