Pincus: Woodward 'Asked Me to Keep Him Out' of Plame Reporting

editor and publisher. ^ | 11/16/05 | Joe Strupp

[Pikamax]

Pincus: Woodward 'Asked Me to Keep Him Out' of Plame Reporting

By Joe Strupp

Published: November 16, 2005 12:45 PM ET

NEW YORK Walter Pincus, the longtime Washington Post reporter and one of several journalists who testified in the Valerie Plame case, said he believed as far back as 2003 that Bob Woodward had some involvement in the case but he did not pursue the information because Woodward asked him not to.

"He asked me to keep him out of the reporting and I agreed to do that," Pincus said today. His comments followed a Post story today about Woodward's testimony on Monday before special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, in which Woodward reportedly disclosed that a senior White House official told him about Plame's identity as a CIA operative a month before her identity was disclosed publicly.

In today's Post story, by reporters Jim VandeHei and Carol Leonnig, Woodward is quoted as saying he told Pincus that he knew about Plame's true identity as a CIA operative in 2003. Pincus said, in the same story, that he did not recall Woodward telling him that, but believed he might have confused the conversation with one they had in October 2003 after Pincus wrote a story about being called to testify.

"In October, I think he did come by after I had written about being called and said I wasn't the only one who would be called," Pincus said, adding that he believed Woodward was talking about himself, but did not press him on it. "Bob and I have an odd relationship because he is doing books and I am writing about the same subject."

Pincus said he did not believe Woodward had purposely lied about their conversation, saying, "I think he thought he told me something." Pincus declined to comment on the other revelation in today's story, namely that Woodward had waited until last month before revealing his conversation with the White House official to Executive Editor Leonard Downie Jr. "I don't talk about what other people do, other reporters," he said. "Everybody does in this business what they think is the right thing to do."

Pincus also declined to comment on what reaction there has been in the Post newsroom to Woodward's testimony. "I'm not listening," he said.

Woodward did not return calls seeking comment.

Pincus gave his deposition to Fitzgerald in September 2004, in which he spoke about a conversation with a source related to the Plame case, but has never disclosed the identity of the source.

When asked if Woodward's unusual arrangement with the paper, in which he often withholds information and source identities for use in his books, is a problem for the Post, Pincus defended Woodward and said the situation is often a help.

He cited as an example a story Pincus wrote in 2003 just before the U.S. invasion of Iraq, which doubted the existence of weapons of mass destruction. "Bob helped to get it in the paper," Pincus said. "He had been hearing the same thing and actually wrote a couple of paragraphs that I adapted into the story."

[frankjr]

Sigh sigh. Yes I read the indictment several times. And it says little...like most indictments. However, Fitz's mistake was his press conference where he said:

"At the end of the day what appears is that Mr. Libby's story that he was at the tail end of a chain of phone calls, passing on from one reporter what he heard from another, was not true.

It was false. He was at the beginning of the chain of phone calls, the first official to disclose this information outside the government to a reporter. And then he lied about it afterwards, under oath and repeatedly."

Ooops. Hey Fitz (aka Mr. Wrong Facts) good luck proving Libby lied vs. different memory (like the crappy memories of every reporter in this case). Fitz better hope for a jury full of MarcusTulliusCiceros.

[Jo Nuvark]

[... Fitzgerald flummoxed on how since the Wilson story, all his professionalism jumped out the window...}

Maybe he found the bloody head of a thoroughbred in his sheets. That would be an ARKANSA thoroughbred.

[Political Junkie Too]

I don't think you're getting my point, that Libby would not have made contradictory statements if Woodward spoke up, or allowed himself to be subpoenaed. People knew things but kept quiet, and so the investigation went in a direction that it might not have if the original information holders would only have spoken in a timely manner. I agree that it's not about outing Plame, it's about whether Libby heard it from a reporter or told a reporter. It seems to me that Fitzgerald thinks Libby lied because Fitzgerald could find no reporter who says he told Libby, therefore Libby lied when he said he heard it from a reporter instead of telling a reporter. Now Woodward is saying that he might have told Libby.

You're saying that it doesn't matter?

-PJ

[freema]

On the 21st, immediate past National Security Advisor and Joe Wilson's co-advisor to John Kerry's campaign steps down as investigation becomes public about theft of the most highly classified information about Al Qaeda.

[BlueStateDepression]

Novak is doing some digging along with many other political reporters....HE has a hunch based on this tid bit and that tidbit as to who went to niger....he bounces his Idea off of Miller who likes the juice she hears...cooper is doing essentially the same thing.....it gets around what Novak is kinda onto....many reporters put it together but have no real source to verify it...... Journalists ask questions of Rove, libby (along with many other 'officilas' looking to verify what they already know.....libby asks cheney if she Is CIA as he heard....Rove does this also....
then it all hits papers...well "all" being this little chunk and that little chunk accompanied by MASSIVE amounts of OP ED about what they mean.

I have said before that (I think)there really was no true source. I think Andrea mitchel is being truthful when she said alot of folks knew before novak ever printed what he did WHO valerie was. I would offer that the folks that need charged in this are members of the MSM and not the white house at all. In the end wether charges are filed or not I cannot say, but inthe court of public opinion....MSM will end up holding the ball for this debacle.

[msnimje]

It is very interesting that one of the "Three Sources" who spoke with Woodward was Andy Card.

I wonder what will become of that, if anything.

[M. Peach]

Thanks for the clarification - that's what makes this place so great -

[Patriot from Philly]

Yes, but here's the rub on Libby. Libby is being charged with having lied about hearing about Plame first from reporters. If Woodward told Libby early on that could cast considerable reasonable doubt.

And since everyone seems to be confused about who said what (Especially the reporters) the Russert falsehood doesn't look so bad. After all the same thing happened to Pincus.

I don't know, I think the Libby case has been weakened on the perjury, false statement, and obstruction charges.

[LikeLight]

I watched Brit's report and came on FR thinking the place would be BUZZING with excitement - sounds like the entire case against Libby is crumbling today - and all I can find is this somewhat muted "Pincus" thread . . . odd . . .

[golfisnr1]

Fox News had Victoria Toensig and her Husband Digenoa(sp) on this evening. Digenoa took the prosecutor to task expecially on the news conference. Bottom line Digenoa said under Justice Dept. guidelines he MUST clear Libby now that this has come to light.

[TeleStraightShooter]

Wouldn't that be a trip if Woodward said, "Yeah, I might have told Libby she was CIA."

Here what he did say:
Notice how he dodged the question.
Why did he dodge the question?
When asked by Fitzgerald if it was possible I told Libby I knew Wilson's wife worked for the CIA and was involved in the assignment, I testified that it was possible I asked a question about Wilson or his wife, but that I have not recollection of doing so.

[Patriot from Philly]

Nothing, because if you read Woodward's statement, they didn't discuss Wilson, Plame or anything else.

They probably had a lot more important things to discuss since Woodward was trying to get information for his book on Iraq.

[Patriot from Philly]

Nothing, because if you read Woodward's statement, they didn't discuss Wilson, Plame or anything else.

They probably had a lot more important things to discuss since Woodward was trying to get information for his book on Iraq.

[Political Junkie Too]

I think he also says his note were not complete. He said that he had a pre-list of questions to ask, but didn't write down all the questions that he did ask, and that if Libby said something about Plame he would have noted it.

-PJ

[Jo Nuvark]

[...Fox News had Victoria Toensig and her Husband Digenoa...]

I saw this. Thought Degenoa was going to burst a vein, demanding that Fitzgerald drop the case against Libby. Also accused Fitzgerald of padding or ignoring the evidence. He was acrimonious. Those two are great Americans.

Someone needs to find the transcipt.

[Mr. Lucky]

I live in a cave.

Who are Victoria Toensig and Degenoa?

[kellynla]

"Sigh....you all really have to actually read the indictment and not just press accounts of it. It is independent of whether or not Plame was or was not covert. It all deals with contradictory statements under oath. Even if both claims were false he still has a case."

well I don't know where you went to law school, but if Joe diGenova Esq. says Fitzgerald will need to drop the charges then my money's on diGenova!

next case...

[conservative blonde]

Too bad they were not willing to give Libby that benefit of doubt.

[Jo Nuvark]

[...Who are Victoria Toensig and DiGenova...]

I believe they are the defense team for the Plame/CIA vs WH/Libby leak case.

[Tarpon]

Does anyone else think they should fire "deep throat" for abusing the public trust, and the editor as well?