Posted on 11/17/2005 2:49:48 AM PST by The Raven
Bob Woodward's just-released statement, suggesting that on June 27, 2003, he may have been the reporter who told Scooter Libby about Joseph Wilson's wife, blew a gigantic hole in Patrick Fitzgerald's recently unveiled indictment of the vice president's former chief of staff.
While that indictment did not charge Mr. Libby with outing a CIA covert operative, it alleged that he lied to investigators and the grand jury. As we have stated earlier on this page -- and unlike many conservative voices then -- we believe perjury is always a serious offense (even in a political setting). And if sufficient evidence exists to support a conviction, then Mr. Fitzgerald's indictment of Mr. Libby was fully warranted.
However, the heart of his perjury theory was predicated upon the proposition that Mr. Libby learned of Valerie Plame's identity from other government officials and not from NBC's Tim Russert, ...
--snip
However, given Mr. Woodward's account, which came to light after the Libby indictment was announced, that he met with Mr. Libby in his office -- armed with the list of questions, which explicitly referenced "yellowcake" and "Joe Wilson's wife" and may have shared this information during the interview -- it is entirely possible that Mr. Libby may have indeed heard about Mrs. Plame's employment from a reporter. ...
--snip Accordingly, Mr. Fitzgerald should do the right thing and promptly dismiss the indictment of Scooter Libby.
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
Could be very possible that Libby remembered Russert told him when it actually was Woodward.
"The Editorial and the article it references seem to miss the point that Libby called the CIA himself, in order to learn about Plame"
For the longest while I have seen you post some variation of this on every Plame/Wilson thread. I wonder where you go it.
Fitzgerald's indictment says this:
"On or about June 9, 2003, a number of classified documents from the CIA were faxed to the Office of the Vice President to the personal attention of LIBBY and another person in the Office of the Vice President. The faxed documents, which were marked as classified, discussed, among other things, Wilson and his trip to Niger, but did not mention Wilson by name. After receiving these documents, LIBBY and one or more other persons in the Office of the Vice President handwrote the names “Wilson” and “Joe Wilson” on the documents."
It is too big a coincidence that Woodward is now inserted into this whole Pflame matter.
IMO it is Woodward who was talking to reporters about Pflame and Wilson.
Woodward will eventually be identified as Deep Throat in the Pflame outting.
Did, perhaps, someone at the CIA fax those documents out of the blue, or were they requested to do so?
23. On or about July 12, 2003, in the afternoon, LIBBY spoke by telephone to Cooper, who asked whether LIBBY had heard that Wilson's wife was involved in sending Wilson on the trip to Niger. LIBBY confirmed to Cooper, without elaboration or qualification, that he had heard this information too. ...The difference between paragraphs 23 and 26 is that paragraph 23 purports to state fact, and paragraph 26 is the allegation of a statement actually made by Libby. Note the difference, in paragraph 23, the prosecutor asserts that Cooper mentioned Plame to Libby, first. Back to the indictment ...26. As part of the criminal investigation, LIBBY was interviewed by Special Agents of the FBI on or about October 14 and November 26, 2003, each time in the presence of his counsel. During these interviews, LIBBY stated to FBI Special Agents that: ...
b. During a conversation with Matthew Cooper of Time magazine on or about July 12, 2003, LIBBY told Cooper that reporters were telling the administration that Wilson's wife worked for the CIA, but that LIBBY did not know if this was true; and [stement re: Miller deleted]
32. It was part of the corrupt endeavor that during his grand jury testimony, defendant LIBBY made the following materially false and intentionally misleading statements and representations, in substance, under oath: ...b. LIBBY advised Matthew Cooper of Time magazine on or about July 12, 2003, that he had heard that other reporters were saying that Wilson's wife worked for the CIA, and further advised him that LIBBY did not know whether this assertion was true; and [again delete references to Miller]
33. It was further part of the corrupt endeavor that at the time defendant LIBBY made each of the above-described materially false and intentionally misleading statements and representations to the grand jury, LIBBY was aware that they were false, in that: ...
b. LIBBY did not advise Matthew Cooper, on or about July 12, 2003, that LIBBY had heard other reporters were saying that Wilson's wife worked for the CIA, nor did LIBBY advise him that LIBBY did not know whether this assertion was true; rather, LIBBY confirmed to Cooper, without qualification, that LIBBY had heard that Wilson's wife worked at the CIA; and [Miller deletia] ...
Paragraph 32 purports to recapitualte Libby's actual testimony, as did paragraph 26. It is that testimony which is alleged to be false.
Paragraph 33 purports to recite the true facts as discerned during the course of the investigation. For example, 33.b. is derived from Cooper's testimony.
Text of Indictment in HTML form <- handy reference
Wow! Wish I knew what was going on. Usually things are much more clear on this site. We have people reading the same docs, and saying things that are 100% diametrically opposed to each other. What gives.
BTTT
Actually, I see where what you have stated is mentioned later in the indictment:
"7. On or about June 11, 2003, LIBBY spoke with a senior officer of the CIA to ask about the origin and circumstances of Wilson's trip, and 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.
9. On or about June 12, 2003, LIBBY was advised by the Vice President of the United States that Wilson's wife worked at the Central Intelligence Agency in the Counterproliferation Division. LIBBY understood that the Vice President had learned this information from the CIA."
But I think the timeline is significant. It's not like Libby called the CIA out of the blue. Nor is it that this was Libby's only contact with the CIA. There was a lot of contact.
I don't think it entirely implausible that Libby would have muddled up who was the first to tell him. Or even to forget that he was told by the CIA.
Paragraph 32: LIBBY advised Matthew Cooper of Time magazine on or about July 12, 2003, that he had heard that other reporters were saying that Wilson's wife worked for the CIA, and further advised him that LIBBY did not know whether this assertion was true ...
32. It was part of the corrupt endeavor that during his grand jury testimony, defendant LIBBY made the following materially false and intentionally misleading statements and representations, in substance, under oath: ...b. LIBBY advised Matthew Cooper of Time magazine on or about July 12, 2003, that he had heard that other reporters were saying that Wilson's wife worked for the CIA, and further advised him that LIBBY did not know whether this assertion was true;
Paragraph 33 says nothing about Cooper.
Yes it does. See post above where I cut and pasted from it.
The indictment does not say that Cooper told Libby.
Yes it does, see paragraph 23 and other places.
And the idectment does not say that Libby lied about anything to investigators or the GJ, except about what Russert said.
The indicment alleges lies in the context of conversations will Russert, Cooper and Miller.
According to Woodward he wanted to protect his source and did not want to go to jail in doing so.
I suspect they were requested to do so. And I would guess because of the articles coming about the trip to Niger. Notice that the CIA didn't even mention Wilson's name in the documents.
Yes, but if Libby had heard about Plame from Woodward, his testimony and statements in 26 and 32 are true. Cooper asks Libby about Plame (does not tell him), Libby says he's heard it from reporters. Libby tells investigators and the GJ about this conversation and says he told Cooper that he did not know if it is true. He lied to Cooper about that, which is the right thing to do because he cannot speak to Cooper regarding classified sources, but he did not lie to investigators or the GJ. Libby told them the truth about his conversation with Cooper.
Reading comprehension problems, compounded by a predisposition to a certain outcome, reinforced by the echo chamer.
FR is always like this, as far as I recall. The nice thing is links to reference material and alternative points of view so each reader can look it up and draw on his own reasoning power.
Yes exactly.
The fax did not identify Wilson. At some time after the fax was received Libby learned that it was Wilson being discussed in the fax. There is no evidence that it was already known to be Wilson by Libby, and the content of the fax would suggest that Libby did know at the time that it was Wilson, much less know about Plame's role.
It was only shortly after this that Woodward showed up with notes to ask Libby about Wilson's wife. It was probably then that Libby learned about the Wilson/Plame/CIA nexus, and possibly then that Wilson's name was written on the fax.
The real question is: where did Woodward learn about Plame?
This is where the story is.
"The real question is: where did Woodward learn about Plame?
This is where the story is."
From a *former* top level Bush official.
I would guess Powell. Though I guess it might have been Tenet.
In either case it dramatically undercuts the claim that the outing was payback for Wilson's (mendacious) editorial.
No, the RATS will never admit they were wrong. They will pursue Libby to his grave.
You got that right. It will be an article of faith with them -- Alger Hiss was innocent as the driven snow. And Cheney, Rove and Libby committed "Treasongate."
To read any of the leftwing sites on this subject is to see how immune to reality these people are. Their ignorance is invincible.
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.