Posted on 02/12/2007 2:25:08 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach
WASHINGTON (AP) -
Former White House press secretary Ari Fleischer leaked the identity of a CIA operative to Washington Post reporter Walter Pincus during a 2003 phone call, Pincus testified Monday as the first defense witness in the CIA leak trial.
Pincus was one of the first reporters to learn the identity of Valerie Plame, the wife of former ambassador and prominent Iraq war critic Joseph Wilson. Pincus said he learned her identity July 12, 2003 but did not immediately write about it. Plame was outed by syndicated columnist Robert Novak two days later.
Pincus testified on behalf of Vice President Dick Cheney's former chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby. Libby is accused of lying and obstructing the investigation into the leak of Plame's identity.
Pincus, a veteran national security reporter, said he was talking to Fleischer for a story about weapons of mass destruction. He said Fleischer "suddenly swerved off" topic and asked why Pincus continued to write about Wilson.
"Don't you know his wife works for the CIA as an analyst?" Pincus recalled Fleischer saying.
Fleischer testified at the trial earlier that Libby had told him about Plame over lunch. Fleischer testified he leaked the information to three reporters during a presidential trip to Africa but he did not mention the Pincus conversation. In exchange for his testimony, prosecutors promised not to charge Fleischer.
Libby argues that he never discussed Plame with Fleischer. Pincus' testimony helps defense attorneys make the argument that Fleischer needed someone to blame to cover up his own leaking.
Novak, whose column triggered an FBI investigation into the leak, was also scheduled to testify Monday, attorneys said.
Novak has said that Richard Armitage, the former deputy secretary of state, and Bush aide Karl Rove were the sources for his July 2003 column.
"You're going to hear that," defense attorney Theodore Wells said in court Monday morning. "He's going to testify about that in a few hours."
Novak and Pincus are two of several journalists whom Libby's attorneys planned to call. These lawyers also are fighting hard to force NBC foreign affairs reporter Andrea Mitchell to testify about why she said that Plame's identity was "widely known" even before the Novak column was published.
Mitchell has since recanted those comments and has said that she cannot explain them.
A key dispute in the case involves Mitchell's NBC colleague, Tim Russert. Libby says Russert told him in July 2003 that "all the reporters know" Plame worked for the CIA. Russert said that never happened because he didn't know who Plame was at the time.
Prosecutors say Libby concocted the Russert story to shield him from prosecution for discussing information he had learned through official government channels.
Libby's attorneys want to show that Russert had heard that Plame worked at the CIA. Fleischer has already testified that he told NBC reporter David Gregory about her. If Libby can show that Mitchell knew, too, they think they can persuade jurors to believe Libby's account of the Russert conversation.
U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton said Mitchell can be called as a witness but he wouldn't allow Libby's attorneys to ask about her inconsistent statements.
In addition to Mitchell, attorneys have said several other journalists are expected to testify this week: New York Times managing editor Jill Abramson, Newsweek assistant managing editor Evan Thomas, and Bob Woodward and Glenn Kessler, along with Pincus, from The Washington Post.
---
Associated Press writer Michael J. Sniffen contributed to this report.
--
Walter Pincus knew Valerie since 1996
Woodward testifies in CIA leak case
Text: Bob Woodward's Public Statement
Pincus: Woodward 'Asked Me to Keep Him Out' of Plame Reporting
PS: I should mention that on that first link, I haven't been able to confirm the agent referred to in the article was Plame and other researchers I've talked to have argued that it wasn't, so take that FWIW, but I include it for reference on the topic of Pincus and Plamegate.
What a mess this is - and what an embarrassment this is even on trial. Mitchell knew, Russert knew, Armitage knew, hell EVERYBODY knew and they are trying to hang Libby because their little witch hunt didn't work out.
Still working on that piece,...pretty thick...
>> I am Spartacus...
No, I am Spartacus.
Thank you!
There was no "leak," because she was not covert.
Woodward adds twist to CIA leak case ~ Armitage tape at CNN reveals truth of Plame exposure
Wilson did it!
No freaking way. How low can they go?
See link at post #49.
See link at post #49....just unreal.
CHUCKLE. CHUCKLE. CHUCKLE.
Thanks for the info!
Good thing I am snowed in today...otherwise I wouldn't have time to try and figure all of this out!
Libby lawyer Ted Wells just announced that he will not call Vice President Dick Cheney to testify in the trial. Wells also said that Libby himself will not testify in the trial. The defense is expected to wrap up its case tomorrow.
02/13 02:42 PM
A Glimpse Into the Sausage Factory PowerLine 2-12-07
One of our readers has now penetrated inside the Post through an email exchange with Jeff Smith, one of the Post reporters "credited" with the story. Smith is unhappy at being associated with the debacle. This is what Smith emailed to our reader:
I agree with you that this was an egregious error. I also had nothing to do with it. All I did was obtain a copy of the unclassified summary of the IG report and write a precisely correct account, which I turned over to the other reporters. I'm not happy my name was put on that story by the editors, and I was astonished by the mistake. I blew the whistle on it internally. So don't attribute the mistake to me.Cheers,
Jeff Smith
So someone--Pincus is an obvious candidate--had the two-page public portion of the IG report, and also had an accurate account thereof, but nevertheless managed to misrepresent the report's contents to make it look more critical of Feith's group than it actually was. Is there any possible explanation for that "egregious" and "astonish[ing]" error, other than a political agenda that trumps all else?
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.