Posted on 11/17/2005 5:10:51 AM PST by veronica
November 17, 2005 -- CALL it "Deep Throat 2." The CIA-leak probe is in big trouble because superstar reporter and Watergate hero Bob Woodward has emerged as a surprise witness for the defense — potentially undermining the case against ex-White House aide Scooter Libby.
Woodward yesterday revealed that he's told prosecutors he could be the first reporter to learn from a Bush administration source that Iraq war critic Joe Wilson's wife worked as a CIA analyst — but Libby wasn't his new "Deep Throat."
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
You recall wrong.
Where in the transcript did you see that? I seem to have missed it. Besides, did anyone ask the question "did you know of this before someone in the administration told you?"
Dont have the transcript in front of me. Could have been there or in the article that the Washingon Post wrote about the statement. In any event this WSJ chronolgy clearly lables the time as Mid June. The chronology has been updated based on Woodward's statement. Revised Timeline CIA-Leak Chronology November 17, 2005 9:18 a.m. Here is a chronology of the CIA leak case. It is based on information contained in the indictment of Cheney aide Libby, a result of the investigation by special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, plus media reports and other sources. Items from Libby's indictment are in plain text; additions are marked with italics. February 2002: Former Ambassador Joseph Wilson is asked by the Central Intelligence Agency to travel to Niger to check out an intelligence report that Iraq tried to buy yellowcake uranium from Niger in the late 1990s for use in nuclear weapons. Jan. 28, 2003: President Bush delivered his State of the Union address, which included sixteen words asserting that "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa." May 6: New York Times published a column by Nicholas Kristof that disputed the accuracy of the "sixteen words" in the State of the Union address. The column reported that, following a request from the Vice President's office for an investigation of allegations that Iraq sought to buy uranium from Niger, an unnamed former ambassador was sent on a trip to Niger in 2002 to investigate the allegations. According to the column, the ambassador reported back to the CIA and State Department in early 2002 that the allegations were unequivocally wrong and based on forged documents. Wilson May 29: In the White House, Libby asked an Under Secretary of State for information concerning the unnamed ambassador's travel to Niger to investigate claims about Iraqi efforts to acquire uranium yellowcake. The Under Secretary thereafter directed the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research to prepare a report concerning the ambassador and his trip. The Under Secretary provided Libby with interim oral reports in late May and early June 2003, and advised Libby that Joseph Wilson was the former ambassador who took the trip. June 9: 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. June 11: 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. June 12: Prior to this date, Washington Post reporter Walter Pincus contacted the Office of the Vice President in connection with a story he was writing about Wilson's trip. Libby participated in discussions in the Office of the Vice President concerning how to respond to Pincus. Cheney June 12: Libby was advised by Vice President Cheney 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. June 12: The Washington Post published an article by Pincus about Wilson's trip to Niger, which described Wilson as a retired ambassador but not by name, and reported that the CIA had sent him to Niger after an aide to the Vice President raised questions about purported Iraqi efforts to acquire uranium. Pincus's article questioned the accuracy of the "sixteen words," and stated that the retired ambassador had reported to the CIA that the uranium purchase story was false. Plame June 14: Libby met with a CIA briefer. During their conversation he expressed displeasure that CIA officials were making comments to reporters critical of the Vice President's office, and discussed with the briefer, among other things, "Joe Wilson" and his wife "Valerie Wilson," in the context of Wilson's trip to Niger. Mid-June: During this period, Washington Post writer Bob Woodward heard about Plame from a "senior Bush administration official" while researching a book, according to his testimony before a grand jury in November 2005. Woodward declined to identify the official but said it wasn't Libby. A spokesman for Karl Rove told the Post that it wasn't Rove either. Woodward said he told Walter Pincus, who had reported on Iraq intelligence and the war for the Post, about Plame, but Pincus had no recollection of this exchange. (Woodward's statement) June 19: An article appeared in the New Republic magazine online entitled "The First Casualty: The Selling of the Iraq War." Among other things, the article questioned the "sixteen words" and stated that following a request for information from the Vice President, the CIA had asked an unnamed ambassador to travel to Niger to investigate allegations that Iraq had sought uranium from Niger. The article included a quotation attributed to the unnamed ambassador alleging that administration officials "knew the Niger story was a flat-out lie." The article also was critical of how the administration, including the Office of the Vice President, portrayed intelligence concerning Iraqi capabilities with regard to weapons of mass destruction, and accused the administration of suppressing dissent from the intelligence agencies on this topic. Shortly after publication of the article in the New Republic, Libby spoke by telephone with his then principal deputy and discussed the article. That official asked Libby whether information about Wilson's trip could be shared with the press to rebut the allegations that the Vice President had sent Wilson. Libby responded that there would be complications at the CIA in disclosing that information publicly, and that he could not discuss the matter on a non-secure telephone line. June 20: Woodward interviewed a second administration official, White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card, for his book. Woodward said later: "One of the lists of questions I believe I brought to the interview included on a single line the phrase 'Joe Wilson's wife.' " He said he had no recollection of asking Card about her, and that the tape-recording of the interview contained no mention. Miller June 23: Libby met with New York Times reporter Judith Miller. During this meeting, Libby was critical of the CIA, and disparaged what he termed "selective leaking" by the CIA concerning intelligence matters. In discussing the CIA's handling of Wilson's trip to Niger, Libby informed her that Wilson's wife might work at a bureau of the CIA. (Note: Miller wrote later in the Times: "My notes indicate that well before Mr. Wilson published his [July 2003, see below] critique, Mr. Libby told me that Mr. Wilson's wife may have worked on unconventional weapons at the CIA. My notes do not show that Mr. Libby identified Mr. Wilson's wife [Valerie Plame] by name.") Post's Woodward June 23: Woodward had a phone conversation with Libby, telling him he was going to send questions for Cheney regarding yellowcake and Iraq's weapons program. Woodward said, in testimony later, that he had the question list from the June 20 interview with the phrase "Joe Wilson's wife" on his desk during the discussion. Woodward testified that he has no recollection that Wilson or Plame was discussed, and that he has no notes of the conversation. June 27: Woodward interviewed Libby but said there are no references to Wilson or his wife in four pages of notes from this meeting. July 6: New York Times publishes op-ed by Wilson, with headline: "What I Didn't Find in Africa." July 9: According to people briefed on White House aide Karl Rove's testimony to the grand jury in mid-October 2005, Rove said that on this date columnist Robert Novak told Rove he was writing a column that would report that Plame worked for the CIA, and Rove told the columnist he had heard similar information. July 10: Libby spoke to NBC Washington Bureau Chief Tim Russert to complain about press coverage of Libby by an MSNBC reporter. Libby didn't discuss Wilson's wife with Russert. "He didn't call me as a source. He called me as a viewer," Russert later said. Russert said he hadn't heard of Plame at that point, and that Libby didn't discuss her with him. Novak July 10 or July 11: Libby spoke to a senior official in the White House ("Official A") who advised Libby of a conversation Official A had earlier that week with columnist Robert Novak in which Wilson's wife was discussed as a CIA employee involved in Wilson's trip. Libby was advised by Official A that Novak would be writing a story about Wilson's wife. People briefed on the matter confirmed that Official A is White House adviser Karl Rove. Cooper July 12: Libby flew with Vice President Cheney and others to and from Norfolk, Va., on Air Force Two. On his return trip, Libby discussed with other officials aboard the plane what Libby should say in response to certain pending media inquiries, including questions from Time reporter Matthew Cooper. July 12: 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. July 12: In the late afternoon, Libby spoke by telephone with Judith Miller of the New York Times and discussed Wilson's wife, and that she worked at the CIA. July 12: Washington Post reporter Walter Pincus had a conversation with an unnamed administration official who says that Wilson's trip to Niger "was set up as a boondoggle by his wife, an analyst with the agency working on weapons of mass destruction," according to an account of the conversation by Pincus two years later. July 14: In a column, Novak identifies Valerie Plame, as "a [CIA] operative on weapons of mass destruction," citing "two senior administration officials" as his sources. July 17: Matthew Cooper writes on Time.com that government officials have told him Wilson's wife is a CIA official monitoring WMD. Another article appears in the magazine's July 21 print issue. Sept. 29-30: The Justice Department informed then-White House counsel Alberto R. Gonzales that it had opened an investigation into possible unauthorized disclosures concerning the identity of an undercover CIA employee. Gonzales informed the president the next day. Bush told reporters: "[I]f there is a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is. And if the person has violated the law, the person will be taken care of." He added: "I don't know of anybody in my administration who leaked classified information. If somebody did leak classified information, I'd like to know it, and we'll take the appropriate action." July 6, 2005: U.S. District Judge Thomas Hogan sent The New York Times's Judith Miller to jail for refusing to testify to the grand jury. Time magazine's Cooper agrees to testify after receiving permission from the source -- Karl Rove -- to do so. Sept. 30: Miller testifies before the grand jury at the federal courthouse in downtown Washington. She says that, while in jail, she received a letter from Libby informing her that "every other" reporter had testified that they did not discuss Plame's name or identity with Libby. Oct. 14: Karl Rove testified for the fourth time before a grand jury investigating the potentially illegal leak of a CIA agent's identity. Rove spent about four and a half hours inside the federal courthouse. Oct. 15: The New York Times reported that Miller's notes contain the misspelled name of covert CIA officer Valerie Plame, but the reporter has told prosecutors she cannot recall who disclosed the name. Oct. 28: Libby was indicted on one count of obstruction of justice, two counts of making false statements and two counts of perjury. Nov. 14: Post's Woodward testified before a grand jury.
Did I misunderstand the underlined sentence you wrote in Post #222 on this thread? The sentence is constructed so as to clearly imply you are a prosecutor.
To: js1138
Once you demonstrate that national reporters have lied about this, or have incredibly faulty memories, how are you going to get a jury to convict?
As a prosecutior, it's the integrity of the investigators that I am concerned with. The reporters are a sideshow, as is the CIA to be honest.
This is a question of whether Libby told investigaotrs that he called CIA to check Plame's status for himself. Do you believe Libby "forgot" to mention that to investigators? Or do you believe the prosecution, that Libby intentionally withheld that fact.
The challenge to the prosecution will be to diminish the "was she outed" question; and the strategy of the defense is to keep raising the "was she outed" question.
222 posted on 11/16/2005 5:56:02 AM PST by Cboldt
In any case, why is it so important to you that Libby be guilty of something?
However, if Woodward told him before he went to the CIA ....
Yes, you did.
ONly partially correct. He would have heard of it first from Cheney, two people at the CIA, and another person at the STate Department. He would then have discussed this knowledge with three additional government officials and then forget it and attributed his knowledge to Russert/Woodward. Big difference. His failure to remember appears to indicate attempt to cover up.
"That is absurd. Woodward didnt come out."
Then how come we didn't hear about this till afterwards? I didn't see anything on these forums about Woodward. It was all Novak, Miller and Cooper. I would think that Woodward would have been on top of the list.
No, there is more to this and the RATS will not let this die. They want Rove.
But now we see a different reporter knew about Plame a month before Libby was talking to anyone. Maybe Libby learned it from Woodward BEFORE all those pesky Fed Employees mentioned it to him. "I knew that, a reporter told me that" is now a much, much more plausible claim for Libby to make. It shoots the "timeline" that is the main evidence in Fitz's case.
Plus now that we know there is ONE MORE, are there TWO MORE or THREE MORE reporters who knew this, maybe even earlier than Woodward?
Because neither Woodward nor the administration official who leaked the information to him wanted to appear before the grand jury. Woodward had publicly criticized the investigation as a witch hunt and said it was all about nothing. Woodward was bound by agreement with his Administration source so he couldnt go to Fitzgerald. Then around Nov 3, Woodwards administration source went to the Prosecutor and reported the conversation. Then Fitz had Woodward testify Nov 14. Woodward would never have come out if he hadnt been outed by his administration source.
People don't understand what happened here. Fitzgerald's theory of the case is that Libby was the FIRST leaker to the press so when Libby told the FBI and the Grand Jury that, he Libby, heard about Plame from a reporter it must be perjury.
Woodward now says he knew about Plame from other sources prior to Libby's alleged leaking, Woodward goes farther by admitting he may have discussed Plame with Libby prior to Libby's alleged leakings.
It may come down as to whether Libby confused Russert and Woodward on the telephone and whether such confusion is punishable by 30 years in jail.
The "lie" he told was that a reporter told him Plane worked for the CIA. Now Woodward is saying he could have told him Plane worked foer the CIA. So they did not catch him in a lie.
Except Libby was told in late May/early June. Woodward wasnt told until mid June (when by testimony, Libby had heard from four different people). Libby did not speak to Woodward until June 23 and June 27.
You are not obliged to answer, of course, but I'd appreciate a clarification for my own enlightenment.
As a prosecutior, it's the integrity of the investigators that I am concerned with.
Or, written more directly, "I am concerned with the integrity of the investigators as a prosecutor."
Or, "As a prosecutor, I am concerned with the integrity of the investigators."
Could you expand on who the subject (prosecutor) is in this sentence? In the one-dimensional world of internet forums, it's very easy to misunderstand what someone posts.
Actually, I believe he said that he would have recorded it in his notes if LIBBY had said something to him and that didn't happen.
He said he "possibly" could have mentioned it to Libby, because it was on his list of questions to ask .....
Woodward asserts his contacts with THREE officials were mid-June for an unnamed official (can't name publicly, I bet the name was givien to Fitzgerald); June 20 [assumed later than mid-June] for a 2nd official; and Libby [named] on the 23rd and 27th.
Woodward testified that he had no recollection of discussion of Plame with any government official between mid-June and July 14, 2003. The June 20 contact with a second official and June 23 and 27 contacts with Libby are in the context of "did you PLAN to ask questions of other government officials."
"In the shoes of a prosecutor in this case, I'd be more concerned about the integrity of investigator testimony than about the integrity of reporter testimony"
It says Cheney found out on June 11ths. On June 12th it says Pincus published his article and it also says prior to that date (June 12th) Walter Pincus contacted the office....etc. Prior when?
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.