Skip to main content

With trembling, jittery fingers, I ransacked web site after web site looking for an angry fix.  The paucity of the news today has me feeling jumpy, irritable, disoriented and fretting a long "dry" weekend.  But then I came across this new Murray Waas piece.  One tidbit is that Miller did not come forward with the June meeting until she was confronted with Secret Service logs...suddenly her memory came oozing back, viscuous and slow.  They still had to "refresh her recollection" on other things as well.

There's all kinds of information in the story.  I haven't parsed it thoroughly yet - I don't know if there are any major blockbusters.  As someone in withdrawal, however, I thought that I would linger over it -word by word- who knows when more sustenance will come?  Here's an excerpt...after the flip.  Enjoy!!

Libby has told federal investigators, according to legal sources familiar with his testimony, that he told Miller at the meeting that he had heard that Wilson's wife had played a role in Wilson being selected for the Niger assignment. But Libby testified regarding both the June 23 and July 8 meeting that he had never named Plame nor told Miller that she worked for the CIA, because either he did not know that at the time, or, if he had heard Plame was a CIA employee, he did not know whether it was true.

Miller's grand jury testimony as well her notes on the July 8 meeting contradict Libby's version. Miller's notes indicate that Libby did indeed tell her that Plame worked for the CIA. Her notes said, according to Miller: "Wife works at Winpac." Asked for an explanation by the grand jury, Miller has said she testified she knew that Winpac meant Weapons Intelligence, Non-Proliferation, and Arms Control, a CIA unit.

Murray Waas - National Journal

Originally posted to mayan on Thu Oct 20, 2005 at 04:47 PM PDT.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  "sources familar with Libby's testimony" (none)
    is code for "Libby's Lawyer"

    of course.. :D

    "Our country right or wrong. When right, to be kept right; when wrong, to be put right" - Carl Schurz

    by RBH on Thu Oct 20, 2005 at 04:48:56 PM PDT

  •  Classified Information (none)
    Isn't employment at the CIA - whether overt or covert considered classified information that requires specific release?

    Shouldn't Libby, with all his apparent work in the area of foreign affairs, defense, know better to talk about someone who works in the CIA without knowing damn well that person's status?

    "Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph." (T. Paine)

    by dmmteacher on Thu Oct 20, 2005 at 04:49:28 PM PDT

    •  I think (none)
      only classified is covert or overt.  You think we'd know this by heart by now, wouldn't you.  I cannot being to count how many Plame diaries I have read.
    •  Bilmon column yesterday (none) has a great column yesterday, called "The Poison Memo"  In it, he writes (excerpted):

       Everyone knows how to catch rats -- you either set traps, or you put out poisoned bait. In the case of the White House conspirators who outed Valerie Plame, it looks like Patrick Fitzgerald is making use of both.

      The traps we already know about . <snip>
      The poison, though, may be what nails the conspirators for leaking Plame's identity and CIA affiliation -- although it may also show the plot was more a case of collective criminal negligence than a calculated act of reprisal . <snip>

      The irony is that in this case the rats may have poisoned themselves by leaking classified, but erroneous, information -- making it that much easier for Fitzgerald's team to trace the leak back to its original source:

      Miller's notes say I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby told her on July 8, 2003, that the wife of Bush administration critic Joseph Wilson worked for the CIA's Weapons Intelligence, Non-Proliferation and Arms Control unit. <snip> Plame, Wilson's wife, never worked for WINPAC, which is on the overt side of the CIA. She worked on the CIA's secret side, the directorate of operations, according to three people familiar with her work for the spy agency.

      There's a circumstantial case to be made that Scooter made his mistake because he was quoting a classified paragraph in the State Department memo  but there are a couple of reasons to suspect that the author -- an analyst in State's Bureau of Intelligence and Research -- may have incorrectly identified Plame as a WINPAC analyst, or at least described her in a way that might have left that impression.


      According to Washington Post, the second paragraph of the memo identified Plame by her married name, Valerie Wilson, and was clearly marked with an "S" to indicate that it was classified Secret.


      It doesn't seem far-fetched to speculate that either the original note taker or the memo writer might have misidentified Plame as an analyst in the WINPAC unit -- or perhaps as simply a CIA analyst, which others, like Grossman or Libby, later assumed meant she worked for WINPAC.

  •  A little desperate for a "fix" ? (none)
    lol - not that I blame you - enough already, let's get this done with before they play "Saturday Night Massacre" again.

    But the endless speculation, divineing, studying of chicken entrails starts to grate the nerves.

    Pardon me if .....

  •  New Title? (none)
    I am recommending that you change the title to something like "Murray Waas-Judy Miller changed testimony" or something of the like.

    That is the big news here. Judy Miller lied to Fitz and wouldn't give confirmation June 23rd happened until they showed her the logs.

    Only at that point did she "find" her notes for the meeting. Fitzgerald needs her to get Libby or he likely would have just indicted her butt for perjury.

    • prob. (4.00)
      You mean my mental state is NOT the story here?  That's a tough one to swallow!

      "We're all working for the Pharoah" - Richard Thompson

      by mayan on Thu Oct 20, 2005 at 04:55:56 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  And thanks, too (none)
        I'd speculated days ago that Judy had been cornered with hard evidence of some sort (badge access logs, video, phone logs, etc.) about the 23-JUN meeting, but I never saw anything that validated it.

        Your post tells me there definitely was something hard that stopped the weaseling, might not have been limited to the 23-JUN meeting.

        Wonder what other hard evidence stopped what other weaseling...?

    •  Title (none)
      A Good Title Would Be.  Secret Service Records Prompted Judy Miller Testimony.

      Little "Miss Run Amok" does not willingly tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

      She is sooo very much above all of that.

  •  Hard (none)
    It's hard to get the kids to stay in bed between Fitzmas Eve and Fitzmas morning.

    Well, I hope that the investigation is concluded soon.

    We need to be thinking about 2006.

    Unless this turns out to be bigger than 2006.

    In that case, please disregard.

    "When you starve the beast, you starve the people. And the bathtub was a reference to New Orleans." -- bink

    by bink on Thu Oct 20, 2005 at 04:59:33 PM PDT

  •  Knew Murray was what? (none)
  •  I wondered as I read it if.... (none)
    ...perhaps this information might be coming from Fitz's team? I know they don't leak, but if you assume that, that means the article is truthful and both Miller & Libby look like shit. However, if Libby's lawyer is leaking (and I agree that's more likely), then he is definitely trying the "Blame the Reporter's" or "the reporters are lying" defense.

    Canadians care too...

    by jbalazs on Thu Oct 20, 2005 at 05:02:37 PM PDT

    •  That's been their defense all along... (4.00)
      that it's the reporters' fault.

      And it's so implausible.  The idea that high governmental officials, with access to classified information, learned about classified information from reporters, who don't have such access (cf. Miller) is just counter-intuitive.  I can't see many jurors buying it; if it gets that far.

      But they don't really have much else of an available defense.  The facts are the facts.

      Let justice reign though the heavens tremble

      by Viceroy on Thu Oct 20, 2005 at 05:23:31 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Read the article (none)
      Bob Bennett, an attorney for Miller, confirmed in an interview that Miller's October 12 testimony "corrected" her earlier statements to the grand jury regarding the June 23 meeting.

      Not just Miller's attorney, Miller's attorney on the record.

  •  hmmmmm (none)
    Is this Libby's new track/defense... that he didn't really know Plame was CIA or that she was an operative (witness his being incorrect that Plame worked for WINPAC)...?


    Mitch Gore

    Nobody will change America for you, you have to work to make it happen

    by Lestatdelc on Thu Oct 20, 2005 at 05:18:30 PM PDT

    •  Why are they spinning so furiously? (none)
      It seems like Libby and Rove are back on the same page: both of them heard from the press, and simply passed on what they heard. But in any case, they never knew that she was covert until Novak.

      Possible, but, given what we know, very hard to believe. And if there really has been some flipping, then Fitz certainly has accounts from others that give lie to this. So why are they leaking so much? I hope it doesn't mean that they expect pardons or dismissal, and so they are only worried about the court of public opinion.

      •  I have a vision (none)

        Of Scooter, Karl and the gang dancing  and singing  "I heard it on the grapevine".  Of course, as everyone knows, Republicans have no soul and therefore no rhythm, so they're stepping on one anothers toes as they stumble over the words.  

        "He that sees but does not bear witness, be accursed" Book of Jubilees

        by Lying eyes on Thu Oct 20, 2005 at 06:25:38 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  No brag, just fact (none)
    As I predicted here
  •  I don't see how Miller won't be indicted... (4.00)
    We know she lied about "Valerie Flame".  Come on. A journalist forgets her source?  She obviously wrote it in a different part of her notebook on purpose.

    And now we find out that she basically omitted her June 23rd meeting with Libby and didn't admit it until after she was confronted with the logs?  Maybe, (not sure if I have this straight) that's why she suddenly found her notes for that meeting in her office.  I mean its so obvious, she's feeling threatened about being confronted in a lie or omission and tries to make up for it by not holding out on the notes she had originally withheld.

    NSARE - National Struggle Against Republican Extremism

    by B obby Boucher on Thu Oct 20, 2005 at 05:27:17 PM PDT

    •  I thought the rationale (none)
      for Miller originally witholding these notes was because her subpoena requested information starting in July and not June.

      "conservatives are the worshipers of dead radicals".

      by gandalf on Thu Oct 20, 2005 at 06:59:53 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  hopefully we can get a perjury charge here (none)
    I'm keeping my fingers crossed.
    •  I think (none)
      Judy Miller will definitely get perjury or obstruction of justice... unless she made one hell of a deal.  I'm wondering if any other journalists will be indicted - Christ Matthews?  Tim Russert?  Matt Cooper?  And what about Bob Novak?  He's been off the radar ever since this thing really took off, and the only conclusion I can draw is that he sang like a bird the first chance he got.  But he was the one who actually "outed" Valerie Wilson in print - that should certainly qualify as sharing classified information, shouldn't it?  I'll be shocked if he gets off with nothing, unless he made a deal.

      "Man's capacity for justice makes democracy possible; but man's inclination to injustice makes democracy necessary." - Reinhold Niebuhr

      by Mahanoy on Thu Oct 20, 2005 at 05:45:41 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  One Would Hope So... (none)
        But Waas' article seems to assume that (maybe incorrectly) that nothing will happen to her.

        From the article:

        Stan Brand, a respected Washington defense attorney who often represents political figures in high-profile investigations, including those by special prosecutors, said in an interview that he did not know the particulars regarding Miller's testimony. But, speaking in general, he said: "What you tell your client when they go before the grand jury, is that they should be truthful, be thorough, and not hold anything back. You don't want to hide anything or not disclose things to expose you to charges or even the perception by the government that you haven't been forthcoming."

        Regarding Miller specifically, Brand said that even if Fitzgerald were to conclude that Miller had "a feigned memory loss," the special prosecutor was unlikely to "make an issue out of this because he got what he wanted from her," and might still be dependant upon her as a witness during a potential trial.

        "We're all working for the Pharoah" - Richard Thompson

        by mayan on Thu Oct 20, 2005 at 05:55:47 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Good point (none)
          But that all depends on whether the most serious thing she did was "feign memory loss."  If that's all it is, I doubt anything more will happen to her - especially if, as you point out, Fitz wants to use her as a witness in upcoming trials (if there are any - fingers crossed!).  But if feigning memory loss is only one of many problems with her testimony, then I don't think she'll get off without any charges.

          "Man's capacity for justice makes democracy possible; but man's inclination to injustice makes democracy necessary." - Reinhold Niebuhr

          by Mahanoy on Thu Oct 20, 2005 at 06:02:55 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Yeah, I think incorrectly but ... (none)
          I'm no prosecutor yet alone, a lawyer.   To me, it would seem, I would want to set an example of what the justice system does to reporters that deliberately lie, aid or abet, suspects of a serious crime, exposing a NOC (aka treason).  Judy was trying to protect Scooter Libby.  You have to wonder why.  Regardless, if she's part of the same cabal or WHIG, or whatever, she is obstructing justice by witholding pertinent information and committing perjury by claiming she doesn't remember her source for Valerie Plame's name.

          NSARE - National Struggle Against Republican Extremism

          by B obby Boucher on Thu Oct 20, 2005 at 06:06:39 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Matt Cooper testified (none)
        after the release from Rove. Why would he be indicted?

        "conservatives are the worshipers of dead radicals".

        by gandalf on Thu Oct 20, 2005 at 07:02:22 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Booman Trib had a diary today here about (4.00)
    8 indictments already prepared and that Powell only showed the Plame doc to W and Cheney - and we all know what THAT means.

    I think this diary is true.

    I thought this was the freshest of the Plame news today.  Check it out.  It will warm your heart and help you sleep tonite.  

    And give boo much deserved hits for his good work.  Comes via Alternet.

    •  That story seems to have been... (none)
      removed.  Maybe Rove took it.

      "We're all working for the Pharoah" - Richard Thompson

      by mayan on Thu Oct 20, 2005 at 05:43:21 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  you mean removed from Alternet? yeah (none)
        but Booman has it - what do you think about this?
        •  removed from Booman - check link n/t (none)
          •  Maybe my bad - here it is. (none)
            Powell to McCain: "I showed memo to only 2 people"
            by Limelite
            Wed Oct 19th, 2005 at 06:02:41 PM EDT

            While rumors are the theme of the week, here's a hefty slice from the Beltway Insider Pie that comes to us via an e-mail from a Democratic House member's staffer to Jan Frel at AlterNet.
            Four items, viz.:

            Fred Flights, an assistant to John Bolton, is a named name who could be indicted.

            Sens. John McCain and Lindsey Graham have been suggested as replacements for Dick Cheney.

            Colin Powell told John McCain he showed the infamous memo with Plame's identity on it two just two people; Dick Cheney and George Bush.

            Fitzgerald is looking at the precedent set from the indictment of Tricky Dick's veep Spiro Agnew to pursue against Cheney.
            Note, the e-mailing staffer eschews CAPS, a quirk that I've preserved.

            Further disclaimer as to sourcing:
            . . .the sources include two senior members of senate and key staffers; counsel for individuals that have been called before the grand jury; and two journalists taking a lead position in investigating the case. . . represent[ing] a composite of the information from those sources.
            Details bullet item 1

            . . .we are told that eight indictments have already prepared, with the possibility of another ten. these indictments include senior white house staff, most notably vice president cheney's chief of staff scooter libby, fred flights (special assistant to john bolton), and--very surprisingly--national security adviser steve hadley.
            Details bullet item 3

            powell recounted to the senator that he had traveled on air force one with bush and cheney, and brought to their attention a classified memorandum about the issue of whether there was indeed a transaction inolving niger and yellow cake uranium. the document included ambassador joe wilson's involvement and identified his wife, valerie plame, as a covert agent. the memorandum further stated that this information was secret. powell told mccain that he showed that memo only to two people--president and vice president. according to powell, cheney fixated on the wilson/plame connection, and plame's status.
            further. . .

            powell testified about this exchange in great length to the grand jury investigating the plame case. according to sources close to the case, powell appeared convinced that the vice president played a focal role in disclosing plame's undercover status.
            Concluding details:

            one interesting point though--it is worth noting that a parade of senior republican senators have evidently been privately pushing mccain to lobby to be cheney's replacement. senator lindsey graham (R-SC) has also been mentioned. meanwhile, the white house has already been developing countermeasures--notably including senior white house officials privately voicing president bush's disappointment in karl rove's involvement in the case, calling it "misconduct." an urgent search for a rove replacement is already underway.
            Gossip just doesn't get any juicier.  Have at it.

  •  Thanks (none)
    I also need a "new news" fix myself.  OMG what will we do until next week?  I do suspect that as the time draws near that many other "news stories," will be reported, "as the aspens 'turn'."
  •  I was intrigued by something Buchanan said (none)
    today, lowlife that he is:

    "During Watergate, a good friend went to prison for saying twice before a grand jury, "I can't recall." That was about a picayune matter compared to Judy Miller's "I can't recall" to the question, "Who gave you this name, 'Valerie Flame'?"

    Wow.  Judy should be in jail.

     I guess from Fitz's perspective -

    can you say small fish in a big fucking pond.

  •  Fitz springs a double mousetrap (none)
    Not only did he catch Judy lying, he caught her lying in a way that Scooter had implicitly encouraged in his infamous letter. And so Scooter's nailed for obstructing justice, too.

    I have a post at Needlenose with some further thoughts, for anyone who cares.

  •  When I grow up. (none)
    When I grow up, I want to be a federal prosecutor. I want to train and learn my craft on mobsters, then apply what I've learned to stupid politicians.

    Hiding the essential meeting, both of them, where there were visit logs.

    In fact, senior advisers close to the president may well have been clever enough to have used others to do the actual leaking, in order to keep their fingerprints off the crime.
    --Joseph Wilson

    Or perhaps not.


  •  Ha ha ha (none)
    BUSTED! Thanks for this wonderful bit of Fitzmas cheer today.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site