I have noticed a strange tendency of the Media to, and I think from ignorance, misunderstand the
potential significance of the
Cheney Told Scooter revelation. To me here is where the story goes off the rails:
The notes, taken by Mr. Libby during the conversation, for the first time place Mr. Cheney in the middle of an effort by the White House to learn about Ms. Wilson's husband, Joseph C. Wilson IV, who was questioning the administration's handling of intelligence about Iraq's nuclear program to justify the war.
. . . Mr. Libby's notes indicate that Mr. Cheney had gotten his information about Ms. Wilson from George J. Tenet, the director of central intelligence, in response to questions from the vice president about Mr. Wilson. But they contain no suggestion that either Mr. Cheney or Mr. Libby knew at the time of Ms. Wilson's undercover status or that her identity was classified. Disclosing a covert agent's identity can be a crime, but only if the person who discloses it knows the agent's undercover status.
Stop right there. What do you mean no suggestion? The suggestion is that Cheney was told Plame worked for the CIA - a necessary precondition to being a NOC for the CIA. Of course it carries a suggestion. Unless the notes say expressly that Plame was NOT a NOC, that sentence in the story is absurd.
More absurdity:
It is not clear why Mr. Libby would have suggested to the grand jury that he might have learned about Ms. Wilson from journalists if he was aware that Mr. Fitzgerald had obtained the notes of the conversation with Mr. Cheney or might do so.
Oy. Because people do stupid things. To me the question NOT asked in the article is the obvious one - why did Libby seek to keep Cheney out of it? I think an answer is very much suggested -- Cheney directed him to leak to reporters the facts surrounding Ms. Plame's work with the CIA and Wilson's trip to Niger.
There is a word for this, I am surprised the NYTimes and people like Lawrence O'Donnell do not understand it -- conspiracy. Are we supposed to believe that Libby decided, ON HIS OWN, to out Valerie Plame? Puhleaaaze.
There is another important piece of this story that the Media has ignored - the June 12, 2003 State Department memo by Marc Grossman. The date of this memo is no coincidence. I'll discuss on the flip.
Update [2005-10-25 11:32:51 by Armando]: This important denial should have been more prominently featured by me and by the Media:
Mr. Tenet was not available for comment Monday night. But another former senior intelligence official said Mr. Tenet had been interviewed by the special prosecutor and his staff in early 2004, and never appeared before the grand jury. Mr. Tenet has not talked since then to the prosecutors, the former official said.
The former official said he strongly doubted that the White House learned about Ms. Wilson from Mr. Tenet.
That leaves the June 12 State Dep't Memo.
In
this diary, I wrote this:
Walter Pincus' article does not say it outright, he is a "just the facts" reporter as he should be, but it is hard to imagine any other logical conclusion -- the story Rove and Libby were peddling comes from the June 2003 State Department Memo that found its way into Ari Fleischer's hands on Air Force One on July 7, 2003. The key excerpts:
Two sources [other than Rove and Libby] appear to support the view that Wilson's wife suggested her husband's trip. One is a June 2003 memo by the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR).
The GOP Senate smear of Wilson by the hack Pat Roberts came in 2004, so clearly Rove and Libby were not relying on that. That leaves the State Department memo. When you look at what Rove and Libby said, you realize that it is inescapable that the source of their info had to be the June 2003 State Department memo:
Senior Bush administration officials told a different story about the trip's origin in the days between July 8 and July 12, 2003. They said that Wilson's wife was working at the CIA dealing with weapons of mass destruction and that she suggested him for the Niger trip, according to three reporters.
. . . Time magazine's Matthew Cooper has written that he was told by Karl Rove on July 11 "don't get too far out on Wilson" because information was going to be declassified soon that would cast doubt on Wilson's mission and findings. Cooper also wrote that Rove told him that Wilson's wife worked for the agency on weapons of mass destruction and that "she was responsible for sending Wilson."
So Rove said expressly the exact story of the June 2003 State Department memo and strongly indicated that his information came from classified material (that would be declassified soon.) Pretty damning.
Who Pincus spoke to we don't know, but Pincus reports:
This Washington Post reporter spoke the next day to an administration official, who talked on the condition of anonymity, and was told in substance "that the White House had not paid attention to the former ambassador's CIA-sponsored trip to Niger because it was set up as a boondoggle by his wife, an analyst with the agency working on weapons of mass destruction[.]"
Exact same story. And Novak, who was sourced by Rove and another Administration official (not a "partisan gunslinger"):
Novak had been told earlier in the week about Wilson's wife. . . . Novak wrote [he was told by a Senior Administration official] was that "Wilson had been sent by the CIA's counterproliferation section at the suggestion of one of its employees, his wife." Novak then called [Rove]for confirmation and got the response "Oh, you know about it."
For those who can add 2 plus 2, the conclusion is obvious -- the classified information improperly, (and probably illegally) leaked by Rove and Libby, came from the June 2003 State Dep't memo.
See where I am going? Why was the June 2003 State Dep't Memo prepared? For the same reason Cheney asked Tenet -- Cheney wanted to know who was behind the May 6, 2003 Nick Kristof column. Tenet told him.Cheney had also asked the State Dep't to brief him on the issue - his boys there, Bolton et al, obliged.
And now, for those who wanted to know why Fitzgerald waited for Judy Miller it is clear. Before Miller testified, I wrote this:
It does lead me to one piece of speculation - Judith Miller may have been given the memo for her review by Lewis Libby. And that is why her testimony is critical to the investigation. . . . The moral of the story? Libby MUST specifically release Miller from her pledge of confidentiality. Free Judith Miller!
And now that Fitz forced Judy to give up the information that Libby told her about Plame on June 23 - only 10 days after Cheney told him about Plame's CIA work, there is now a reasonable inference that Libby did what he did at the behest of the Vice President of the United States.
If there was a crime contemplated, under the Espionage Act or the 1982 Outing CIA Agents Act, then there is now evidence (circumstantial evidence, but powerful circumstantial evidence) that the Vice President headed a criminal conspiracy.
The significance of this has been all but ignored by the Media. But I think it is due to their incompetence, not malice.