Me:
http://www.senate.gov/legislat…..vote=00249

link to torture vote.

Grampa, I read the de la Vega article yesterday and found the same paragraph interesting. Back when the story just broke, I wrote the following in a long comment in the “Mr. Run-Amok” thread:

“Does nobody else find this fishy/bizarre?

Swopa cites the latest on the Libby defence strategy from the NYT:

“Lawyers for I. Lewis Libby Jr., the former White House official indicted on perjury charges, plan to seek testimony from journalists beyond those cited in the indictment and will probably challenge government agreements limiting their grand jury testimony, people involved in the case said Tuesday.

‘That’s clearly going to be part of the strategy — to get access to all the relevant records and determine what did the media really know,’ said a lawyer close to the defense who spoke on condition of anonymity.”

Then, the same day, word comes out that Bob Woodward, a journalist “beyond those cited in the indictment”, is claiming he’d been told about Wilson’s wife even before Judy Miller. Libby’s lawyer is triumphant. Jeffress claims the testimony raises questions about what else Fitz may not know. Libby’s defence strategy scores its first victory!”

I’m still stuck on Wurmser as the source in question and this is how I expect Woodward’s disclosure played out.

Libby knows Wurmser was tasked with leaking Plame’s identity to reporters, because he was part of the whole scheme. And now Libby’s team is exploiting this leak to Woodward in the hopes of lessening the burden on Libby.

It’s fractured logic, of course. Such a tactic ignores the obvious reality that Libby, thus far is not charged with leaking but with perjury, obstruction, and making false statements.

Anyway, my money’s still on Wurmser, a professional stooge if ever there was one. And as for Woody’s absurd contention that his source came forward as a resultof Woodward reporting, I can only say that Booby has been his own biggest fan for so long that his ability to discern reality is severly damaged by his narcissism.

makes it look like what it probably is — a post hoc invention by Woody to turn an innocuous October 2003 conversation into a June 2003 revelation

this seems to me to be a likely scenario.

anyway fritz would be able to determine the legitimacy of woodies claims?

Steady Eddie:

Is Hadley really a small fry? He was promoted to National Security Advisor by Bush AFTER all this went down. As I blogged earlier this morning, if Hadley was the first administration official to discuss Plame’s name with a reporter, then all of the efforts to insulate Bush from the scandal go out the window!

Jane, Redd Hedd — what about Paul Lukasiak’s scenario above about what the effect on Fitz of Woody’s telling Downie about the leak may have been? Sounds plausible, especially when you consider how it puts Woody in a position to do a major favor for WH heavies.

And it also explains why the discrepancy between Woody’s story and Pincus’ about when Woody told Pincus about Plame. The discrepancy is so implausible that is makes it look like what it probably is — a post hoc invention by Woody to turn an innocuous October 2003 conversation into a June 2003 revelation that tries to reduce the pressure on WH leakers at the expense of Pincus’ credibility with Fitz. That’s why Pincus was so pissed at Woody to publicly call him a liar, in effect.

Note also that the October 2003 date for the conversation that Pincus put on it is after the CIA referral of the Plame case to DoJ, which would certainly help explain why Woody was anxious to create this post hoc help — information that he might have wanted to keep for his book had suddenly become very problematic indeed, at the behest of the Agency where Pincus had previously worked. So Woody gets back at the CIA and offloads his problem with being a silent recipient of the leak on Pincus, at the same time.

The only question I have about Paul’s comment is that it helped Hadley. Obviously this assumes Hadley was Novak or at least Woody’s source, but it’s not like Woody to endanger so much of his public image for a relative small fry like Hadley. IMHO, at least, that strenthens the case for Woody’s source being Cheney.

Not sure that the comments Libby’s lawyers made were the impetus for Woodward to acknowledge his role in Plamegate. Why then did he tell Downie in October? What was the impetus for that?

To anybody looking at events from outside, reading what has surfaced, and applying just plain commonsense (like you would to any other interaction between people), its is probable that the Libby charges were – to quote Churchill – not the beginning of the end, but the end of the beginning ….

There is just too much floating around about a probable group of people setting out to achieve agreed ends. That group has several members, and it seems at least a half a dozen reporters were to be tools in the plot.

So, half a dozen tools, a group with a plan, and just one indictment? Not a high success rate, for a special prosecutor who does, we are told, a good job when he tackles it.

My guess? Several more indictments in the offing, with several more “tools” still to be publicly revealed.

It would be a good step if someone decided to tackle this a bit more intensively from the “tool” side: just who were to be used, and how exactly do their stories tie up? Who played along, which of the “tools” cut a deal and is cooperating?

I would think the first among the “cooperative tools” would be Mr. Novak (the silent man). Judy Miller – after some hesitation and diligent prodding – is another “cooperative tool”, in my view.

Now, what about “hidden tools”? Anyone care to take a stab at identifying them?

suntzu — all the published information around Lincoln Group is so damned thin, it reads like an outsourced spook outfit. I suspect that to maintain a positive image of the war in the minds of the public *globally* that a group larger than Rendon was necessary, especially if Rummy was determined to keep all of the OSI’s functions (as well as OSP’s function) at the same time.

Multiple hundreds of millions sounds about right — not including whatever could be “scavenged” in Iraq, what with bales of US money going missing all over the place. (Imagine the work required to dampen the news of billions gone walkabout…)

And then there’s the meat puppets in the press and the spiking of stories; buying those things doesn’t come cheap, and really needs an intermediary so as not to leave a messy trail back to DoD or other departments. A scalable infrastructure needed, best suited to outsourcing providers. But that’s the way I’d think if I were an executive manager in business.

ruh row Beef, this is twice in 2 days someone has neeedlessly impugned Mary Magdalene for no reason, and misguided at that of who and what She really was, including being a Saint. Pluuueezzzeee don’t. I find that totally offensive.

DonÂ’t forget that corporate media is hot to promote Bush Administration tax cuts, foreign wars and all. Editors are middle men that were cut out Woodward/Miller and Rove/Cheney Nexus. It is just that Rove/Cheney went overboard in sliming Ambassador Wilson and his CIA wife, broke a few laws, and Novak was stupid enough to publish too many facts.

Hadley feels like a side show. Why didnÂ’t the Washington Post serve him up like the NY Times served up Scooter Liddy? He was only CondiÂ’s assistant and is out of the news loop nexus except that he served on the Iraq Working Group.

The only reason that Deep Throat II wasnÂ’t named must be because he is either Cheney or Bush. Cheney did know about WilsonÂ’s wife from the beginning. I doubt Bush knows anything and his brain didnÂ’t know until later in June.

I keep coming back to VP Cheney as Deep Throat II.

LazyJournalist,

I heard Mary Magdalene on Imus too, wierd, almost like she’s giving everybody another hint. Maybe the 4th gospel or the key to the Da Vinci code. But than again it sort brings back bad memories of Andrea Bitchell and all her cheap gossip. The only reason Imus has these two air heads on his show is so he can goof on them.

http://www.yeeguy.com/freefall/
Jim | 11.21.05 – 7:10 am | #

If you keep your finger on the drag button and move the mouse, you can do a lot more than watch Bush freefall. Neat animation.

I’ll make a point I’ve made repeatedly before.

Why are these OVP folks so busy making a case about espionage? Libby wasn’t INDICTED for espionage.

Perhaps they have expectations Booby will lead us to the espionage case?

For amusement: criticism evidently is in the eye of the beholder. The LA Times has a story today headlined: “Bush keeps jabbing at war critics.” The Dallas Morning News has a related story today headlined: “Bush eases up on war critics.” Go figure

Emptywheel: Thanks for responding. I have been wrestling with the ‘knowledge within the conspiracy’ question for days.

new thread.

Rayne (6:44) suntzu — if you liked that Rendon bit you need to Google up “Billmon + Blowback” and read that post from last summer. The money cited will blow you away, makes Rendon look like a little girly-cupcake.

The Blowblack scandal (placing the post-invasion Iraq propaganda machine essentially in the hands of the Republican party) is different from the Rendon scandal. In the Rendon scandal we have a situation where generating the rationale for starting a war (with dubious intelligance) is essentially outsourced to a civilian agency that has no accountability, no oversight, no control from Congress, and worse of all, no true expertise in intelligence. It was even budgeted by the Pentagon and CIA, not Congress.

It was a rogue operation most assuredly resorted to by the White House because they had a lot of trouble getting State and the anti-war faction of the CIA to hop on the War Now! bandwagon. It is also not the first time this has been done, and maybe not the last.

Were any laws broken? I have no idea, but it bothers me a great deal to know that our government is outsourcing developing war strategems to civilians over whom we have little control.

Now, guess who is the legitimately designated watchdog to make sure the president gets good intelligence? The president’s security adviser, at that time Condi Rice. Was her mind on the next pair of Gucci’s?

Reuel Gerecht yesterday with Wolf Blitzer:

“GERECHT: I think the Central Intelligence Agency treats coverage as a joke overseas. And most assets are run by officers who have their cover blown.

And the discussion of Valerie Plame I think…

BLITZER: Would those be non-official cover or official cover?

GERECHT: Official cover.

BLITZER: It’s one thing if you’re a defense — a scientific attache…

(CROSSTALK)

BLITZER: … she was working as some sort of a private citizen.

GERECHT: No, she was not. Valerie Plame’s case was at best what you would call a NOC of convenience, and I think her cover status overseas was paper thin, was paper thin back here.

BLITZER: But she was working for some fake energy company. She wasn’t part of the U.S. Embassy.

GERECHT: No.

But she was part — she was back at headquarters. Real NOCs never serve in headquarters. Real NOCs do not have desk outside of the chief of…

(CROSSTALK)

BLITZER: There are people who deny that. Larry Johnson, for example…

(CROSSTALK)

GERECHT: All due respect to Larry, he is wrong.”

•This snippet cannot convey this guy’s derisive arrogance. A total creep.

And this morning on Imus, Mary Matalin repeated something I’ve heard other ’spokesmen’ for the Bush administration claim recently (with absolutely NO followup): “Joe Wilson came back from Niger with proof that Saddam was trying to purchase yellowcake?”

About the leak? She said nothing happened; there is no there there.

She promises Scooter will be vindicated – he is a hero.

These people are driving me crazy.

sonate

I really think the Armitage thing is a red herring, just as the “Colin Powell had the INR memo on AF1″ stories were mid-summer. He would have had no incentive to reveal the Plame identity. Keep in mind that Wilson was in touch with at least one State official (my guess is Grossman) during May and June–they were supporting him going forward–so the State team would be very cautious about damaging his argument. Moreover, most “motives” ascribed to Armitage involve some anger at CIA. That just doesn’t fly in the larger context of this leak, which is a OVP/DOD v. State/CIA war.

You’ll have to ask ReddHedd about the law. But I don’t think lack of knowledge about NOC status would excuse anyone from a conspiracy charge (it would excuse them from an IIPA or espionage charge). Because they would still be in violation of their Non-disclosure agreement. If Fitz could prove they were WILLINGLY violating the terms of nondisclosure by not checkign Plame’s status, then he might be willing to indict for that.

emptywheel:
Thanks. So they would not trust Armitage to “play ball.” (OK but that makes me think that the source is not Armitage.)

Maybe you can help me with something else. Under the conspiracy laws we understand that a crime comitted by one is a crime by all in the conspiracy. But does the law also impute “knowledge” too. For instance, we know Cheney knew that Plame was a NOC. If Cheney tells the WHIG to spread that Plame was CIA and does not tell the WHIG that she’s a NOC and nobody (besides Cheney) in WHIG knew she was a NOC, are members of WHIG under the law imputed to have had knowledge of Plame’s status because the head of the conspiracy (Cheney) had such knowledge?

Please write to your Congresspersons at http://www.Congress.org (they will publish your email online if you click the second yes button at the end of their webmail form and you can write to all three Rep and Senators at once) to support Rep. Nadler letter for Fitzgerald to expand his investigation.

http://www.house.gov/apps/list…..02005.html

Nadler: Fitzgerald Must Broaden Investigation

“Did the Bush Administration deliberately mislead Congress about the war?

WASHINGTON, D.C. – In light of recent developments in the CIA leak investigation and other recent
revelations, Congressman Jerrold Nadler today called for Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald to expand his
investigation to include a criminal investigation to examine whether the President, the Vice President, and
members of the White House Iraq Group conspired to deliberately deceive Congress into authorizing the
war in Iraq.

“The CIA leak issue is only the tip of the iceberg,” Congressman Nadler said. “This is looking increasingly like a White House conspiracy aimed at misleading our country into war – in part by manufacturing now-refuted evidence in support of its rationale, in part by smearing and silencing critics, and in part by manipulating media complicity. There is mounting evidence that there may have been a well-orchestrated effort by the President, the Vice President, and other top White House officials to lie to Congress in order to get its support for the Iraq War.”

It is a crime to lie to Congress under several federal statutes. Congressman Nadler requested that Special Counsel Fitzgerald follow the leads he has already discovered and broaden his investigation to include charges of lying to Congress. In his letter to Acting Deputy Attorney General McCallum asking for a broadening of Special Counsel Fitzgerald’s investigation, Nadler cited the President’s infamous reference to African Uranium in the 2003 State of the Union Address, reports of the White House Iraq Group’s singular mission to sell the war at all costs, assertions made in the “Downing Street Memo,” and reporters’ own accounts of media manipulation.

“Honest, if mistaken, reliance on faulty intelligence to convince Congress to authorize a war is bad enough,” Congressman Nadler wrote in his letter to McCallum. “But, if, as mounting evidence is tending to show, Administration officials deliberately deceived Congress and the American people, this would constitute a criminal conspiracy against the entire country.”

“We are no longer just talking about a Republican culture of corruption and cronyism,” Nadler added. “We now have reason to believe that high crimes may have been committed at the highest level, wrongdoing that may have led us to war and imperiled our national security.”

Congressman Nadler demanded answers to the following questions in his letter to McCallum:

à Was the CIA leak incident merely one part of a larger illegal effort by the Administration to deceive Congress about a matter of war and peace?

à Who was involved?

à Were any of their actions criminal?

The text of Congressman NadlerÂ’s letter to Deputy Attorney General McCallum follows:

October 20, 2005

Acting Deputy Attorney General Robert D. McCallum, Jr………

CNN just played the “no exit” Bush video. Even Drudge has a link to the scene…
the Preznit is becoming quite the laughingstock

sonate

The WHIG/OVP crowd would NEVER include Armitage in a conspiracy. He was the enemy, not one to cooperate with.

Video of the stupid dolt .

Door thwarts quick exit for Bush

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asi…..454738.stm

lawyers never initiate questions that they aren’t certain of the answers

if Libby’s lawyers are going to subpoena journalists to “find out if this was common knowledge”, then they know something that we don’t know.

there are other journalists that were told in “casual conversation” and these people will be tapped as asets to Libby’s case

Bush in freefall. Check in out:

http://www.yeeguy.com/freefall/

p lukisiak

I don’t think WaPo woudl have to go back to Fitz legally. Pincus’ deal was to say what happened in his conversation with Libby and his own Mr. X. Not to tell all of his sources on Niger. In the same way, we KNOW Judy has other sources on Plame. But she got away with not telling Fitz about them.

Speaking of which, has anyone thought that maybe Libby wasn’t the first source for Judy, either? That maybe Mr. X told her first and then she had conversations with Libby to clarify on Mr. X’s conversations? Fitz forced her to reveal the June 23 conversation because he had evidence of it. But (riffing Rummy) absence of evidence of a conversation is not evidence that such a conversation did not occur. Fitz worked back from WH phone records, not the other way around, from Journalists phone records (working from the jounalists’ phone records would expose all their sources).

So pretend, for a moment, that Judy met with Mr. X at, say, the AEI (I say AEI only because I know she got to meet Chalabi and Rhode there in late July). And he “gossips” about Plame there around the same “I said mid but I meant early” June timeframe as Woodward got the leak.

SNIP
When the Watergate scandal reached a similar stage in October 1973, President Richard Nixon, ordered Attorney General Elliot Richardson to fire the intrepid special prosecutor Archibald Cox. Richardson resigned rather than carry out Nixon’s order; and so did his deputy William Ruckleshaus. So Nixon had to reach farther down into the Justice department where he found Robert Bork, who promptly dismissed Cox in the so-called Saturday Night Massacre.

Fitzgerald is at least as vulnerable as Cox was. Indeed, in recent days some of the fourth estate, Richard Cohen in the Washington Post and John Tierney in The New York Times, for example, seem to have accepted assignments to help lay the groundwork for Fitzgerald’s dismissal.

Will the White House decide to fire special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, and simply absorb the PR black eye, as Nixon did? There is absolutely nothing to prevent it. Can you imagine Attorney General Alberto Gonzales refusing on principle an order from President Bush?

Could Bush himself be named an un-indicted co-conspirator? If that or something like it happens, we can expect a circling of the wagons and Fitzgerald cashiered.
SNIP

I know that Fitz is not in the same category here, but there is a lot of interesting comments at this link…
http://www.alternet.org/waroni…..;pID=49719

It’s frustrating to walk along the fence that separates my faith that justice will be served to “the cabal” and my fear that they are playing chess while outsiders play checkers….

mooncalendargirl,

Can you elaborate on the thought that Sharon is at the core of Fitzmas? Is this, in your view, about the Brewster Jennings/Aramco story being behind Plame’s outing? I’m intrigued by your comments.

Morning all. Thank goodness for coffee. Can I just say that commenters on this site rock — and so does Jane’s cat out of the bag post. :)

Good marnin’ folks, happy Fitzgivin’ ta all you and yours.

First off everyone should read Mooncalendargirl’s post above, I endorse her admonition…don’t let all this info get dumped into the dustbin of history Jane and Redd. We have indeed experienced a coup which is now retrenchin’. You folks ken provide the sharp stick that keeps our system pursuin’ these Fascists.

Second, to Jane: Since Pincus is CIA and VERY smart, doesn’t it fit that Pincus knew exactly what Woodliar was doin’ (tryin’ ta drop hints for others ta follow) and chose not to play. He must have known the inside of what has been goin’ on from his Company sources. So when Woody says ” I told Pincus” , Pincus says “I don’t remember that” (which translates into, “you’re screwed you cheap slut”).

The point bein’ that both Woody and Miller had the same role (indeed the same script) and both were aware of their responsibilities. They are both part of the conspiracy from the get go….is there any possibility that Fitz will get ‘em?

Bob Woodward will be on Larry King tonight. AMERICAblog will be live blogging the show to count the number of lies told by Woodward…

http://katrinamemo.blogspot.co…..-show.html

We also have to remember that the real grip China has on us is economic. Not only are we transferring more and more manufacturing there but there is also the matter of US Treasury Bonds. China has a huge amount of them, basically they are financing the war in Iraq and so much more. Talk about having us by the balls, we certainly don’t want to piss them off.

Right on target, rayne. When is our bleeder coming back to the states anyway?

Mary Matalin on IMUS this morning spinning like crazy .. same old RNC talking points .. but I noticed that at one point during a lull in the conversation (after Imus asked a question about Fitz) Matalin started singing “I shot the sheriff, but I didn’t shoot the … (trailing off)…. What was that point of that, I wonder?

Was Matalin sending out the message that Rove (the deputy) is in the clear… remember: McCain on Larry King seemed to be reaching out to Rove as well last night.

Pls disregard this message if it has no merit. I’m mostly a lurker.. absolutely awed by the intellect here.

I think that I read both here and somewhere in the MSM that is’t a blow to a future “conspiracy” charge if Woody’s source is Armitage instead of Hadley or Cheney. I do not understand why?

If yet another WH source besides Rove and Libby were involved in “chatting” to the press, irrespective of who it is, I would think that that would ADD credence to a conspiracy charge instead of diminish it. What did I miss here?

suntzu — if you liked that Rendon bit you need to Google up “Billmon + Blowback” and read that post from last summer. The money cited will blow you away, makes Rendon look like a little girly-cupcake.

ccmask — yeah, exactly, I made the same comment here at FDL in the last day or so — Woodie-the-journo versus Woodie-the-author — and Woodie-the-author keeps the good scoops like Plame info for his books. But that might be the implicit agreement he has with the cabal; “we’ll give you access for books only, make us look powerful”…what a skank muffin.

EW — the leader of China would ever appear to “rip” the leader of the US to shreds; they would merely be polite, all smiles and handshakes and bows, but make only agreements to think about action in the future, remaining non-committal. They think in terms of decades and centuries, not for the mere term of an inconvenient US presidency; they’ll just drag their feet slowly on any joint effort until the impediment is gone. It’s far more important to note the total absence of Americana in any Bush photo-op while in China; that’s the ENORMOUS slam. And that little faux pas with the doors? Huge. Utterly revealing as to who was in control.

okay kids, I keep explaining this, and now its coming true, so I’ll try again.

Woodward now says that his telling Downie was the catalyst that lead to the source coming forward….

That is because when Woodward told Downie that Pincus knew before Pincus heard about Plame from his government source, Downie had to tell the Post lawyers. And the Post lawyers had to tell FitzG about it.

(The Post had negotiated the agreement for Pincus to testify. What Woodward said drew the reliability of Pincus’s testimony into question, so the Post’s lawyers had to disclose that information immediately.)

This meant FitzG could not use any of Pincus’ testimony in his indictments — and is probably what got Rove and Hadley off the hook, at least temporarily.

Washington, DC—October 21, 2005—12:00 EST—TomFlocco.com exclusive—Today Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald handed over 22 indictments to Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez, accusing President George W. Bush, Vice President Richard Cheney and others of espionage, obstruction of justice, perjury and a variety of other charges in the matter of the CIA/Valerie Plame leak-gate case.
I don’t know if I have just forgotten about the 22 indictments handed down by Fitzgerald, but, when I google FITZGERALD 22 indictments, there are 625,000 hits, such as:

According to intelligence sources who spoke with federal whistleblowers Thomas Heneghan and Stewart Webb, Bush then ordered Gonzalez to fire Fitzgerald and have the indictments quashed and sealed.

Gonzalez refused to release the indictments which have been handed down by the grand jury and ordered served by a judge, subjecting the Attorney General to additional charges of obstruction of justice, the sources said.
http://tomflocco.com/fs/CiaPla…..tments.htm

Correction: “dupe/accomlish” should be “dupe/accomplice.”

Rolling Stone has rolled out a remarkable story about the selling of the Iraq war, spearheaded by a man who calls himself an “information warrior,” the most famous man I never heard of, John Rendon – a master civilian spook.

Rendon is a man who fills a need that few people even know exists. Two months before al-Haideri took the lie-detector test, the Pentagon had secretly awarded him a $16 million contract to target Iraq and other adversaries with propaganda. One of the most powerful people in Washington, Rendon is a leader in the strategic field known as “perception management,” manipulating information — and, by extension, the news media — to achieve the desired result. His firm, the Rendon Group, has made millions off government contracts since 1991, when it was hired by the CIA to help “create the conditions for the removal of Hussein from power.” Working under this extraordinary transfer of secret authority, Rendon assembled a group of anti-Saddam militants, personally gave them their name — the Iraqi National Congress — and served as their media guru and “senior adviser” as they set out to engineer an uprising against Saddam. It was as if President John F. Kennedy had outsourced the Bay of Pigs operation to the advertising and public-relations firm of J. Walter Thompson.

The Rolling Stone story is remarkable also because it ties together some of the disparate strands we already know more about: Libby, Chalabi, and Judy Miller. It places in stark relief the role that Judy played in the run-up to the war – an apparently willing dupe/accomplish (pick your label) in a White House/Pentagon/CIA campaign of disinformation.

One of the weirder aspects of this story, if true, is a little side tidbit that Rendon reportedly charges you and me, the taxpayers, $311.26 per hour for his services. Now, I have heard of lawyers and consultants who charge $300 and hour, but never heard of anyone charging precisely $311.26. I can only guess that he is padding in his Blueberry account costs, but on second thought, I would think his expenses would be billed separately. So you figure out the meaning of the extra $11.26.

Anyway, the article is long but it is free, and a must-read for FDL junkies.

http://tinyurl.com/ckg6f

Well Jane, since I can’t post to the soberest mind in this biz I’m posting to you. It looks like Sharon is covering his tracks after his little tete a tete with Condi. This makes perfect sense given the Likud and Friendz in DC agenda of dismantling the borders in the Mid East. Sharon and his pals are at the core of Fitzmas, but with all the whooping an hopping going around who’s got pause to notice? Let me just plant this in your pretty little ear: Leeden is a Fascist and he works for the Likud. Cheney’s motivation is simple, and Rove basically orchestrated his wholesale pillaging under the rhetorical banner of Straussian ‘politics’ The smooth operating of Rumsfeld, who plays dumber that the Chimp, finds its most perfect moment right about now. A shitload of money has been made, a big fucking boatlaod of chaos has been spoozed into the region, and it here to stay baby. Enough folks are gettin’ keen to this shit, and the players are covering their tracks. Most of them learned how annoying the middle class can be in the 1960s. Call ‘em out Jane. Stop all this beltway cha cha. There’s a sea change taking place. Track these people down and hold them accountable. At least keep a legal record. We have lived through a well organized junta that is retrenching now. cleverly, but is here to stay. Stay with Wurmsur and Leeden. Hadley’s a mouthpiece and nothing more. He doesn’t have the theoretical arc or the finesse of Wolfowitsz. Enough already. Home in and take these people to task. You have the goods. It’s worth it.

Ah, well. Someday, someone will write about this sad era of American infamy and call it Hunker in the Bunker.

LJ/Aquaria,
OT a little…very interesting that you should make this comment today. I was watching “un-Reliable Sources” yesterday and there was an editor on from “The New Republic” who said we would have to wait to see what happens in the “Plame Affair” until after the history books were written. I laughed and thought….”you wish, Lady!” I contend that Jane and Redd Hedd and Digby and Empty Wheel and Needlenose and Atrios and Arianna….. and everyone else doing all the wonderful reporting will cut out that “middle man” too. We don’t have to wait to see how history works out anymore. We can live it everyday on the internet. It’s a pretty amazing thing to watch.

Thanks to all who are doing really wonderful work. It’s been an amazing adventure….and I truly believe it’s helped to keep the “MSM” more honest. Even Howie’s show has gotten better…..probably realizes that Arianna will do a number on him just like she has been doing to Tim “the Avians are coming” Russert! LOL.

I starting reading Plan of Attack when it was first published. I just couldn’t get through it.

Just now I flipped open to a page and started reading. There are two Woody’s: 1) the author 2) the reporter.

From his book, Chapter 18, page 192:

Bob Graham had a family connection to the WAPO where I work. His half brother was the late Philip Graham, the publisher of the post until 1963 and the husband of Katherine Graham. Phipil Graham’s son, Don Graham, currently is CEO of the Post Company, so Graham thought it best to talk on the record and only for my book and not the newspaper. I tape-recorded our lengthy dinner conversations with his permissions.
SNIP

Bob Woodward was an author during the Plame Affair, not a reporter.

Woodward’s analysis makes Bob Wiley seem logical. I can’t wait for this evening’s episode of Larry Bling to watch that goofball Booby go back for seconds and “pile it on high and deep.” It’ll either be that or Larry’s version of baby steps.

I like to think Mr. X is Hadley, but with the amount commotion surrounding the inevitable disclosure and the extent to which people are going to soften the landing, it does make ya wonder about VP Zanny.

You know, with Woody tripping all over himself in the press, you have to wonder if he did the same during his testimony.

I belatedly learned why Bush went to Mongolia: that remote country was somehow persuaded to become part of the Coalition of the Unwilling, and actually sent something like 150 troops to Iraq. That must have been half of the country’s standing army. So Bush’s visit was apparently a thank-you gesture.

In any case, the Mongolians are expert horsemen (and women), and I am willing to bet there was a pre-agreed state-level treaty that Bush would not be asked to mount a horse.

On Mamayaga’s point. Woodward said he told Pincus about Plame, and Pincus said he didn’t. According to Pincus, he at one point mentioned to Woodward that he had been subpoenaed and Woodward responded that Pincus wouldn’t be the only one testifying. Also according to Pincus, this conversation took place well after the time Woodward said he gave Pincus the information about Plame. Pincus said that he would certainly have remembered if Woodward told him about Plame. Anyway, somebody on another thread suggested that perhaps what Woodward had been trying to do was to give Pincus a hint so that Pincus would follow up. Instead, what may have happened was that the hint was so vague that Pincus didn’t pick up on it. This fits in with your theory because if it was Woodward’s job to spread the message he would want to be oblique about it or it would be directly traceable from Pincus to Woodward to Woodward’s source.

Mack–

By their own comments neither Woody nor Judy seemed to have recognized this WAS double-super-secret. That was a phrase used by Rove to Cooper, who is not a member of the club. Both Judy and Woody have bent over backwards to characterize their leaks as casual and incidental. And Woody, by his account anyways, did drop the Plame info into a casual conversation with Pincus.

“I caught some CNN this evening and saw a clip of Bush, surrounded by Chinese soldiers and talking about religious freedom in China. There was this short elderly Chinese woman next to him, he was stumbling and stuttering to remember his words, and he kept looking down at the elderly Chinese woman for approval… “

Even in China he seems to need a mother hen. She was probably his designated ahma (nanny) for the trip.

Me

I can think of no more unpleasant experience for Bush than having to sit down with Hu Jintao for a serious meeting. Hu can run circles around Bush. And I suspect it was the first time Bush was made to realize how he has ignored China’s solid grip on our balls all the while yapping about Saddam. And one of the first when he didn’t have a sycophant to grab hold of to keep him steady.

I was in CHina on business earlier this year with another American, a real ugly American. In the middle of a conversation about how much he wanted the rest of the world to be like America (egads! In a country with a history 20 times as long as Americas!), the ugly American made a toast to Hu and Bush. I declined to toast Bush.

I can only imagine Bush made the equivalent gesture–talking about how he wanted China to be best friends with the US. And Hu ripped him to shreds.

mamayaga
do reporters chat about ‘double super-secret bullshit”?
i dunno, seems like they would keep those cards close

As to whether Woody was part of the conspiracy, I think he was, and occupied the same special role that Judy did. I don’t think they were ever intended to write articles about Plame — since they were the first to receive the news, they were too close to the ultimate source(s) of the info within the WH. What they were intended to do was chat about this with other reporters, who in turn would go back to the WH and get their two official confiirmations (”yeah, I heard that too”) from Rove and Libby. Don’t know who Judy may have passed the tidbit on to, but Woody was clearly intended to pass it on to Pincus, who is, remember, known to be the reporter with the deepest ties to CIA. If he bit, and published, then that would further obscure the real source of the info. But, Woody either failed to carry out his assignment, or didn’t speak up — either way, his part of the conspiracy was never completed (unless, of course, he is another source for Novak, or possibly for others who adopted the “everybody knew it” line…)

on the subject of tv journalists

one of my sister’s sorority sisters first job after graduating from Northwesten’s Communications program was investigative reporter for fox chicago.
she told my sister about her first assignment uncovering
“this ring of auto shops where they take apart stolen cars and sell the parts… they’re called ‘chop shops’”
of course the story never expanded to cover who might finance such operations or buy the parts
the implied assumption was the parts were sold at fleamarkets rather than to reputable auto dealerships (now there’s an oxmoron)

Me, I noticed that too, It could be “jet lag” or something else, he was really fried and zombied

maybe Woodward is an aspect of the Pincus play

wasn’t Pincus a target of the leak conspiracy early?

How do you shut out Woodward, when Pincus is getting the word? After all, rumors of Wilson’s media efforts had started. And Woodward was on the premises

Hey Valley Girl :)

Can you toss a link out to the votes that the Nazgul made in the Senate on the torture resolution?

I am going to write to the main stream press tomorrow and would like the link to the source… Also, there has been some re-writing of history on this, and I wanted to see if that vote was still “valid”

Thanks xoxox

Ah,another good bunch a writing, yummy.
All the comments seem to be narrowly focused on the issue of whether Mr X or Cheney etc testified to the GJ, or if they were not under oath. I’ve been sqeeking about this here and there and I’m stickin to it:If Mr X has talked to anybody in this investigation- wouldn’t that include those before Fitz? Weren’t there FBI investigators, and wouldn’t an interview or even an email or phone call be enough to let Fitz in the door? This I think if true could be what put the wind up their tails when they realized they had spoken to someone, even if it was an Asscroft investigator there could be an obstruction charge in there. Am I right?
That would rationalize all the clever parsing of the denials from Cheney . Please let it be Cheney!
I’m probably naive but I thought that was a common opinion about how Fitz worked. In this case there was the previous investigation when they thought they had it all covered by Asscroft. Oops!

Maybe he was made to remember the extent to which the US economy is indebted to China.
-

Did anybody notice what a changed man Bush is after he vanished in China for some period of time?

When Bush appeared in photo ops he was surrounded by Chinese military and agents… No American Secret Service types… No American flags were placed behind him after the welcome ceremony (check the photos, Bush is never at a podium without a flag) And he was rattled, and parroting the Chinese party line?

Amazing what a few hours waterboarding can do for a guys political position.

I caught some CNN this evening and saw a clip of Bush, surrounded by Chinese soldiers and talking about religious freedom in China. There was this short elderly Chinese woman next to him, he was stumbling and stuttering to remember his words, and he kept looking down at the elderly Chinese woman for approval… And she would look up and as if to say “You’re doing ok”

And at the end of his short statement I swear he asked her if he had gotten it right?

She smiled and nodded, and Bush seemed very relieved and they cut the clip.

Monk | Homepage | 11.21.05 – 12:55 am

Monk, man oh man, you got the gift. The Delay hot tub graphic was hilarious. Not to say that I don’t love this new one too, but it’s a bit more “cerebral” if you know what I mean.

I found some Delay pics while poking around on the internet. If you can think of anything special to do with this one (link) you are very welcome to it.

http://i8.photobucket.com/albu…..c_0001.jpg
-

Smokestack | 11.21.05 – 12:08 am

Well, I take your questions as I read them, and my reading may not be correct, given all of the smokescreens we’re trying to deal with.

“But wouldn’t you figure Hadley would have been informing his inner circles of his goings on with Fitz, all along?”

No, I (personally) wouldn’t figure that. I figure that once the momentum and reality of the Fitz GJ investigation started to hit home base, it was every perp for himself.

“And why would Hadley have incentive to sustain suspense and stimulate new info towards Fitz?”

Well, perhaps Hadley did not exactly have the “big picture”. He knew knew about the initial efforts to plant landmines, and he kinda sorta knew that there had been a few explosions, but I doubt that he was keeping an Excel chart day by day, as Libby might have, if Libby used Excel. In terms of suspense, I suspect that sooner rather than later during the Fitz investigation, Hadley was in suspense himself. Sustaining suspense might actually equal keeping his mouth shut, and hoping that bigger dogs were gonna fall before Fitz got back to him. And meanwhile, he’s trying to calculate (or sniff the air?) as to where he is on Fitz’s food chain.
-

“I have only to date seen the WaPo article on figures for his first 15 months, which totaled 732,000. Did Fitzgerald go on some wild, coke jag spending spree in the past few months? Maybe he is a Republican after all.”

Pfffft…. hahahahahaaa! fan-freaking-tastic! good laugh out of that one.

If you were able to open my skull and get a look at my brain, you’d probably see an image of bob woodward. I’ve been batting this thing around and while I’d be able to lay some bets down, I wouldn’t feel comfortable with any of them.

So, to take a little break…

I just blogged about Tom Delay and the fact that it looks like Scanlon is going to go after a plea bargain and start cooperating with investigators.

http://darted.blogspot.com

Yep, graphic is included.

-Monk

Your choice of Woody from Toy Story is perfect. A not too bright do gooder gets involved with people a lot brighter and far more cynical than he is.

Woody’s story was actually a bit different than that. He saw himself as a good guy, a cowboy, admired by all the other (less important) toys, and loved by the most important person in the world, Andy. When his place at the top of the toy heap was threatened by the loud, pompous new-toy-on-the-block, Woody’s overblown ego couldn’t take it. He did something underhanded and spiteful to knock the new guy down off his perch and reestablish himself as the number one toy. Soon, however, he found himself an outcast, despised by all the others for his nasty behavior and forced to accept the fact that he wasn’t such a good guy and wasn’t all that important, after all.

That reads like the saga of Woodmill, in animated form.

The Venn diagram of testimonial types, under oath and not under oath would indicate that Woody’s source is either Cheney or Bush.

It’s too late for me to go back and look up the actual news reports, but there were two statements from two lawyers associated with the case, 1) that Woody’s source had not testified to the GJ and, 2) that Woody’s source had testified.

Statement 1 was under oath, statement 2 wasn’t, and reasonably indicates it would have been those SAO’s who were merely “interviewed” by Fitz.

Since Fitz visited Bush’s lawyer Oct 28, is there grist for this mill?

Maybe that’s why the Chimp has retreated to his mom’s and nanny’s.

jane, your nation link in the update links to the time article.

interesting about the book deal leftahead. perhaps the framing for his book is now out of wack because of the new revelation and this is why woody didn’t speak up earlier, think he’s doing some rewrites?

after a post-Fitzmas break, I went to New Haven, CT, for a business meeting, where, trolling for local media, among other things, I picked up a Yale Bulletin–I threw it in my carry-on, and didn’t read it until yesterday–here is the page 3 headline, from the Nov 4th edition:

‘Today’s press fails to get ‘to the bottom of things,’ journalist says’

The speaker? Bob Woodward ‘65

The money quote? ‘Beware the demon pomposity’

The kicker? According to the article, Woodward is now working on a book about Bush’s second term!

Grampa:

Very good stuff.

But wouldn’t you figure Hadley would have been informing his inner circles of his goings on with Fitz, all along?

And why would Hadley have incentive to sustain suspense and stimulate new info towards Fitz?

An outsider like Armitage might have stronger motives (and abilities) here. Maybe.

Suzanne — I’m not sure, that’s a good question for Redd in the am.

Tolkien was a Beowulf scholar and you can see the influence of that as well.

How does a witness correct testimony in this type of case? Does it depend on how that witness testified?

And, what can we learn from that to help identify Woody’s source?

Grampa — That whole Hadley email thing is weird to me. If Rove was reporting back to Hadley, wouldn’t your first thought if you were Fitz be that Hadley was coordinating things? And yet there is no indication that Fitz brought Hadley in to the GJ after it came to light. Somebody somewhere was saying that it might have come up because Hadley mentioned it, in which case WH document searchers maybe got a nice dose of Mr. Fitzgerald’s miraculous memory restorative.

Lots of oddities surrounding Hadley that are yet-to-be-explained.

Grampa – you’re last point is a good one. Hope it turns out to be correct.

I think (and hope) it’s someone from Cheney’s office.

Night all.

My money’s still on Hadley, and I make him for both Woodward’s source and Novak’s source. If he is Novak’s source, he would have testified before the grand jury quite early — before the judge stopped them from using the back elevator, and before Rove’s email to him surfaced.

In addition, if he is Novak’s source, chances are he has a deal with Fitz. The Woodward revelation wouldn’t hurt him too much — maybe he really did forget — but in any event, his only choice would be to go back and talk to Fitz after getting the call from Woodward.

Finally, if it is Hadley, he (and Fitz) would have all the incentive in the world to keep everyone else guessing as to who Woodward’s source really is. The more uncertain people are, the more likely they are to come forward and give new information to Fitz.

PS.

The smart ones in the WH treat reporters like their buddy. Some don’t fall for it, but many do.

Woodward seems like a well meaning guy who has lost his skepticism and traded it in for access and power. I’m sure he would be astounded at that and can rationalize the whole thing. Your choice of Woody from Toy Story is perfect. A not too bright do gooder gets involved with people a lot brighter and far more cynical than he is.

Add some self importance and you have disaster.

I hope we find out what really happened. I can’t stand the wait!

If the Neocons manage to pin this on Armitage — via Anna Nicole Woodward — oh man would they be good. In the diabolical sense of the term.

So let’s hope Fitz is too genuniely good, in months ahead.

Should it be Armitage on the end of this hook, it would be a major shame. A decided non-neocon, he was one of the few good guys in BushCo. He stood up to The Cabal, all along, and got hammered for it, all along.

But now THIS? It would be too much. Especially when you consider the unfair beating he took back in Iran-Contra — which was another ludicrous Neocon concept.

Alas, my gut tells me Armitage is the Novak source. They’re both non-neocons, and there’s something about the way Wilson says Novak spoke to the ‘mysterious stranger’ on the street. Those salty flourishes really do sound like Armitage talking.

But, if Armitage, why? Doesn’t make sense.

Libby may yet get nailed, but the prospective Armitage involvement certainly dilutes the real vulnerabilities of the Cabal.

Meanwhile, expect no leaders of either political party to stand up for truth on any of this — unless massively cattle-prodded by the grassroots.

To prod and to wait. But if the wait begins to seem too long, it should be time for new leaders. Across the board. The vacuum awaits, America.

Interesting, Grampa. Thanks.

Elizabeth De La Vega makes an interesting point about coincidence in her very good legal analysis of the purgery charge against Libby, http://www.thenation.com/doc/20051205/delavega, when she writes:

“In turn, the Woodward revelation was preceded on November 15 by a leak from ‘lawyers close to the defense’ to the New York Times indicating that the Libby defense team planned to seek testimony from numerous journalists, not just those named in the indictment, in order to determine what the ‘media really knew.’ As Libby’s lawyer put it on November 16, ‘Hopefully, as more information is obtained from reporters, like Bob Woodward, the real facts will come out.’”

Anastasia — TV journalists, absolutely. The print ones tend to be a bit harder to fool.

Ah, well. Someday, someone will write about this sad era of American infamy and call it Hunker in the Bunker.

Done to the music of Jethro Tull’s “Bungle in the Jungle”

Jane,

I’ve noticed that an astonishing number of journos in DC are what you might call naive. It doesn’t take much to get them to hold the WH in awe. Just dazzle them with shiney objects such as:

Top WH source
TV face time
Book deal
Ride on Air Force One
Security clearance
Direct line access
Invites to insider parties

Caveat – I assuming knowledge is an element of a conspiracy count. I could well be wrong. If I am, Judy still has whatever the requisite elements are to be charged with conspiracy, Deadwood still does not.

mercury — You know, I think Woodward’s just too damn dumb to be part of a conspiracy. The more I think about it, the more I think that Big Time or somebody leaked to him first, thinking “hey Bob Woodward, he’d go to jail before ratting me out.” But the way they did it — dropping it in casual conversation — just didn’t have the underlining Woodward needed in order to see what was being given to him. As opposed to Matt Cooper, who recognized it instantly.

Woodward does nothing with it, then when the whole thing blows up, still doggedly maintains that it was all just “casual conversation” because dot connection is most certainly not his forte.

Coincidence. Federal prosecutors (as well as state prosecutors, or any prosecutor) don’t believe in coincidence. Yeah, they may be wrong, but they don’t believe in it. So none of us should either. Personally I have never been a fan of coincidence, but the law enforcement types really aren’t fans.

Woodmill. If they didn’t write a story then they were part of the “cover” – “We got this from reporters.” I don’t know what the plan was, but that is the way to bet. As for whether either part of Woodmill was part of the conspiracy (had “knowledge” in terms of the law), I have always thought Judy did, and was a part of the conspiracy. Deadwood? More interesting, though what is really interesting is how he has gone from some super sharp Neocon player b/c of his father and CIA decoder ring to a dim bulb on these threads. Can’t have it both ways (although he could be a savant of some kind). My guess is Deadwood is not a part of the conspiracy like Judy, he has much less at stake. I am not going to do the research but nobody is accusing him of leading the country to war by printing false stories – although he does have his own very large collection of false stories regarding his actions in the fall of 2003. I think Deadwood is fighting for his reputation, and he will lose.

As for the newspapers themselves. The Post, no. The Times, possibly, depending on what management really knew and why they really didn’t want Judy to testify. Oh the tangled webs they weave.

Maclord. Tolkien always denied that Nazism/Hitler (or the rise of Fascism in Europe in general) played any role in his writing of the Lord of the Rings. Hard to believe, but that was his position. Finnish Eddas (I think I have that right) were the inspiration.

Will be back t’row, g’night.

So legally, what kind of position is Woodward in now? Can he be charged with obstruction? And what is the smoking gun needed to charge conspiracy?

OMG I am becoming obsessed with FDL! All the news thats fit to read, right here! Stop posting so I can go to sleep!
Fabulous, Fabulous work, all of it, including the commenters.
Come visit us over at the Rigorous Intuition board, we talk some deep shit over there.
http://p216.ezboard.com/frigor…..m10?page=1

Woody sounds like an actress: “Well that’s enough about me. Let’s talk about yooou. What did yooou think about my latest movie?”
-

I read a quote, to paraphrase, that Booby’s “highest priority was to protect his source.” Not to report the news to the public, not even to distinguish what is news, just to protect his source. I don’t see him ever regaining his former credibility. He may be an author now, but he’s certainly no longer a reporter.

The thing is, back during Watergate, he and Bernstein did a hell of a job of reporting because someone could smell abuse of power and they went after it like bulldogs. But they did not bring Nixon down, nor did they force the President to resign as I saw promulgated in some article yesterday. Nixon brought Nixon down, with the help of some stupid moves like the Saturday Night Massacre (which caused two patriots to resign, Eliot Richardson and William Ruckelshaw (SP?)) and more importantly, the tapes.

This time around, Woodward claims to not have noticed that what he was told was news. Even Judy Miller said that she flinched at Novak’s column, realizing she had been scooped. What does it say about a reporter’s instincts when he doesn’t recognize the news when it bites him on the ass? It tells me that he can’t be that dumb, so he’s definitely covering, and will continue to provide cover until it becomes convenient for him not to do so anymore, because his responsibility to his readers is of lower priority than his need for access to the centers of power.

My questions are, since it sounds like this administration has basically dispensed classified information on a wholesale basis to their pet reporters (Judy says so, Andrea Mitchell says so, Chris Matthews say so, they all said on national TV that’s how it’s done), wouldn’t all that also be under the purview of the Special Prosecutor? It sounds like the identity of an active NOC is not the only piece of classified information that has been divulged by this administration.
How long has this been going on? During previous administrations, did only whistleblowers reveal classified stuff that had other than propaganda purposes? I’d really like to know just how badly our national secrets are being abused.

“Hunkered down?” You mean, like Anna Nicole Smith hunkered down?

Heh.

Or like Cheney hunkered down in his bunker after 9/11. Maybe Woodsy learned how to do that from Big Time?

Ah, well. Someday, someone will write about this sad era of American infamy and call it Hunker in the Bunker.

I can’t help but notice that Woodward or whoever authoried that article for Time continued to push false GOP Talking points and the line about a jag coke spree was cute. Thanks also to Julie for reminding me that Fitz did visit Sharp, as I’d forgotten about that. At the time, it raised alot of Red Flags about Fitz, but it would seem to fit, as why would Woodward throw away his entire reputation to carry the administration’s water, unless he’s protecting Bush or Cheney? None of the other principals would seem to merit the disgrace he’s earned himself by constantly quoting GOP Talking Points.

the prison camps were set up more than 4 years ago, well before Goss’ tenure.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ wp…5110101644.html

sam,
i suspect that Tenet resigned because he knows what intelligence was given to the WH and what was cherry-picked.

and Tenet has been silent about everything since he resigned. of course, he received a Medal of Freedom.

now Tenet’s book would be a must read — he probably knows where all the intelligence are buried.

Porter Goss was put into his position as CIA head with the intention that he could control the various mavericks and/or patriots within the CIA. It just didn’t happen. Goss is lucky to still be alive. He knows that, and treads as lightly as possible.

IMO, George Tenet was too much of a suck-up to both Clinton and Bush. He became Director of the CIA on July 11, 1997, with his last day being July 11, 2004. He was eager to please the two presidents, Clinton and Bush, and as such did some stuff he should not have.

Julie — I haven’t heard a good explanation for that one yet. A big question mark for all of us.

Woody still has not answered the question of why he did not say anything after Novak published. There was no special prosecutor nor threatened jailing of reporters when this story broke.

Ain’t buying it.

What hat did he pull those figures out off? Cheney’s or Rove?

As a Plame amateur, I was wondering if you see any connection between Woodward’s story, in which things started happening Oct 23 or 24, and that weird incident in which Fitzgerald visited the office of Bush’s lawyer (Sharp), which I believe was Oct 28?

Woody is not just the world’s greatest investigative journalist and writer! As has been already pointed out by many, he’s clairvoint, too. Hunkering down for an investigation before an investigation got started. Why, it is Woody’s world. We’re just lucky to live in it.

“at a time when reporters like Miller and TIME’s Matthew Cooper were being jailed or threatened with jail unless they revealed their sources.”

Which is to say, Woodward’s offer to take some of Judy’s jail time was bunk.

. . . and thank you jane for answering my question about possible next steps in the Cheney scenario.

hello. . . and gnite!