Maybe the ‘incompetent’ one was the person who allowed the forgeries to be exposed for what they were/are.

Who that ‘incompetent’ person might be isn’t entirely clear, but someone at the CIA who sent Wilson to Niger or authorized him to investigate or okayed an op-ed by him would be one possibility.

But, keep in mind, there were reports that a ‘report about Saddam trying to buy uranium in Africa’ was also discussed with regard to another country and then quickly dismissed. And, there were two other individuals who were in or went to Niger and investigated the allegation: the US ambassador (hellish job that) and a military colonel (I think) and their report mirrored Wilson’s, that there was no uranium being sold to Saddam.

The key difference is that Wilson wrote the op-ed and that his wife was working on nuclear non-proliferation in the middle-east (Iraq & Iran at least).

It almost seems like the idea that Wilson had to be discredited was as much a cover reason for outing Plame as it was a real desire to punish anyone who opposed them.

MarkC @ 30

Libby’s answers about the meat grinder metaphor were odd — or at least didn’t make sense to me. […]

Okay, here’s a speculation about the meatgrinder context.

Who was opponent? Wilson
Who was being protected? Staffer
Who was “that guy”? Libby? Wilson?
Who was asked to put their neck in the meatgrinder by the Pres? Libby? Wilson? by CIA? by Cheney?
Who is the fall guy in this whole thing?
Libby or Wilson?

Meat grinder is the press corps.

“Not going to protect one staffer (Rover) and sacrifice the guy (the Scoots) this pres that was asked to… “

What Libby was telling the grand jury was whatever BS he made up on the spot. So it shoiuldn’t be expected to make any sense what so ever.

But if the Press Corps was the “meatgrinder” then wasn’t Rove also “sticking his head in the meat-grinder” (talking to the Press)?

Was Rove simply volunteering this information? Perhaps HE was Cheney’s incompetant one?

And if Libby was the one ASKED by the President to put his neck in the meatgrinder…then wasn’t the disclosure of his identity the
“sacrifice” that he willingly accepted?

Was he trying to weasel out of his “martyrdom”?

Maybe the “meatgrinder” relates to some greater risk than simply media exposure…maybe it relates to facing the threat of felony prosecution for leaking classified information?

Libby volunteered but others screwed it up…exposed the the whole caper through negligence, and opened the gateway to bring down the whole conspiracy. Or at least that’s what Libby told Cheney….that he covered his trail well…that Rove screwed it up! Or maybe that ARI screwed up.

Swopa, can you explain the reference to david corn, please? How does shedd play into this?

Shedd was a former CIA agent with diplomatic cover in Central America…a close associate of Negroponte. He was working in the SC at the time.

Corn believes that he was the source of the actual naming of “Plame”…that he knew who she was and told others…rather than the info coming directly from the CIA.

http://www.boomantribune.com/s…..23847/2172

http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/0505/050905nj1.htm

http://www.dni.gov/aboutODNI/bios/shedd_bio.htm

It’s interesting that a Grand Juror took this possibility seriously…suggesting that Fitz briefed them on this, or some other witness discussed Shedd…perhaps Shedd himself provided testimony?

“..maybe on the margins of a meeting”–interesting turn of phrase..

The phrase “individuals at the margins” also was used in reference to those asked about what occurred in the CIA briefing for Wilson before he went to Niger. Apparently Ford wasn’t able to directly interview CIA people who were IN the meeting or even his own staffers who attended…and he used “individuals at the marginb” (i.e. hearsay) to reconstruct what happened.

Over a year later Se. Pat Robert’s “investigators” decided to use the same secpndhand memo for the SSIC Report rather than actually, again, asking those actually IN the meeting!

“Boondoggle” is the word that gets me.

On or after 7/6, Cheney writes this on his copy of Wilson’s op-ed.

On July 12, Libby calls Kessler…and Kessler asks Libby, out of the blue, “Was this a boondoggle?”

It’s a nice word and all, but seriously, that’s quite a remarkable linguistic coincidence. Two people, supposedly out of the blue and without collaboration, each use that word to describe the same trip! And as some wise and/or witty person once said, I believe in coincidences…but I don’t trust in them.

(unless “boondoggle” is a very common word batted about at DC cocktail parties…anyone who has gone to one of those parties who could comment?)

Hi. First time commenter here, and from the other side, but I can say something about the currency of the world “boondoggle” in DC. It’s actually very common, but not so much at cocktail parties. It’s more like bureaucrat-ese. My Dad worked at the State Department for years, where the word was used quite broadly to mean any official travel that was pointless/meaningless. It certainly didn’t carry the connotations of nepotism that people on both sides seem to be reading into it. More like somebody going on vacation on the Department’s dime.

As an aside, there used to be a comic strip called “SuperCrat” in State magazine (the in-house mag for department employees), the protagonist of which was a rather dull diplomat character in a Superman outfit. Anyway, his faithful companion was a dog named “Boondoggie”.