Richard Armitage was a guest on CNN’s Late Edition yesterday. Crooks and Liars has the full clip of his appearance where, surprisingly, he was asked about his betrayal of Valerie Plame Wilson (to both Bob Novak and Bob Woodward, just to be clear on all the facts, since only Novak comes up). Armitage’s response was unusual for people in the Bush Administration in that he owned up to some culpibility. But was it a full acceptance of responsibility? Let’s go to the comments, shall we?
Hugh says: November 11th, 2007 at 9:47 am
OT, sort of. So Armitage says that Valerie Plame is right, that what he did was very foolish and he should have known better than to talk to “a” reporter about her employment. His excuse, he saw her name (Valerie Wilson, not Plame) in a memo, something about she was chairing a meeting or something, and since he had never before seen a covert agent’s name listed in any memos, he thought she was not covert…..
The “memo” was actually a report. A report that had Top Secret designations all over it, including at the top of the page in which Valerie’s identity is discussed. FURTHERMORE there was another encoding on that page…one that contained the name of a covert operation…and which was also classified.
Armitage not only revealed an agents name from a document that was Secret, and the page itself classified….he discussed some of this information with Woodward and Novak. It’s how they learned she was an officer of the COVERT Counter-Proliferation Division of the Operations Section.
And it was clear from these conversations with reporters that he WANTED them to release the information publicly…he practically implored Woodward to do so. “Don’t you f*ckin’ SEE THE LINK! She’s his WIFE! SHE sent HIM!” is what Armitage kept repeating to Wadword…when even the report never made such a claim.
Good catch. It seems a common ploy of professional liars in Washington to slip in some innocuous detail “a memo” which opens the door to and makes reasonable the lie which follows.
Gosh, that sure is a lot to leave out, isn’t it. But, hey, when you are tap dancing, I guess it’s tough to keep the feet moving at a distracting speed, your lips moving to keep the filibustered answer going, and actually tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Asking a lot from someone who would betray a covert CIA operative to two separate journalists on two separate occasions, I know, but there you are.
What did Armitage own up to in his interview? To wit:
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
VALERIE PLAME WILSON, AUTHOR, “FAIR GAME”: Mr. Armitage did a very foolish thing. He has been around Washington for decades. He should know better. He’s a senior government official. Whether he knew where exactly I worked in the CIA, he had no rights to go talking to a reporter about where I worked. That was strictly off-limits.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BLITZER: Those are strong words from Valerie Plame Wilson.
ARMITAGE: They’re not words on which I disagree. I think it was extraordinarily foolish of me. There was no ill-intent on my part and I had never seen ever, in 43 years of having a security clearance, a covert operative’s name in a memo. The only reason I knew a “Mrs. Wilson,” not “Mrs. Plame,” worked at the agency was because I saw it in a memo. But I don’t disagree with her words to a large measure.
BLITZER: Normally in memos they don’t name covert operatives?
ARMITAGE: I have never seen one named.
BLITZER: And so you assumed she was, what, just an analyst over at the CIA?
ARMITAGE: Not only assumed it, that’s what the message said, that she was publicly chairing a meeting.
BLITZER: So, when you told Robert Novak that Joe Wilson, the former U.S. ambassador’s wife, worked at the CIA, and she was involved somehow in getting him this trip to Africa to look for the enriched uranium, if there were enriched uranium going to Iraq, you simply assumed that she was not a clandestine officer of the CIA.
ARMITAGE: Well, even Mr. Novak has said that he used the word “operative” and misused it. No one ever said “operative.” And I not only assumed it, as I say, I’ve never seen a covered agent’s name in a memo. However, that doesn’t take away from what Mrs. Plame said, it was foolish, yeah. Sure it was.
BLITZER: So you agree with her on that. ARMITAGE: Yeah. Absolutely.
I don’t see any mention by Mr. Armitage of the multiple notations of TOP SECRET being stamped on the memo, do you? Nor do I see a follow-up question by Mr. Blitzer regarding the affirmative duty that someone holding a security clearance under the SF 312 who sees a memorandum with such a notation on it has to first ascertain whether or not (1) the information is top secret classified, (2) that they can talk about any aspect in it and (3) whether the person to whom they will be blabbing is, in fact, on a “need to know” basis.
(Dear Wolf: It’s the SF 312. Try reading it. Soon.)
I dunno about you, but I sincerely doubt that either Bob Novak or Bob Woodward were on a “need to know” basis with the DO at the CIA. Which says to me that Richard Armitage was way out on a very thin limb when he opened his yap — not once, but twice. And I’d say his failure to accept full responsibility for his actions says that there is a whole helluva lot more that we don’t know. How about you?
Still waiting on those answers as to what sorts of hairballs Armitage coughed up in exchange for keeping his ample ass out of the Grand Jury indictment rodeo.
And, while I’m asking questions, why exactly did both Blitzer and Armitage give Bob Woodward a pass as being leaked to by Armitage? Because Bob was too dim to catch a pointed leak when he got one and they felt sorry for him? Sorry, not buying it. I want the full story on the Woody involvement as well…as long as we’re hoping for disclosures, we might as well ask for the whole kit and kaboodle.
Related posts:





Spotlight








Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search

Christy!
Good morning Christy! Seems the commenters here are way ahead of the paid media. Let us do the talking head shows for a month, that’ll shake some things up!
quick comment;
even if the document was NOT top secret (which it was) there is STILL a rediculous thing to say;
how would he even know if the names he saw were covert or not, if the person is covert, he would NOT know it
duh
Christy…I love it!
Perhaps if Wolf were to be Spotlighted with this, it might improve his followup questions.
Of course, if some of his competitors — Hi, Keith! — were to be spotlighted as well, it might improve their coverage of Armitage’s remarks.
Still in shock that Armitage got asked about Plame-Wilson at all. Must….not….get…hopes….up.
But seriously, given how shallow the media’s knowledge of l’affair Plame, is it any surprise that Armitage can tap dance around leaking covert identities to a journalist?
Sadly, ’tis not.
did you guys see this quote from armitage?
it’s as if he’s so scared of what this administration has done to this country that he is becomming a progressive…sort of like comey in that regard but check this out;
should dig this post and I am going to do that now
“Wolfie,..Heir Blitzer, I did not know she was covert, I have nothing against these people, the Wilsons. I did not intend to hurt anyone, I was only taking orders…”
Why in the he!! was Armitage on Blitzer’s show anyway? What’s the angle?? What is the motive for his appearance?? I’m lost as to the timing. Someone help me out, please.
Morning all. To refresh my recall of details around the covert identity leaking Bush White House, the ‘memo’ or more aptly described top secret report did not contain the name “Plame”, only a reference to her name, “Wilson”, no?
And has Novak to date ever revealed how on earth he accurately got the name “Plame” ?
.
Yup, that is a good example of why I’m addicted to the Refresh Comments button :)
What confuses me is why Fitz did not charge Armitage. With the evidence we’ve got, it would seem to be an open & shut case. So what did Fitz discover that we’re missing?
Boxturtle (Maybe he wants to wait until Bush can’t pardon?)
And let’s not forget what Novak said about Armitage. He said Armitage sought him (Novak) out — in order to pass on this information.
The same Richard Armitage who, Novak said, had previously been avoiding him like the plague.
All of a sudden Armitage changes his behavior, seeks out Novak, passes on the Plame info, and tries to palm it off as mere social blabbermouthing, and then is oh so sorry.
Tell it to the Marines.
That interview was a huge CYA session. Armitage takes no responsibilty for the deed, and Wolf lofts unerudite softballs.
Something has to be done, the media cannot be owned by the rethugs…
egregious @ 2
The paid media doesn’t want, or care, to know. Look at Woodward. He’s a freakin’ sellout. It looks like he’s gotten used to the life of the cocktail weenie circuit. It’s a damn shame too. He once was a hero. Now he’s just as much a tool as Tweety or Mr. Potato Head.
“They’re not words on which I disagree. I think it was extraordinarily foolish of me. There was no ill-intent on my part.”
Really? How can he say that with a straight face? That. Is. A. Lie.
Even if his only intent was to hurt Wilson’s credibility by making a connection for him with a wife at CIA, THAT in and of itself is “ill-intent”. That was malicious mischief, if nothing else. He knew what he was doing was wrong – at the least, it was malicious gossip. He knew what he was doing to Joe Wilson – perhaps he did not have a complete grasp of the possible implications of giving gossip “legs” like that in terms of others who are connected with Wilson – but he had to know that he was hurting at least one person.
No ill-intent? How stupid does he think we are?
perris @ 7
I continue to believe that while progressives might be the ones to get things going, and provide cover and support, the real push back of the pendulum will come from people on the right who are sick at what’s happened to our country.
Peterr thinks he can improve Wolf’s questions. Good luck with that. You have more faith in the power of certain people to grow in wisdom and grace than I can summon. As for the “full story” on anything being revealed, I am not hopeful.
Sounds like something out of a psychotherapy session. Does Armitage have this problem frequently?
Doesn’t he deserve credit for this:
That’s a back-flip with a double twist. We’ve all come to understand the cronyism at the top of this administration has resulted in hiring incompetents, but it is incredible that he would say he “assumed” in a manner involving an employee of the CIA. Assumed based on the name being on a memo! Then there is the dodge; “that’s what the message said”. Finally, how covert could she possibly be if she were “publicly chairing a meeting”? Coverts only privately chair meetings… right?
I’d like to see David Shuster interview Armitage, only guy qualified to handle the follow up.
Susan in Iowa @ 19
If Olbermann and others mock Blitzer’s giving Armitage a pass, Wolf’s PRODUCERS will recommend that he be a little more thorough in his prep for various interviews. It’s not so much my faith in “the power of certain people to grow in wisdom and grace” as much as my faith in anchor-people not wanting to be the target of parody and criticism for malpractice.
More than that, though, is my faith in the corporate bean-counters not to want their #1 anchor to become a laughingstock that could hurt the bottom line.
Diane @ 22
well, there is jane, christy and marcy too
oh, you mean those in the corporate media complex
nevermind
Diane at 22 — Now THAT would be a fun interview to watch…
you know, him saying “I never saw a covert agents name on a report” is like saying;
“I never saw someone who was invisible”
SHE’S COVERT MORON, YOU WOULDN’T KNOW IF YOU SAW A COVERT NAME ON A LIST
Toby Wollin @ 17
THAT little bit, the “no ill-intent” statement, was a massive CYA to protect against a charge under IIPA.
That’s what I believe was the single reason Fitz couldn’t charge one of the administration officials with IIPA; he could not provide solid evidence of intent. And this interview was one more attempt at clouding intent.
Tells me that somebody must still be digging, and Armitage felt a need to wave this matter of intent again to drive the seekers away.
good morning, all… coffee is ready, hold out your cups…
why do I get the impression there are top secret documents just tossed around on desktops for anyone to read?
In a conversation with one of my conservative acquaintances she said that the issue abour whether or not Plame suggested her husband for the trip or somebody else did is sufficient to brand Plame as no different and guilty of the same offences (lying) as Scooter Libby and that they are equivalent in her mind. She is unmoveable on this point. Where do people get these ideas and this logic. It is stunning.
I’ve never understood why Armitage, Rove, Libbey, et. al. were not indicted for revealing classified information. I don’t see how it makes a difference that Armitage was the only one who had a teker on the leak, they all committed the same crime. Additionally, they were all aware that it is a crime not only to reveal classified information, but to confirm classified information. Otherwise, it could all be discerned by playing twenty questions.
clamberite @ 29
tenet, president’s top cia aid, who bush awarded the medal of freedom said unequivicalby that did not happen
point that out to your friend and say she is calling the president and his top aid liars if she insists valery suggested her husband for the mission
that should shut her up pronto
clamberite — They get them from people like Victoria Toensing, who got booked on every major news show after the investigation into the leak got going to blab just that point of obfuscation. After it was deliberately planted in the Republican rebuttal to the Senate Intel Committee report — to give them a way to substantiate an inaccurate talking point in the first place that was so thinly sourced it could not be accepted into the full bipartisan report because the facts didn’t add up into anything but spin and nonsense.
And then it gets repeated on every right-wing radio show and blog across the Mighty Wurlitzer and from there to Drudge and into the corporate media tank. Rinse, lather, repeat.
Peterr @ 23
Wolf is already a laughingstock. Not one of the higher ups at CNN seem to care.
OldCoastie @ 28
Dunno, maybe it’s the multiple reports we’ve gotten that classified material is handled that way in the Bush Administration.
Information embarrassing to Cheney = “treat as Top Secret”
Actual national security information = “treat as trash”
Pardon this OT:
Los Angeles police are apparently starting up lists to locate area Muslims so they can “help out that community” like the do with the Jews who need “help on high holy days”. First, I never knew that the police department was a social work organization, and secondly, that Muslims needed help with parking problems on Ramadan!
This is ominous.
Foolish?
Most of us who hold clearances expect that if we did something similarly “foolish” (regardless of intent), a legal proceeding would follow in which our lifespans would be in danger of considerable shortening.
itwasntme @ 35
quite ominous, there is some pushback on it, but not enough.
Rayne @ 27
That makes sense to me.
OldCoastie @ 37
now if blackwater is hired to do this work we are in the brown stuff up to our ears
Christy @ 32 – proof of the Right Wing Conspiracy.
Professor Foland @ 36
I’ve handled classified data. I can assure you, that REGARDLESS of my intent, if I discussed that classified data in an inappropriate circumstance (like to a reporter) my clearence would be pulled and I’d probably be charged with a felony.
Boxturtle(Of course, I have no friends at the White House)
kdh22 @ 38
I really don’t understand the “intent” deal. As a former air traffic controller, I was always told that we could be charged with criminal negligence if unintentional bad things happened.
Hmmm. Rove left the White House abruptly this summer. Armitage is spinning his bald little head off. Cheney’s whipping himself into butter trying to start a distracting war with Iran. Could someone somewhere (now that the Bushies are fleeing the sinking ship in droves) have given Fitzgerald more information regarding the “intent” of the leakers, someone like Susan Ralston, Rove’s former minion, who’s on the hook big time in the Abramoff scandal? Just wondering…
pma — The “intent” issue comes up in the IIPA context because it is written into the law itself as an element which must be proved in order to sustain a prosecution thereon. Without being able to prove intent for an IIPA prosecution, you have no case — it’s a required element that the prosecution must prove to sustain a conviction under the law. See here for more on that and for other information about other potential charges when the investigation was just gearing up.
Blitzer is an A*P*C apparatchik. (Once you’ve worked there, always there!)
He is therefore always going to shade his work to reduce damage as much as possible for The Cause, Greater Israel! His owners belong in the same camp……. Whaddya expect?
Jews who are patriotic Americans are more and more seeing Zionism as bad for the US. How sad our politicians are so far behind, just as the Democratic Leadership just does not get that We The People want them to claw for Every Inch against Bush/Cheney.
egregious @ 18
My right-wing town has bloomed with Ron Paul yard signs…
dalloway at 43 — Not that I have heard.
Don’t forget that Bob Woodward not only withheld his knowledge about the leak from the Washington Post, he wrote several articles and editorials admonishing those who criticized the leak. Truly appalling behavior and truly ironic given his Watergate background.
Christy Hardin Smith @ 44
Alright. Thanks. It seems to allow for a lot of casually loose lips.
Re Rayne @27: “Tells me that somebody must still be digging, and Armitage felt a need to wave this matter of intent again to drive the seekers away.”
I think also there is an ongoing and sustained attempt to rewrite history and to transform the meaning of the story from ’sordid’ to ’sort of’ in the minds of Americans.
.
Loo Hoo. @ 46
We were in Philadelphia over the weekend – there was some sort of rally for Ron Paul, so there were signs “freeway blogged” all over the place.
Toby Wollin @ 51
Do they understand he opposes public schools?
Yeah, SpookyTooth, it was foolish alright, a foolish little felony called treason.
The only two current reasons Armitage might have been hauled onto Wolfies show is
a) that he is involved in the contract scandal where an incompetant Kuwaiti sub-contractor was awarded the rights to build a series of US Embassies (Baghdad) and Consulates (in Gabon, Indonesia and Saudi Arabia). Armitage & Associates was affiliated with another firm~ Grunley Walsh Int’l via Paul Jureidini. Grunley Walsh bought First Kuwaiti Contractors in 2006. In all First-Kuwaiti/Grunley Walsh carries over $1 billion in contracts in Iraq, and another $200 million elsewhere.
http://www.davidphinney.com/pa…..siness.php
b) Armitage is some sort of an “expert” on Iran, having served there as a “contractor” for the US embassy and Defense Department in 1976-77 (for all of two years), appointed in the waning days of the Ford era. Nobody is really sure what he was doing there, but it was in the final years of the Shah’s rule.
Many suspect that Armitage was CIA, or at least an operative, in Iran. He admits that he “assisted” the CIA in his time in Vietnam by providing intelligence…but denies affiliation with the CIA supported terrorist Phoenix Program (a claim made by ex-CIA officer Ted Shackley). Some suspect he was assigned to assist the Shah’s regime with something similar in Iran. Certainly the turmoil against the Shah and his hated SAVAK was ramping up. Three other US military contractors had just been assassinated by Iranian Marxists, and the Shah had used CIA assistance to shut down the underground press. Ironically the US had just started to build Iran’s nuclear industry. The Shah’s Nuclear Industry.
Armitage certainly became a part of the Cheney, Rumsfeld cabal in and around that time. After another stint “as a private businessman” in Thailand, he returned to the US to serve first, as an advisor to Bob Dole, and later to Ronald Reagan. Whether any of this allows him to have any real expertise on Iran is questionable unless he admits to what precisely he was doing here 30 years ago.
Cinnamonape really filled in some serious detail on where the information really came from, which, if true, details intent on the part of Armitage. All you would need is the page from the document on which Valerie’s name as Wilson appears with the marking Secret on it.
To me, it has always been the “intent” part of the case that was paramount and hardest to prove, that caused the case to stop with Libby. But assuming that Cinnamonape’s information is correct (since it usually is, although I would like to see a citation) I gotta wonder why then Fitz couldn’t bring charges to include that conspiracy he alluded to publicly? Did he give Armitage blind immunity (in other words, did Fitz mistakenly buy a pig in a poke?) so he couldn’t prosecute? He just didn’t want to open up that can of worms without absolute certaintly of a win (If you attack the King, better kill him!)?
To me, the whole Armitage branch of this is “the road less traveled.” The media has always seemed to turn a blind eye toward the fact that Armitage could have been smack dab in the middle of a conspiracy to discredit Joe Wilson. He’s been blatantly dismissed as a suspect even though they know that he was the first leak. Why is this such a jump to the press? The man was heavily involved with Iran contra. He has been a covert agent himself sometime during the Reagan and Bush 1 administration. Why could he not have been a plant at State, the administration spy within the State Dept. to make sure they weren’t straying from the party line? And why no further exploration of his role given what we know? Somehow this is all very unsettling!
Quebecois @ 15
Could the timing be related to something that is just about to happen with the Plame leak? Is Armitage attempting to muddy the public understanding of the events just prior to an INDICTMENT?
Well….one can hope!
A bit of breaking news on Al Gore, up and ready for the reading for everyone…
~Christy some breaking Al Gore news upstairs~
kiweagle @ 48
Bob Woodward was all over the place undermining Fitz’s investigation. Woodward is not an innocent bystander in outing of Plame or in the march for the invasion of Iraq.
And he appears to be participating in the spin on Iran.
# Bill Maher’s interview with Plame
http://www.alternet.org/blogs/video/66868/
#Matthews interview with Plame
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-GENUilnfD0
Rod @ 59
he also asserted early on that the CIA HAD done an assessment and there was no harm no foul from the leak
(Larry King Show)
According to an article linked at Huffpro- Hillary has dropped 10 points in the polls since the media declared that she screwed up in the debate….
Every talking head in the nation was talking about what it meant about her character that she refused to condemn the driver’s license for illegals program suggested in NY…
These guys can still take anyone down- or give us another Bush..scary
I’m supporting Edwards- but if the media can take Hillary down in a week- they can take Edwards down too..
I heard Armitage’s reference to seeing the name in the memo as the now typical Republican ploy of giving lip service to accepting responsibility while in fact blaming someone else, in this case the writer of the memo. But then I got to thinking about who wrote that memo and why didn’t the author follow the protocol of not naming CIA agents by name. Is Armitage trying to point the finger at someone else?
And it seems that Valerie Plame doesn’t put Armitage in the same cadre as Rove, Cheney and Libby. Why?
rwcole @ 61
I have also noticed that when HuffPo does a Hillary story they usually use a photo that is less than flattering.
Joe Klein’s conscience @ 16
Yeah, but wanna bet that Woodward makes a hell of a lot more money than real reporters like Seymour Hersh and Dana Priest! He figures he deserves it. I figure it’s all in the free market. When you come down to it, we are rewarding Woodwards decadence by paying him “mo’ money.” It’s the American way!
The media’s biggest problem with the presidential race is that it’s BORING- they have to manufacture news about it. No one cares- no one watches.
rita @ 63
He came clean with Fitz as soon as he knew he was caught in Fitz’s net.
perris @ 7
Boy-oh-boy, I’m late agin & the dawgs are all on point already. HAH!
Morning Christy and all. Good catch!
methinks too little, too late, mr. are-midge.
Pathetic. Shameful. Stoopid. Inexcusable. Embarrassing.
Down Right P.S.S.I.E.! mr. mentalmidget.
Keith? Blitzer? halloooooooo?
-uh-, yerhonourmrdobbs sir, not to interrupt yer roast there, but… look up once in awhile, past yer own nose…
# Woodward on the King show referring to the Plame outing “this is not even a firecracker, they did a damage assessment” Go listen to Woodward undermining the investigation
http://mediamatters.org/items/200511010002
Armitage is being ‘pushed’ into the camera lights so that all of US can see the obvious – He was punked by Cheney and Bush.
He’s the dopey kid with the sign taped on the back of his shirt, that doesn’t know what’s going on when his classmates are kicking him in the ass in the halls.
I take it that Little Dickey is being trotted-out to give ‘his story’ – that he’s sticking to – in advance of ‘news’ that moves the timeline back to the early June Bush-Cheney-Libby meetings and the INR Memo.
http://dkosopedia.com/wiki/Plame_Leak_timeline
That would be pre-Armitage, but show that the linkage from Bush-Cheney-Libby to Armitage was Woodward. It was in the early June meetings that the decision was made to ‘get Wilson’ by Bush and Cheney.
The ‘memo’ Armitage is referring to – the INR Memo – is a memo from his own State Department’s intelligence unit. It’s plastered with all the standard caveats for classified information – but Armitage is a well-known gossip – he’ll talk about anything, if the other person shows they ‘know’ something first.
So, Armitage gets the INR Memo. Woodward comes whistling down the hall and asks some questions for his ‘upcoming’ book, and oh-by-the-way how about Wilson’s Niger trip?
Woodward establishes (records the conversation on mini-cassette) that he can ‘punk’ the needed info – wife works at the CIA and sent Joe to Niger – out of Armitage. Cheney calls Duberstein, who calls Armitage and tells him to take an interview with Novak (whom Armitage has avoided for two years up to this point), and Duberstein uses Hohlt to get Novak to call Armitage for an appointment, and primes Novak with the right questions to ask.
Novak meets Armitage (almost half a day after Libby has already leaked to Judy Miller at the St. Regis Hotel), and easily punks the info – again – out of Armitage. Rove confirms, smear committed to print in a draft that Hohlt then gets Rove’s final approval for, and then Novak publishes.
Covert Agent ‘outed’ by dumbstruck gossip who never knew what hit him.
If any case of Malfeasance by the Bush Administration could be taken to Court, I would make it this one because Emptywheel has carefully and accurately documented a clear chain of responsibility that leads from Novak through Rove and Libby to Cheney and Bush.
rita @ 63
Armitage was probably going to be the fall guy on this one. If there was to be a fall. Fitz pretty much put that to rest when he went for Libby and his obstruction. I think Cheney is the one who pushed this on Armitage.
No Blood for Hubris @ 14
Novak has twisted his story of the saga several times. He also said that Armitage gave the information in an “offhand manner” as if it wasn’t intended to be revealed. But when one realizes he did this TWICE, and that it definitely wasn’t offhanded in the Woodward leak…one has to seriously consider “intent”.
Here’s the transcript with expurgated words editted out…my imagination and recall of the conversation put them back in…(so that much of my comment was guesswork).
“Woodward: Well it was Joe Wilson who was sent by the agency, isn’t it?
Armitage: His wife works for the agency.
Woodward: Why doesn’t that come out? Why does that have to be a big secret?
Armitage: (XXXX) Everybody knows it.
Woodward: Everyone knows?
Armitage: Yeah. And they know ’cause Joe Wilson’s been calling everybody. He’s pissed off ’cause he was designated as a low level guy went out to look at it. So he’s all pissed off.
Woodward: But why would they send him?
Armitage: Because his wife’s an analyst at the agency.
Woodward: It’s still weird.
Armitage: He – he’s perfect. She – she, this is what she does. She’s a WMD analyst out there.
Woodward: Oh, she is.
Armitage: (XXXX) Yeah.
Woodward: Oh, I see. I didn’t think…
Armitage: (XXXX) “I know who’ll look at it.” Yeah, see?
Woodward: Oh. She’s the chief WMD…?
Armitage: No. She’s not the…
Woodward: But high enough up that she could say, “oh, yeah, hubby will go.”
Armitage: Yeah. She knows [garbled].
Woodward: Was she out there with him, when he was…?
Armitage: (XXXX) No, not to my knowledge. I don’t know if she was out there. But his wife’s in the agency as a WMD analyst. How about that? “
Just look at how many lies and distortions Armitage passed to Woodward in the above:
Everybody did NOT know Wilson worked for the CIA.
They didn’t know that she worked in WMD Analyst. They couldn’t KNOW that because she WASN’T. Plame wasn’t an analyst…and the report he obtained for Libby never said she was. But we can see that this might have been one source for the “she’s just an analyst meme”…although Woodward asserts that HE never told a soul about this conversation.
Armitage tells Woodward that “the wife” wasn’t the “Chief WMD…” but high up….with the authority or connections to get her husband sent.
Joe Wilson wasn’t calling everybody about his wife. Armitage, in fact, obtained the information from the Classified State Department memo…which contained Top Secret information from the CIA.
And Armitage garbles the reason why Wilson was angry at the “16 words”: He’s pissed off ’cause he was designated as a low level guy went out to look at it. So he’s all pissed off.”
Huh? His wife sends him and he’s pissed off cause he’s the low level guy sent out? It’s not like Wilson was ORDERED to
BaghdadNiger as a low ranking State Department official! He volunteered.Now does it sound at all that it’s Woodward trying to pry the information out of Armitage in the above? That it’s an “off-the-cuff” comment. hardly? It’s Armitage intentionally giving up Plame’s classified CIA affiliation…and deliberately obscuring the fact that the CLASSIFIED REPORT was the source of his information…and deceiving Woodward into thinking that Plame was “merely an analyst”. “Everybody knows it”…”Wilson himself gave up the information”.
It was all framed to get Woodward to leak…yet Woodward wasn’t taking the bait. Or did he…notice just how many of these right-wing talking points showed up in public. Very curious, indeed!
cinnamonape@54
What enlightening info! Thanks.
The names Armitage and Negroponte always cause me to have what I can only assume are panic attacks…heart palpitations, cold sweats and interrupted breathing. :(
See, Christy, you had mentioned yesterday, and I agreed, that the whole subject of Plame probably wouldn’t come up with Blitzer. So. What? I guess we’re supposed to be satisfied that it even was raised and that Blitzer is quite the intrepid raker of muck, right? Bullshit. The lack of probing/follow-up is just bogus. No better than if he hadn’t been asked, really. maybe worse if the only result is to give Armitage a platform for his self-serving bullshit. And what continues to gall me is that the CIA asked Novak not to print Plame’s name and he just ignored them.
rita @ 63
Armitage is being sued by the Wilsons, so I think she does include him in the cadre.
Joe Klein’s conscience @ 33
You fail to take account of the possibility that the man who signs Wolfie’s paycheck may have also indicated a preference for the direction that Wolfie’s questioning should take.
cinnamonape @ 72
I’ve never understood that “everybody knew about Plame” bullshit (I’m using that quite a bit, today, huh?)that some people are even still repeating. Just think about it. Even Armitage says he didn’t know ’til he saw it in a memo. Russert didn’t know. Novak didn’t know ’til Armitage told him, Libby didn’t know. So, prior to Novak’s column, who is this “everybody” who knew?
Novak said in one interview “Nobody in the White House called me and told me to leak this”
But later Novak said “First, Armitage did not, as he now indicates, merely pass on something he had heard and that he ‘thought’ might be so. Rather, he identified to me the CIA division where Mrs. Wilson worked, and said flatly that she recommended the mission to Niger by her husband, former Ambassador Joseph Wilson. Second, Armitage did not slip me this information as idle chitchat, as he now suggests. He made clear he considered it especially suited for my column… he noted that the story of Mrs. Wilson’s role fit the style of the old Evans-Novak column — implying to me it continued reporting Washington inside information.”
cinnamonape @ 78
See, this is what I’m talking about. If it was “Washington inside information” doncha think Novak – who’s an invenerate gossip- woulda said (with his feelings quite hurt), “Gee, I never heard that.” The whole thing is just so inherently implausible, I don’t know how it ever had any shelf life.
Part of the prevailing wisdom on Armitage’s role in the outing is that he is a gossip and a bit of a rube. This seems supported by the fact that Valerie Wilson calls his actions foolish. He is one of the defendants in the civil suit ( as he must be for his part in leaking). But I get the sense that he is one of the simple(as in simpleton) tools in this matter.
I wonder if he enjoys the role of village idiot among his crowd? And if he is in fact one of the village idiots inside the beltway, he is a village idiot who has been entrusted with a lot of government secrets over the years. That in itself is rather scary to contemplate.)
(BTW, thanks for the responses to my questions in my first comment. I’d forgotten that he was part of the civil suit.)
All of you who find criminality here need to explain why Fitzgerald, who knew of Armitage’s blabbing from the start, didn’t charge him with anything.
Chew on that, will you?
# 81
because Bush and Cheney have been spying on EVERY American in the USA since way before 911 !
balls in your court !
Wilderness: thank you very much for your stunning non-sequitur, which is in any event manifestly untrue.
If Bush and Cheney have been spying on every American, surely you can list those spied upon and the ensuing negative consequences. Do try to be specific, will you?
I am refering to the fact that they heve been capturing the entire unfiltered data streams fop all communications in, through, and out of the USA.
Let me find the link for you.
Oh ya the link is in the secret room at AT&T
go to livelink.com or just google at&t data stream intercept to see what type of illegal spying has really been going on.
I don’t post here to get in long arguments with people that won’t even be around after the shit really hits the fan…
Someone asked about the INR (State Department Intelligence) memo that was seen by Armitage. This was produced by Carl Ford on June 10th, Armitage saw it on June 12th, and met with Woodward on June 13th, 2003.
http://wid.ap.org/documents/li…..3/DX71.pdf
Note that every page has “Secret” Classification on it. The “provisionally declassified” labels were placed on the document AFTER they were declassified FOR the Libby trial. There are also blacked out notations next to the “Secret” or “Top Secret” Classifications separated by a slash and marked out.
The additional Classification notifications apparently contained the names of the operations or additional restrictions….such as limitations to a particular Department or sub-section, or restriction to a particular level.
http://dkosopedia.com/wiki/Classified_information
Wilderness, as I predicted you can come up with no specific examples of adverse consequences. If you think the billions of
“unfiltered” communications made daily in this country can be listened to/read/monitored, you are well and truly a LOON. If what’s being done is “illegal”, where is Congress? Where are the ACLU lawsuits?
Face it, you’re holding a suitcase full of helium.
ARMITAGE: Not only assumed it, that’s what the message said, that she was publicly chairing a meeting.
—————————
Are you fucking kidding me? As far as I know, the CIA doesn’t “publicly chair” meetings. Valerie Plame was not running a meeting in the CIA’s public lobby (”On our left, you can see a CIA agent of unclear status discussing a recent mission to Niger.”), and it didn’t air on CSPAN.
Armitage got her identity from a classified document. And the reason he didn’t know her identity already was that the CIA didn’t want him to know. He was played–brilliantly–by Rove and Libby, and he STILL doesn’t seem to get it.
Anna Keppa @ 87
Congress is awaiting the Judiciary Committee vote while the White House is negotiating furiously to exonerate the telecoms. The lawsuits won’t proceed till Congress acts.
Why would they ask for immunity if no laws were broken? That would only make sense to a Bush apologist with logical impairment and a gullet full of Kool-Aid.
“Congress is awaiting the Judiciary Committee vote while the White House is negotiating furiously to exonerate the telecoms. The lawsuits won’t proceed till Congress acts.”
Sorry, but that’s apples and oranges. Congress has already given the admin an additional six months essentially to continue their current program. They didn’t declare it illegal.
The telecoms issue is different: the Bush admin
granted immunity to the telecoms companies, and Congress is considering whether to continue that practice. Some Dems want to retroactively withdraw immunity, but lots of problems lurk there, in that the Executive, not the Legislature, has primacy here, AND, if the immunity were legislatively rescinded telecoms could argue they are being subject to unconstitutional ex post facto applications of the law.
“Why would they ask for immunity if no laws were broken? That would only make sense to a Bush apologist with logical impairment and a gullet full of Kool-Aid.”
As I said, they had already been granted immunity by the Executive and some in Congress are now trying to take it away. But if the Executive has the underlying authority to perform the surveillance, and asks private companies to assist it, then what exactly are the companies guilty of? What laws did THEY break?
I suggest you check your facts, not just your premises.
ARMITAGE: Well, even Mr. Novak has said that he used the word “operative” and misused it. No one ever said “operative.” And I not only assumed it, as I say, I’ve never seen a covered agent’s name in a memo. However, that doesn’t take away from what Mrs. Plame said, it was foolish, yeah. Sure it was.
BLITZER: So you agree with her on that. ARMITAGE: Yeah. Absolutely.
Except Wolfie never asked that question. Not even close.
Sort of OT but does anyone know why Valerie makes no mention of the hundreds of UNSCOM inspectors that had been on the ground for months in Iraq pre invasion in her book. Having been one of the main CIA persons struggling to find out what was really going on inside the country while having virtually no agents (humint) on the ground one would think she would have touched on the fact in her book that we finally had hundreds of professionals working in the light of day to uncover what had only been suspect by the CIA up till then.
Foolish. Now there’s an interesting choice of word.