Fitzgerald Investigation of Leak of Identity of CIA Agent

Tico,

Your argument doesn't make much sense. The judge obviously interpreted the statement the exact opposite you did. I don't see how any reasonable person could interpret it in your fashion wihout ignoring the record of Fitzgerald and the rules of logic. The judge trusts Fitzgerald. Your argument is that we can't trust him.



There is no direct evidence that Libby knew she was engaged in covert work.

But this is a 2 part test.
In order to break the law she must have been covert and Libby must have known.

Fitzgerald is not so incompetent and the judge certainly believes he would not have made the statement without passing the first test of whether Plame was covert. Without her being covert he would have had to state there was no evidence she did covert work in talking about the test of whether the law was broken. Any reasonable reading of the law would show that the first test is to determine covert or not. That is the easier test to find evidence for. Without meeting that test there is no reason to determine the 2nd test. You can wiggle and argue that Fitzgerald hasn't said whether he determined it or not. Anyone with a reasonable understanding of the law would accept that he had or else he would not have dealt only with the second part of the test.

I highly doubt that Fitzgerald would be so foolish as to mislead the court by failing to disclose that he couldn't discover if Plame was covered under the law or not. The statement he does make and the fact that he doesn't state he never did find her to be covert point to he found it. Your only argument at this point Tico is that Fitzgerald did mislead the court.

Actually, it makes complete sense ... you just don't want it to.



I'm not saying we can't "trust" Fitzgerald, but hold on ..... when a prosecutor charges a crime, we don't "trust" that the defendant is guilty. We presume the prosecutor has a basis for charging the defendant.

Interpreting the statement contained in the footnote -- it's a footnote, for God's sake -- the way I am does not require ignoring Fitzgerald's record. It has nothing to do with his record.

The statement again:

"In order to establish a violation of [the IIPA], it would be necessary to establish that Libby knew or believed that Plame was a person whose identity the CIA was making specific efforts to conceal and who had carried out covert work overseas within the last 5 years."

Now, show me where he says Plame carried out covert work overseas within the last 5 years. You can't because he doesn't. He merely says that in order to prove a violation of the IIPA, that is what would need to be shown.



He didn't "deal" with any part of the test ... he merely stated what the test is.



I don't think Fitzgerald had any intent to mislead, nor do I think he believed the Court would misinterpret what he had written, which is plainly a statement of what would need to be shown in order to establish a violation under the IIPA, not what could be shown.

and without some sort of confession, witness or hard copy evidence i don't guess we can know that he knew..

but, logically, i have to ask; what would be the value of cheney et.al. outting a woman who's only job was to get coffee ? isn't that how the right wing spin has portrayed her ? just a great pair o' legs?

doesn't really seem like there's be much point to it if that were the case.

Tico,

The judge said....

You said..


The court interpreted that the representations were that Plame was a person whose identity the CIA was trying to hide. Do you have any evidence that the court misinterpreted his statements? The court is pretty clear in that they understood that representation was that Plame WAS undercover and covered by Title 50, United States Code, Section 421 [the Intelligence Identities Protection Act]. I would think if Fitzgerald felt the court misinterpreted his statements he would have let the court know they had.

Is it your allegation that the court DID misunderstand Fitzgeralds claim? The only reading I can see of the court's statement is they felt Fitzgerald had made that claim.

Yes, I believe he did.



Of course. Tatel states: "the special counsel refers to Plame as "a person whose identity the CIA was making specific efforts to conceal and who had carried out covert work overseas within the last 5 years," but Fitzgerald didn't say such was the case, only that's what would have to be shown in order to prove a violation of the IIPA. He just misreads what Fitzgerald is saying. If Fitzgerald was indeed attempting to make a claim as the Judge insists, he certainly could have done so in a more clear manner, and probably wouldn't have done so in a footnote.

Tico, I think you are making a valid point here; but one which probably will soon be immaterial.

http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Outed_CIA_officer_was_working_on_0213.html



Still a raw story; but it does provide a clue that she may have actually been rather important.

Cycloptichorn

Yes, we'll see.

I'm glad to hear she did more than make coffee for the office, but it still doesn't mean she is a "covert agent" (i.e., carried out covert work overseas within the last 5 years). Perhaps the IIPA needs to be broadened to cover more "clandestine" operatives?

Gonzales Withholding Plame Emails
Gonzales Withholding Plame Emails
By Jason Leopold
t r u t h o u t | Report
Wednesday 15 February 2006

Sources close to the investigation into the leak of covert CIA agent Valerie Plame Wilson have revealed this week that Attorney General Alberto Gonzales has not turned over emails to the special prosecutor's office that may incriminate Vice President Dick Cheney, his aides, and other White House officials who allegedly played an active role in unmasking Plame Wilson's identity to reporters.

Moreover, these sources said that, in early 2004, Cheney was interviewed by federal prosecutors investigating the Plame Wilson leak and testified that neither he nor any of his senior aides were involved in unmasking her undercover CIA status to reporters and that no one in the vice president's office had attempted to discredit her husband, a vocal critic of the administration's pre-war Iraq intelligence. Cheney did not testify under oath or under penalty of perjury when he was interviewed by federal prosecutors.

The emails Gonzales is said to be withholding contained references to Valerie Plame Wilson's identity and CIA status and developments related to the inability to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Moreover, according to sources, the emails contained suggestions by the officials on how the White House should respond to what it believed were increasingly destructive comments Joseph Wilson had been making about the administration's pre-war Iraq intelligence.

Gonzales, who at the time of the leak was the White House counsel, spent two weeks with other White House attorneys screening emails turned over to his office by roughly 2,000 staffers following a deadline imposed by the White House in 2003. The sources said Gonzales told Fitzgerald more than a year ago that he did not intend to turn over the emails to his office, because they contained classified intelligence information about Iraq in addition to minor references to Plame Wilson, the sources said.

He is said to have cited "executive privilege" and "national security concerns" as the reason for not turning over some of the correspondence, which allegedly proves Cheney's office played an active role in leaking Plame Wilson's undercover CIA status to reporters, the attorneys said.

Aside from the emails that have not been turned over, there are also emails that Patrick Fitzgerald, the Special Prosecutor investigating the case, believes were either "shredded" or deleted, the attorneys said.

In a court document dated January 23, Fitzgerald says that, during the course of his investigation, he had been told that some emails from the offices of President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney had not been saved. His letter does not claim that any member of the Bush administration discarded the emails, but sources close to the probe say that is what Fitzgerald has been alleging privately.

"In an abundance of caution," Fitzgerald's January 23 letter to Libby's defense team states, "we advise you that we have learned that not all email of the Office of the Vice President and the Executive Office of the President for certain time periods in 2003 was preserved through the normal archiving process on the White House computer system."

Spokespeople for Gonzales and the White House would not comment citing the ongoing investigation. Randall Samborn, a spokesman for Fitzgerald, also wouldn't comment. A spokesman for Cheney did not return calls for comment nor did Cheney's criminal attorney, Terrence O'Donnell.

Cheney testified for a little more than an hour about his role in the leak in early 2004. What he told prosecutors appears to be identical to testimony his former chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, gave before a grand jury during the same year. Libby was indicted on five-counts of obstruction of justice, perjury, and lying to investigators related to his role in the Plame Wilson leak.

Two weeks ago, additional court documents related to Libby's case were made public. In one document, Fitzgerald responded to Libby's defense team that Libby had testified before a grand jury that his "superiors" authorized him to leak elements of the highly classified National Intelligence Estimate to reporters in the summer of 2003 that showed Iraq to be a grave nuclear threat, to rebut criticism that the administration manipulated pre-war Iraq intelligence.

News reports citing people familiar with Libby's testimony said Cheney had authorized Libby to do so. Additionally, an extensive investigation during the past month has shown that Cheney, Libby and former Deputy National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley spearhead an effort beginning in March 2003 to discredit Plame Wilson's husband, former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, a vocal critic of the administration's intelligence related to Iraq, who had publicly criticized the administration for relying on forged documents to build public support for the war.

Cheney did not disclose this information when he was questioned by investigators.

Cheney responded to questions about how the White House came to rely on Niger documents that purportedly showed that Iraq had tried to purchase uranium from the African country. Cheney said he had received an intelligence briefing on the allegations in late December 2003 or early January 2004 and had asked the CIA for more information about the issue.

Cheney said he was unaware that Wilson was chosen to travel to Niger to look into the uranium claims and that he never saw a report Wilson had given a CIA analyst upon his return, which stated that the Niger claims were untrue. He said the CIA never told him about Wilson's trip.

However, these attorneys said that witnesses in the case have testified before a grand jury that Cheney, Libby, Hadley, the Pentagon, the Defense Intelligence Agency, the State Department, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Justice Department, the FBI, and other senior aides in the Office of the Vice President, the President, and the National Security Council had received and read a March 9, 2002, cable sent to his office by the CIA that debunked the Niger claims.

The cable, which was prepared by a CIA analyst and based on Wilson's fact-finding mission, did not mention Wilson by name, but quoted a CIA source and Niger officials Wilson had questioned during his eight-day mission, who said there was no truth to the claims that Iraq had tried to purchase 500 tons of yellowcake uranium ore from Niger.

Several current and former State Department and CIA officials familiar with the March 9, 2002, cable said they had testified before the grand jury investigating the Plame Wilson leak that they had spoken to Libby and Hadley about the cable, and that they were told Cheney had also read it.

Cheney told investigators that when Wilson began speaking to reporters on background about his secret mission to Niger to investigate Iraq's alleged attempts to purchase uranium, he asked Libby to contact the CIA to "get more information" about the trip and to find out if it was true, the attorneys added.

Furthermore, Cheney told prosecutors that before he learned of Wilson's trip, his office simply sought to rebut statements made by Wilson to reporters and the various newspaper reports that said the Bush administration knowingly relied on flawed intelligence to build a case for war.

Moreover, Cheney said that he and his aide were concerned that reporters had been under the impression that Cheney chose Wilson for the Niger trip, the attorneys said. Cheney testified that he instructed Libby and other aides to coordinate a response to those queries and rebut those allegations with the White House press office.

"In his testimony the vice president said that his staff referred media calls about Wilson to the White House press office," one attorney close to the case said. "He said that was the appropriate venue for responding to statements by Mr. Wilson that he believed were wrong."

Cheney told investigators that he first learned about Valerie Plame Wilson and her employment with the CIA from Libby. Cheney testified that Libby told him that several reporters had contacted him in July to say that Plame Wilson had been responsible for arranging her husband's trip to Niger to investigate the Niger uranium claims.

Cheney also testified that the next time he recalled hearing about Plame Wilson and her connection to Joseph Wilson was when he read about her in a July 14, 2003, column written by syndicated columnist Robert Novak.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jason Leopold spent two years covering California's electricity crisis as Los Angeles bureau chief of Dow Jones Newswires. Jason has spent the last year cultivating sources close to the CIA leak investigation, and is a regular contributer to t r u t h o u t.

No, it doesn't make sense. To any reasonable and lucid person. Just watch, he will respond to this by calling me four or five different names. He is obviously in need of intervention.

NSC, Cheney Aides Conspired to Out CIA Operative
NSC, Cheney Aides Conspired to Out CIA Operative
By Jason Leopold
t r u t h o u t | Investigative Report
Monday 20 February 2006

The investigation into the leak of covert CIA operative Valerie Plame Wilson is heating up. Evidence is mounting that senior officials in the office of Vice President Dick Cheney and the National Security Council conspired to unmask Plame Wilson's identity to reporters in an effort to stop her husband from publicly criticizing the administration's pre-war Iraq intelligence, according to sources close to the two-year-old probe.

In recent weeks, investigators working for Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald have narrowed their focus to a specific group of officials who played a direct role in pushing the White House to cite bogus documents claiming that Iraq attempted to purchase 500 tons of uranium from Niger, which Plame Wilson's husband, former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, had exposed as highly suspect.

One high level behind-the-scenes player who has been named by witnesses in the case as a possible source for reporters in the leak is Robert Joseph, formerly the director of nonproliferation at the National Security Council. Joseph is responsible for placing the infamous "sixteen words" about Iraq's attempt to purchase uranium from Niger in President Bush's January 2003 State of the Union address.

It's unknown when Fitzgerald will present the grand jury with additional evidence related to this aspect of the case or if he is close to securing indictments. The sources said the Special Prosecutor is very "methodical," and they expect the investigation to continue well into the spring.

The new grand jury hearing evidence in the leak case was empanelled in November. Right now, the jurors are still absorbing two years' worth of evidence Fitzgerald presented to the jurors a couple of weeks after the previous grand jury's term expired at the end of October. Sources said the jurors have raised numerous legal questions about unnamed senior Bush administration officials against whom Fitzgerald is trying to secure indictments.

Sources close to the probe said witnesses involved in the case told FBI investigators that Joseph was one of the recipients of a classified State Department memo in June 2003 that not only debunked the Niger allegations but also included a top-secret reference to Valerie Plame Wilson's work for the CIA, and that she may have been responsible for recommending that the CIA send her husband to Niger to investigate the uranium claims in February 2002.

Joseph did not return calls for comment. A spokeswoman for the vice president's office said she would not comment on "rumors" or "speculation" as long as the investigation is ongoing. Hadley's spokeswoman also did not return calls for comment, but she has said in the past that Hadley played no role in the leak.

The sources added that the witnesses testified that Joseph and then-Deputy National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley had worked directly with senior officials from vice president Cheney's office - including Cheney's former chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, National Security Adviser John Hannah, and White House Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove - during the month of June to coordinate a response to reporters who had phoned the vice president's office and the NSC about the administration's use of the Niger documents.

Libby was indicted in October on five counts of lying to investigators, perjury, and obstruction of justice related to his role in the Plame Wilson leak. Legal scholars said that Fitzgerald can ask a grand jury to add conspiracy charges against Libby if he uncovers evidence that Libby and other administration officials worked together to leak Plame Wilson's identity to reporters in an effort to silence her husband. If additional charges were filed against Libby it would come in the form of a superseding indictment. Fitzgerald would have to introduce new evidence and witnesses against Libby to the grand jury, and the grand jury would decide whether there were enough evidence to support the superseding indictment.

In a court filing made public Friday in response to a defense motion in which Libby's attorneys wanted Fitzgerald to turn over highly classified documents to assist the defense's case, Fitzgerald made it clear that Libby was not charged with conspiracy.

"Libby is not charged with conspiracy or any other offense involving acting in concert with others, and the indictment lists no un-indicted co-conspirators," states Fitzgerald's motion, which asks a judge to deny the defense motion seeking evidence Fitzgerald said is unrelated to Libby's criminal indictment.

That could change, however, the sources said, if there is enough evidence to support conspiracy charges.

Although that remains to be seen, former State Department and CIA officials who have testified about their role in the leak said they believe officials at the National Security Council and in the vice president's office worked together to unmask Plame Wilson to reporters, specifically to undercut her husband's credibility. They said that Joseph was one NSC staffer who worked with Cheney officials to do so.

Joseph, who is now the Under Secretary of State for Arms Control - a position once held by John Bolton, now United States Ambassador to the United Nations - testified before the grand jury that he played no part in the leak and was not involved in attempts by the administration to discredit Wilson.

Moreover, Joseph testified that he did not recall receiving a warning in the form of a phone call from Alan Foley, director of the CIA's nonproliferation, intelligence and arms control center, saying that the "sixteen words" should not be included in Bush's speech, the sources said.

Foley had revealed this element during a closed-door hearing before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence back in July 2003 - just two weeks after Wilson wrote an op-ed in the New York Times that proved the administration cited suspect intelligence claiming Iraq attempted to purchase uranium from Niger.

The Senate committee had held hearings during this time to try to find out how the administration came to rely on the Niger intelligence at a time when numerous intelligence agencies had warned top officials in the Bush administration that it was unreliable.

Foley said he spoke to Joseph a day or two before President Bush's January 28, 2003, State of the Union address and told Joseph that detailed references to Iraq and Niger should be excluded from Bush's speech. Foley told committee members that Joseph agreed to water down the language and would instead, he told Foley, attribute the intelligence to the British, which is exactly what Bush's speech said.

However, a few weeks before Foley's meeting with the Senate committee, the Niger intelligence was beginning to unravel and threatened to expose the roles of Libby, Hadley, Joseph, Hannah, and Rove in getting the administration to rely upon it to build the case for war.

The sources said it was during this time that Libby, Hadley, Joseph, Hannah and Rove plotted to silence Wilson by leaking his wife's name to a specific group of reporters, saying that she chose him for the fact-finding mission to Niger and as a result his investigation was highly suspect. It's unclear what role, if any, Cheney played, but the sources said Fitzgerald is trying to determine if the vice president was involved.

The sources said Hannah is one of the cooperating witnesses in the probe.

The sources said this time frame was chosen because there were "rumors" that Wilson was "going to go public" and reveal that he had checked out the Niger claims on behalf of the CIA and that there was no truth to them. According to the sources close to the probe, all five of the officials have spoken with reporters about Plame Wilson.

At the same time that Plame Wilson's CIA status was leaked to reporters, Libby, Rove and Hadley had been exchanging emails that included draft statements explaining how the "sixteen words" ended up in President Bush's State of the Union address, the sources added.

"Before Mr. Wilson's article appeared in the New York Times," one source close to the case said, "the administration still insisted that Niger still had merit. It was only after the article had been published that the White House accepted responsibility."

Wilson disclosed in an op-ed he wrote in the New York Times that he had been the special envoy chosen by the CIA in February 2002 to travel to Niger to investigate allegations that Iraq tried to purchase 500 tons of yellowcake uranium from the African country.

Wilson's fact-finding mission had come as a result of additional questions Vice President Cheney raised with the CIA about the veracity of those allegations a month or so before Wilson was selected for the mission. Wilson wrote in the column that he had reported back to the CIA eight days after his trip that there was no truth to the charges. In his column, he accused the administration of ignoring his report. He said President Bush and Cheney continued to cite the Niger uranium intelligence, knowing it was false, in order to dupe the public and Congress into supporting the war.

In the four months prior to writing his column, Cheney and officials from the NSC insisted that the Niger intelligence had merit, and said as much publicly, despite the fact that the International Atomic Energy Association found that they were crude forgeries. Moreover, there is evidence that Cheney, Hadley, Libby, and numerous other officials were warned as early as March 2002 - one year before the start of the Iraq war - that claims suggesting Iraq tried to purchase uranium from Niger were baseless.

Indeed, witnesses in the case have testified that President Bush's senior aides, the vice president's office, the Pentagon, the Defense Intelligence Agency, the State Department, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Justice Department, the FBI, and the National Security Council had received and read a March 9, 2002, cable sent by the CIA that debunked the Niger claims.

The cable was prepared by a CIA analyst and was based on Wilson's oral report upon his return from Niger. It did not mention Wilson by name, but quoted a "CIA source" and Niger officials Wilson had questioned during his eight-day mission, who said there was absolutely no truth to the claims that Iraq had tried to purchase 500 tons of yellowcake uranium ore from Niger.

Cheney and other officials connected to the leak have said over the years that they never saw such a report from the CIA, and had never heard of Wilson until he became the subject of news accounts in which the former ambassador called into question the veracity of the Niger documents upon which the uranium claims were based.

The sources said it was during this month, March 2003, when Wilson arrived on the administration's radar as a result of his public comments that alleged the White House had manipulated intelligence, that Cheney, Libby, and Hadley spearheaded an effort to discredit Wilson.

It was during the course of their attempts to attack Wilson's credibility and rebut his charges that officials in the State Department, the CIA, Cheney's office, and the National Security Council - many of whom were responsible for pushing the administration to cite the Niger claims - learned that Wilson's wife was a covert CIA agent and, upon learning that she may have been responsible for sending Wilson to Niger, leaked her name to a handful of reporters.

Five days after Wilson's explosive column was published, CIA Director George Tenet accepted responsibility for allowing the infamous "sixteen words" to be included in Bush's January 28, 2003, State of the Union address. Many people interpreted this as Tenet falling on his sword to protect the president.

Two weeks later, the CIA revealed that other administration officials were culpable as well. CIA officials sent Hadley two memos in October 2002 warning him not to continue peddling the Niger claims to the White House because the intelligence was not accurate.

Hadley, who didn't heed the CIA's warnings at the time, said during a press conference on July 23, 2003, that he had forgotten about the memos.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jason Leopold spent two years covering California's electricity crisis as Los Angeles bureau chief of Dow Jones Newswires. Jason has spent the last year cultivating sources close to the CIA leak investigation, and is a regular contributer to t r u t h o u t.

When the indictment was announced, talking heads said that they expected Fitzgerald to wrp things up in a few weeks if no further indictments were to be pursued.

What has been? Going on three months now? Not good news for the WH criminals.

Details Emerge in Latest Plame Emails
Details Emerge in Latest Plame Emails
By Jason Leopold
t r u t h o u t | Investigative Report
Wednesday 01 March 2006

The White House confirmed Tuesday that it recently turned over to Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald 250 pages of emails from the Office of Vice President Dick Cheney related to covert CIA operative Valerie Plame Wilson and her husband, former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, a vocal critic of the Bush administration's pre-war Iraq intelligence. The emails were not submitted three years ago when then-White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales ordered White House staffers to turn over all documents that contained any reference to Valerie and Joseph Wilson.

Gonzales's directive in October 2003 came 12 hours after he was told by the Justice Department that it was launching an investigation to find out who leaked Plame Wilson's undercover CIA status to reporters in what appeared to be an attempt to discredit and silence her husband from speaking out against the administration's rationale for war. Gonzales spent two weeks with other White House attorneys screening emails and other documents his office received before turning them over to Justice Department investigators.

News of the 250 pages of emails was revealed to Libby's attorneys during a court hearing Friday.

In addition to witness testimony, investigators working with Fitzgerald are said to have discovered the existence of the emails from computers that investigators had confiscated from the Office of the Vice President, people familiar with developments in the investigation said.

Attorneys for Libby and the US District Court reporter in the Libby case, William McAllister, reading from Friday's transcript of the hearing, confirmed that Libby's defense attorneys were told during Friday's hearing that the emails were recently turned over by the White House to Fitzgerald.

According to a copy of the transcript from Friday's hearing, Libby's attorney, Ted Wells, said he was "told that there are an additional approximately 250 pages of documents that are emails from the office of the vice president," the transcript states.

Your Honor, may recall that in earlier filings it was represented or alluded to that certain e-mails had not been preserved in the White House. That turns out not to be true. There were some e-mails that weren't archived in the normal process but the office of the vice president or the office of administration I guess it is has been able to recover those e-mails. Gave those to special counsel I think only on February 6 and those again are going to be produced to us. We don't know what's in there. We've been led to believe it's probably not anything startling in those e-mails.
A spokesman for Cheney would only confirm the accuracy of what was said in court: that the White House recently turned over the emails. The spokesman would not comment further.

Remarkably, other than a brief citation buried inside an Associated Press story, Friday's development about the White House's "discovery" of the 250 pages of emails was not covered by any major news media.

But that particular bit of courtroom dialogue between Libby's attorneys and Specials Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald was an explosive development in the three year-old criminal probe.

For one thing, it raises numerous questions: why weren't the emails located in late 2003, when Gonzales enjoined roughly 2,000 White House staffers to turn over any communication about Plame Wilson and her husband, as so ordered by a Justice Department subpoena? Do the emails provide greater insight into the campaign to discredit Wilson and identify the officials who unmasked his wife's undercover CIA status to reporters?

A spokesperson for Gonzales did not return numerous calls for comment. But sources close to the investigation said that unnamed senior officials in Cheney's office had deleted some of the emails before Fitzgerald learned of their existence earlier this year, and others never turned them over to Gonzales as requested. Separately, according to people close to Fitzgerald's probe, there are some emails that Gonzales has refused to turn over to Fitzgerald, citing "executive privilege" and "national security."

It's unclear whether a formal subpoena was issued to the White House for the emails or whether the request came in the form of a letter from Fitzgerald. Sources said the White House did not voluntarily turn them over to Fitzgerald's staff.

The emails from Cheney's office that were turned over to Fitzgerald earlier this month were written by senior aides and sent to various officials at the State Department, the National Security Council, and the Office of the President. The emails were written as early as March 2003 - four months before Plame Wilson's cover was blown in a report written by conservative columnist Robert Novak. The contents of the emails are said to be damning, according to sources close to the investigation who are familiar with their substance. The emails are said to implicate Cheney in a months-long effort to discredit Wilson - a fact that Cheney did not disclose when he was interviewed by federal investigators in early 2004, these sources said.

The emails also show I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Cheney's former chief of staff who was indicted in October on five counts of perjury, obstruction of justice, and lying to investigators related to his role in the leak, Deputy White House Chief of Staff Karl Rove, and then-Deputy National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley, as well as former Under Secretary of State for Arms Control John Bolton and other top officials in the vice president's office also took part in discussions about ways in which the administration could respond to Wilson's public criticism about the Bush administration's use of intelligence that claimed Iraq tried to purchase uranium from Niger.

Wilson had traveled to Niger in February 2002 on behalf of the CIA to investigate those claims and reported back that there was no substance to the allegations. But the Niger uranium claims made it into President Bush's January 2003 State of the Union address and Wilson had accused the administration of "twisting" intelligence on the Iraqi threat to win public support for the war.

Cheney and his senior aides did not disclose to federal investigators the fact that they either received or sent emails about either Joseph Wilson or Valerie Plame Wilson when they were first questioned about their knowledge and/or role in the leak in early 2004, people close to the investigation said.

Witnesses who work or worked at the CIA, the National Security Council, and the State Department who have been interviewed in the case, and some of who are cooperating with the probe, said they told Fitzgerald that they had received or sent emails to senior aides in Vice President Cheney's office, the State Department and the National Security Council as early as March 2003 about Joseph Wilson.

Other emails show that in mid-June 2003 these officials had sent emails that mentioned "Valerie Wilson" - not Valerie Plame - and her employment with the CIA, sources close to the leak investigation said.

One email about Wilson and his wife is said to have been sent by Libby to an unknown senior individual at the National Security Council in early June 2003, after Libby was told by Marc Grossman, then Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs, that Wilson's wife worked for the CIA and that Grossman's colleagues told him that Plame Wilson was involved in organizing Wilson's trip to Niger in February 2002 to investigate whether Iraq had tried to purchase uranium from the African country.

However, copies of the emails were never found in the more than 10,000 documents that Fitzgerald's staff has collected during the course of their investigation, the sources said.

Rove and Libby both testified that they learned about Plame Wilson from reporters - a fact disputed by the emails and witness testimony - and that they were not involved in a campaign to discredit Wilson. Rove remains under scrutiny. Rove's attorney, Robert Luskin, did not return calls for comment.

Hadley's role in the leak is also being closely looked at by Fitzgerald and his staff, sources said, adding that new evidence has surfaced showing that the National Security Adviser played an intimate role in the effort to discredit Wilson and that he may be one of the still unnamed administration officials who spoke to reporters about Plame Wilson's work for the CIA.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jason Leopold spent two years covering California's electricity crisis as Los Angeles bureau chief of Dow Jones Newswires. Jason has spent the last year cultivating sources close to the CIA leak investigation, and is a regular contributor to t r u t h o u t.

One would think certain people on the right would be up in arms over this after the way the went on and on about the Clinton administration not turning over documents in the first week they were asked to.

Hey Dittoheads? Where are your principles?

or as sean hannity says; rarararararara, SNIFFFF, rararararararaa, SNIFFF. sir, do you have the moral courage to rararararararararararaaaa?!?

Despite the lack of interest, this story just isn't going away.



http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060318/ap_on_go_pr_wh/cia_leak

We need to have an investigation to find out why Fitzgerald is taking so long to wrap up his investigation.

From where I stand, it seems Bush is making threats through the CIA or some such.

We know congress will never author such an investigation; they themselves are probably threatened by this administration.

Woodward's Plame Leak Deep Throat
Woodward's Plame Leak Deep Throat
By Jason Leopold
t r u t h o u t | Report
Tuesday 21 March 2006

He is referred to as "official one" and he is the mysterious senior Bush administration official who unmasked the identity of an undercover CIA operative to Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter Bob Woodward in mid-June 2003 and conservative columnist Robert Novak a month later.

The identity of this official is shrouded in secrecy. In fact, his name, government status, and the substance of his conversation with Woodward about the undercover officer are under a protective seal in US District Court for the District of Columbia.

But Woodward tape-recorded the interview he had with "official one." Woodward gave a copy of the tape and a transcript to Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald.

Woodward emerged as central figure in the leak of undercover CIA operative Valerie Plame Wilson in November. For the better part of two years, Woodward had publicly discounted the importance of the Plame Wilson leak and had referred to Fitzgerald as a "junkyard dog" prosecutor in interviews during the course of the investigation. He then revealed in November that he had been told about Plame Wilson's CIA employment in June 2003 - before any other journalist.

Woodward wrote a first-person account in the Washington Post in November about the individual who told him that Plame Wilson worked for the CIA. He identified his source as a "senior administration official." He also said that the interview with the official who told him about Plame Wilson had been set up simply as "confidential background interviews for my 2004 book 'Plan of Attack' about the lead-up to the Iraq war, ongoing reporting for the Washington Post and research for a book on Bush's second term to be published in 2006."

White House officials who are sympathetic to Libby say "official one" is former Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage. But numerous senior officials at the State Department, the CIA, and the National Security Council have said that "official one" is National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley. Hadley had been a source of information for Woodward when he wrote Plan of Attack, according to the book's footnotes.

Hadley was also a member of the White House Iraq Group (WHIG), which was formed in August 2002 by Andrew Card, President Bush's chief of staff, to publicize the threat posed by Saddam Hussein. WHIG operated out of Cheney's office. The group has become wrapped up in Fitzgerald's investigation. The special prosecutor last year subpoenaed the WHIG's emails and other documents.

But news reports over the past week have given more weight to Armitage as Woodward's source, based solely on the fact that former Washington Post editor Ben Bradlee gave an interview to Vanity Fair suggesting that it's fair to assume Armitage was Woodward's source. Bradlee issued a statement a day after the article was published saying he was misquoted and never mentioned Armitage.

One thing is for sure, neither Hadley nor Armitage are commenting, not even to issue a denial. Last week, Armitage's assistant at his lobbying firm, Armitage International, said last week that Armitage would comment on the "rumors" once Fitzgerald completed his investigation. Hadley's spokesman would not confirm or deny anything related to the National Security Adviser's involvement in the leak.

It does appear, however, that Libby's defense team is actively trying to shift the blame for the leak onto other parts of the government, including the State Department, the CIA and the National Security Council. They have engaged in a game of semantics, saying that when Libby testified that he heard about Plame Wilson from reporters his testimony wasn't limited to a specific reporter.

With Woodward's tape-recorded interview now in the hands of the special counsel, the attorneys representing I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Vice President Dick Cheney's former chief of staff who is charged with perjury and obstruction of justice for allegedly lying to a grand jury and FBI investigators about his role in the Plame Wilson leak, have zeroed in on three words "official one" apparently uttered during his conversation with Woodward: "Everyone knows it."

But one of the attorneys on Libby's defense team wasn't supposed to mention the existence of the tape-recorded interview in open court because it may cause the unknown government official to come under intense media scrutiny.

"Your Honor, there is one thing that I neglected to mention and again this is subject to filings that have been made under seal but there is, in fact, a transcript of a tape recording that involves official one," Libby's attorney William Jeffress said during the two and a half hour hearing.

"In the particular transcript there is, and the government filed something else yesterday, there is a factual dispute as to what is said or what is meant by a portion of the transcript wherein it appears the official saying, "everyone knows it," referring to the wife's employment at the CIA," Jeffress added. "We have not heard that tape. If, in fact, as the transcript suggests that one official said, 'Everyone knows it,' who did he mean by 'Everyone knows it?'"

Libby's attorneys argued that those three words refer to reporters, meaning that it was common knowledge among journalists that Plame Wilson was employed by the CIA, even though her status was classified.

Fitzgerald disagreed with the interpretation.

"Your Honor, now that we have sort of burned what was sealed, my understanding of that conversation, there are people talking over each other, my understanding is that was a reference that everyone knows it, that Mr. Wilson is the unnamed ambassador," Fitzgerald said. "Mr. Wilson didn't reveal himself as the unnamed ambassador until July 6. This was prior to that time. We turned it over in an abundance of caution but I don't believe that says it, and frankly there is a very limited number of reporters that we found out who had known it. I can't represent we know every reporter because we took seriously the attorney general guidelines."

"Official one" faces no criminal charges in the ongoing investigation into the leak of covert CIA officer Valerie Plame Wilson and is said to be cooperating with the special counsel's two year-old probe.

But Libby's defense attorneys suggested during the February 24 court hearing that "official one" is responsible for the leak.

Jeffress and Theodore Wells, another attorney on Libby's defense team, have argued that Fitzgerald should provide the defense with all of the evidence his investigation has obtained regarding "official one" because it's crucial in proving that Libby wasn't lying when he testified that he heard about Plame Wilson's CIA work from reporters.

"Your Honor, simply it is a fact that is key to this case to know what reporters out there knew or had heard about Wilson's wife, what they were saying to each other, what they were saying to government officials," Jeffress said. "And here is a key person, the first person that we know of, according to the evidence, actually discussed Mr. Wilson's wife's employment with a reporter and not only did it then but did it again with a separate reporter later. This is some person not in the White House."

At the February 24 court hearing, Jeffress, Libby's attorney, in arguing that the defense should be provided with additional evidence such as handwritten notes, transcripts, letters, emails and phone logs Fitzgerald collected during the investigation, said "official one" discussed Plame Wilson's CIA status with at least two reporters, one of whom told Libby that "official one" told him that Plame Wilson was a CIA officer.

Sources close to the case have identified Woodward and Novak as the reporters "official one" spoke to about Plame Wilson.

Fitzgerald argued that Libby's attorneys are routinely circumventing the facts surrounding the case against Libby, which is about perjury not who first unmasked Plame Wilson's identity.

"Your Honor, the one thing that is clear is we should focus on what the allegations are," Fitzgerald said. "The indictment alleges that on Monday Mr. Libby told [former White House press secretary Ari] Fleischer this information about Mr. Wilson's wife and indicated that it wasn't widely known, on a Monday."

"On Wednesday he claims to have learned it as if it were new for the first time from ["Meet the Press's" Tim] Russert in his conversation even though we've alleged six different conversations, more than six conversations in the month before he discussed it with everyone from the vice president to people at the CIA, to ranking officials at the State Department," Fitzgerald added.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jason Leopold spent two years covering California's electricity crisis as Los Angeles bureau chief of Dow Jones Newswires. Jason has spent the last year cultivating sources close to the CIA leak investigation, and is a regular contributor to t r u t h o u t.