Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Federal Grand Jury Could Subpoena Talon News Correspondent (and RighTalk host)
Talon News ^ | 3/9/2004 | Jim Hauser

Posted on 03/09/2004 6:48:38 AM PST by ConservativeMajority

WASHINGTON (Talon News) -- A federal grand jury has subpoenaed White House records on administration contacts with more than two dozen journalists and news media outlets in a special investigation into the alleged improper leak of a covert CIA official's identity to columnist Robert Novak last July.

Talon News has learned that one of the journalists being targeted is Jeff Gannon, Washington Bureau Chief and White House correspondent for Talon News.

In July of 2003, syndicated columnist, Robert Novak wrote a piece entitled "Mission to Niger" in which he discussed retired diplomat Joseph C. Wilson's investigation into possible Iraqi purchases of uranium from Niger. In the article, Novak disclosed that he was told by two administration officials that Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, suggested sending him to Niger to investigate claims outlined in an Italian report regarding the attempted uranium purchases by Iraq.

Novak also identified Plame as a "[CIA] operative on weapons of mass destruction," although in a follow-up column, Novak said that according to unofficial sources, Plame was an analyst and not involved in covert operations. Novak also stressed that her name and occupation were already well known.

"Republican activist Clifford May wrote Monday, in National Review Online, that he had been told of her identity by a non-government source before my column appeared and that it was common knowledge," said Novak in his follow-up column. "Her name, Valerie Plame, was no secret either, appearing in Wilson's 'Who's Who in America' entry."

Two days after Novak's second article, Jeff Gannon wrote a news story for Talon News that outlined White House claims of partisanship in the ensuing furor over the alleged leak.

At one point Gannon quotes a White House spokesman who said, "There are some people that are making unsubstantiated allegations and unsubstantiated rumors about the White House leaking classified information. And some of those people have been forced to back away from that, and then all of a sudden they move the goalpost and focus on another issue that's not the subject of the investigation."

In December of last year, Gannon reported on continuing pressure by Senate Democrats on the Justice Department to "pursue the investigation into the alleged leak of a CIA officer's identity earlier in the year." Gannon also identified Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle (D-SD) and Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI), ranking Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee as the two prominent figures leading the push.

At the same time, the Washington Post claimed that "according to their sources, the Central Intelligence Agency believes people in the Bush administration are continuing to release classified information to damage figures at the center of the Niger 'yellowcake' controversy."

According to a subsequent Talon News story by Bobby Eberle regarding the Washington Post piece, "The Washington Post cites an unnamed source who says, 'The CIA is angry about the circulation of a still-classified document to conservative news outlets.' They point to a memo referenced in a Talon News interview of Wilson that suggests his wife was instrumental in his selection for the fact-finding trip to Africa."

Talon News was the only service identified by the Washington Post as having knowledge of the memo's existence.

"I will tell you that the information did not come from inside the administration," Gannon told Talon News. "For something that is supposed to be classified, it seems that this document is easily accessible."

Earlier this week, the Associated Press reported the subpoena of White House records on administration contacts with journalists and news media outlets that are targets in the special investigation.

Gannon declined to comment on whether federal investigators have contacted or interviewed him and said that he has yet to receive a subpoena. Gannon also noted that he has not been contacted by any other news agencies.

"I don't know why I'm on the list of journalists being called before the Grand Jury," Gannon told Talon News. "I have been an outspoken critic of the leak probe and an aggressive questioner of the motives behind it. That seems to have drawn the attention of someone with the authority to issue subpoenas."

Copyright © 2004 Talon News -- All rights reserved.


TOPICS: News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 16words; cialeak; gannon; jeffgannon; joewilson; nigerflap; plame; plamegate; valerieplame; whitehouse; wilson

1 posted on 03/09/2004 6:48:39 AM PST by ConservativeMajority
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMajority
The g.j. should subpoena the Wilsons.
2 posted on 03/09/2004 6:50:02 AM PST by mewzilla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mewzilla
"The g.j. should subpoena the Wilsons."

Better yet, Novak.
3 posted on 03/09/2004 6:53:22 AM PST by Terpfen (Re-elect Bush; kill terrorists now, fix Medicare later.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Terpfen
Novak can claim confidentiality. The Wilsons can't.
4 posted on 03/09/2004 6:56:03 AM PST by mewzilla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMajority; Jeff Gannon
This is a witch hunt because Jeff Gannon has slapped the reporters silly with at least one of his excellent questions at a White House press briefing.
5 posted on 03/09/2004 6:56:04 AM PST by Peach (The Clintons have pardoned more terrorists than they ever captured or killed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Peach
The Dems should be careful what they wish for.
6 posted on 03/09/2004 6:56:40 AM PST by mewzilla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMajority
Mr.Gannon is not being truthful when he says he does not know why he is being subpoenaed. When he interviewed Wilson last October he made reference to "an internal government memo" purporting to be the minutes of a meeting at which Plame played a key role in getting her husband the Niger assignment.

From the interview: TN: An internal government memo prepared by U.S. intelligence personnel details a meeting in early 2002 where your wife, a member of the agency for clandestine service working on Iraqi weapons issues, suggested that you could be sent to investigate the reports. Do you dispute that?

Since the Niger Uranium documents have been judged forgeries, Gannon is suggesting that he was made privy to counterfeit official/government documents which is a crime, and a separate crime at that and logically he would be hauled in front of a grand jury probing the Plame affair.

7 posted on 03/09/2004 7:12:26 AM PST by JohnGalt (If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied. -- R. Kipling)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mewzilla
"Novak can claim confidentiality. The Wilsons can't."

Novak's also the only guy who knows the name of the leaker. Get to him, problem solved.

I thought it was sick when he mocked the situation at the Gridiron Dinner. It's an investigation of his own making!
8 posted on 03/09/2004 7:16:22 AM PST by Terpfen (Re-elect Bush; kill terrorists now, fix Medicare later.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Peach
You are kind. What is interesting about this is that I have become ensnared in this matter because I asked questions of my government.

This may a chilling effect on freedom of the press.

All this commotion, but the central question has yet to be answered: At the time that Robert Novak's column was published, was Valerie Plame a "covert operative"?

The CIA has refused to comment on this very important point.

If she was not, then no crime has been committed and all communications between the administration and reporters is just gossip.

9 posted on 03/09/2004 7:43:33 AM PST by Jeff Gannon (Listen to my radio show "Jeff Gannon's Washington" on www.RIGHTALK.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Gannon
Good analysis. I wish you all the best of luck in this matter! We can't afford to lose reporters like you, and I believe the leftists would like nothing more than to see you and those like you defeated in whatever manner they can see you jobless.
10 posted on 03/09/2004 7:48:00 AM PST by Peach (The Clintons have pardoned more terrorists than they ever captured or killed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: JohnGalt
Your professed insight into the motivation of the Grand Jury is merely guesswork.

The document in question has never been acknowleged by any government agency to even exist.

This is a one-sided investigation where people are being accused of crimes for revealing names and information that may have not been secret in the first place.
11 posted on 03/09/2004 7:53:13 AM PST by Jeff Gannon (Listen to my radio show "Jeff Gannon's Washington" on www.RIGHTALK.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Gannon
That is simply not true, Jeff.

You are ensnared because you made reference to a government document, which appears to have been a forgery. You need to tell the Grand Jury who made you privy to that document.
12 posted on 03/09/2004 7:54:19 AM PST by JohnGalt (What tale will serve me here among Mine angry and defrauded young? -- R. Kipling)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Gannon
What was the document you referred to in the interview with Wilson?
13 posted on 03/09/2004 7:54:55 AM PST by JohnGalt (What tale will serve me here among Mine angry and defrauded young? -- R. Kipling)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Gannon
All this commotion, but the central question has yet to be answered: At the time that Robert Novak's column was published, was Valerie Plame a "covert operative"?

This, of course, would be argued in a motion to quash the subpoena, if you and other journalists are subpoenaed. If not then, before a judge in a contempt action, if they're so foolish as to attempt to compel your testimony, despite the First Amendment, or--and this is a stretch--if anyone is criminally charged out of this.

14 posted on 03/09/2004 7:57:28 AM PST by Catspaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMajority; Jeff Gannon
This entire situation has me totally confused...........
15 posted on 03/09/2004 7:58:06 AM PST by Gabz (The tobacco industry doesn't pay cigarette taxes - smokers do!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnGalt
I disagree with your characterization of the document itself, but that aside, I maintain that I am under no obligation whatsoever to reveal my sources. That is a fundamental element of maintaining a free press.
16 posted on 03/09/2004 8:01:36 AM PST by Jeff Gannon (Listen to my radio show "Jeff Gannon's Washington" on www.RIGHTALK.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Gannon
Sorry, Jeff, but you claimed in this report you did not why you were being subpoenaed which is untrue. You know very well why you are being subpoenaed.

You are a logical target for the Grand Jury probing either the forged Nigerian documents, 'forged' being the FBI's characterization not mine, or L'Affair Plame.

The law does believe you are obligated so you are incorrect. While I would respect your integrity in accepting the consequences in refusing to release your sources, you are still obligated by the law to reveal who made you privy to the document you referenced. I am sure as a 'conservative' you understand the difference, don't you?
17 posted on 03/09/2004 8:09:02 AM PST by JohnGalt (What tale will serve me here among Mine angry and defrauded young? -- R. Kipling)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: JohnGalt
Justin Raimondo is that you? I didn't think you hung out here anymore.

Oops, now I've "outed" someone else!
18 posted on 03/09/2004 8:17:43 AM PST by Jeff Gannon (Listen to my radio show "Jeff Gannon's Washington" on www.RIGHTALK.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Gannon
Sorry, Jeff, the only one 'outed' was you who claimed ignorance as to why you were being subpoenaed.

I have been on this forum since 1997. Twenty-something; I sell software over the phone. Plenty of people on this forum have met me in the real world.
19 posted on 03/09/2004 8:23:39 AM PST by JohnGalt (What tale will serve me here among Mine angry and defrauded young? -- R. Kipling)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: JohnGalt
You're a riot!

Be careful you don't show too much knowledge about national security matters - you too could be hauled before a secret tribunal!
20 posted on 03/09/2004 8:50:07 AM PST by Jeff Gannon (Listen to my radio show "Jeff Gannon's Washington" on www.RIGHTALK.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Wolfstar
Ping to more on the Wilson/Plame story.
21 posted on 03/09/2004 8:50:12 AM PST by windchime (Podesta about Bush: "He's got four years to try to undo all the stuff we've done." (TIME-1/22/01))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Gannon
Don't you reference the document in this December 2003 interview posted on your web site? Does the document exist or not, Jeff? You would not even have to reveal a source to answer that question, now would you?

Jeff Gannon, the White House correspondent and Washington Bureau Chief for Talon News declined to reveal whether he had seen the memo or had its contents described to him.

While he would not disclose his source, Gannon said, "I will tell you that the information did not come from inside the administration."

"For something that is supposed to be classified, it seems that this document is easily accessible," Gannon added. "Washington is leaking like a cheap umbrella. Just look at what's happening over on Capitol Hill."

22 posted on 03/09/2004 8:53:41 AM PST by JohnGalt (What tale will serve me here among Mine angry and defrauded young? -- R. Kipling)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: JohnGalt
I do indeed. So talking about a document, that no government agency confirms even exists, is a crime?

23 posted on 03/09/2004 8:59:43 AM PST by Jeff Gannon (Listen to my radio show "Jeff Gannon's Washington" on www.RIGHTALK.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Gannon
Not necessarily, but you claimed to be ignorant as to why you might be subpoenaed in this investigation. That is simply not true.

It's clear that the method by which you obtained the information you referenced in your interview with Wilson could be material in an on going investigation. Who gave you the information? Who told you about the memo? Where did you learn about the memo? That is all relevant if in fact the memo proves to be a forgery, don't you think?
24 posted on 03/09/2004 9:08:43 AM PST by JohnGalt (What tale will serve me here among Mine angry and defrauded young? -- R. Kipling)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: JohnGalt
Sorry I had to interrupt our back and forth, but I had to go to the WHITE HOUSE for the press briefing.

If the memo is a forgery, then it becomes even less important.
25 posted on 03/09/2004 11:57:44 AM PST by Jeff Gannon (Listen to my radio show "Jeff Gannon's Washington" on www.RIGHTALK.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Gannon
There is an on going FBI investigation into the forged Nigerian Uranium documents.

You were made privy to either a document/information (you have declined to share in what form how you got the information) that suggested a meeting involving Plame and intelligence officials that never occurred.

It is against the law to forge government documents and thus it is only logical that investigators would ask where you obtained the document, or b) who told you about the memo. Investigators need to determine who forged the documents and prosecute the individuals accordingly.

If you think forged government documents are "even less important" I disagree, but what about your credibility as a journalist. Someone set you up, or b) you were duped by the forged document, and you don't care?

I find that hard to believe, and suggest that you are posturing here in cyberspace. You do care, you should care, and I suspect you are not looking forward to your G Gordon Liddy moment that awaits you.
26 posted on 03/09/2004 12:23:49 PM PST by JohnGalt (What tale will serve me here among Mine angry and defrauded young? -- R. Kipling)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: JohnGalt
You have really gone off the deep end. My question to Ambassador Wilson about the document was intended to get him to comment. It's no different than if I had asked, "There's a place in Nevada called Area 51, even though the government says it doesn't exist. What do you say to that?"

As far as my G. Gordon Liddy moment, I very much look forward to it, but not the one you probably play out with your friends on weekends. G. Gordon Liddy is a great American!
27 posted on 03/09/2004 12:51:57 PM PST by Jeff Gannon (Listen to my radio show "Jeff Gannon's Washington" on www.RIGHTALK.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Gannon
According to the Washington Post article on your web site, you were the only person to even acknowledge the memo's existence. You referenced the memo specifically, i.e. a document--- are you suggesting you would like to have phrased that question differently like "reports suggest your wife..."?

If it is your claim that you never saw the memo, then it must have been someone you trusted who told you about what the memo said, fair? I mean, you are the only person on record stating knowledge that this memo actually exists and you wish to be thought of as a reputable journalist don't you?

And yet you claim you don't know why you might be relevant to the case?

That is simply unconvincing. You know why you are involved and you are probably none too happy with the people or person who got you into this mess, yet I suspect you probably have a pretty good grasp that you are "expendable."

Liddy was a stand-up guy and a patriot, but he was also a felon.
28 posted on 03/09/2004 1:04:33 PM PST by JohnGalt (What tale will serve me here among Mine angry and defrauded young? -- R. Kipling)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: JohnGalt
You are so far off the mark on this, but I won't suggest you stop, since you reveal yourself to others who might be following this thread.

I will ask you to stop making judgements about my "reputation", however. It is unseemly and beyond what I consider appropriate in this forum.

Further, I have no desire to convince you of anything, especially since I sense that you have some self-righteous theory on the subject. Besides that, you are completely wrong.
29 posted on 03/09/2004 1:26:47 PM PST by Jeff Gannon (Listen to my radio show "Jeff Gannon's Washington" on www.RIGHTALK.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Gannon
"I don't know why I'm on the list of journalists being called before the Grand Jury,"

I have only stated you are not being truthful in this statement, and am suggesting you know exactly why you are being called before the Grand Jury.

I then laid out several reasons why it might be unconvincing for you to suggest that you have no idea why.

Is it still your position that you have no idea, even with a Washington Post article on your web site that states you were the only person to mention a memo, why you have been called before the Grand Jury?

30 posted on 03/09/2004 1:32:23 PM PST by JohnGalt (What tale will serve me here among Mine angry and defrauded young? -- R. Kipling)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Gannon
I see you are making waves again....

LOL!
31 posted on 03/09/2004 1:39:12 PM PST by abner (FREE THE MIRANDA MEMOS! http://www.intelmemo.com or http://www.wintersoldier.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: JohnGalt
It is still my position. And you don't know for SURE why, either. You're only guessing, but if you know otherwise for CERTAIN, you are probably in violation of some law regarding secrecy of the Grand Jury.
32 posted on 03/09/2004 1:39:31 PM PST by Jeff Gannon (Listen to my radio show "Jeff Gannon's Washington" on www.RIGHTALK.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Gannon
Obviously, I don't know for sure, but I can at least with some ease understand why you would be asked before a Grand Jury.

You are, according to the WP in December, the only one on record who refers to a 'memo.'

Seems pretty darn obvious when you consider this investigation began at the top and is working its way down.

Do you think they have phone records?

33 posted on 03/09/2004 1:44:22 PM PST by JohnGalt (What tale will serve me here among Mine angry and defrauded young? -- R. Kipling)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: abner
I must be doing something right!
34 posted on 03/09/2004 1:54:49 PM PST by Jeff Gannon (Listen to my radio show "Jeff Gannon's Washington" on www.RIGHTALK.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Gannon
Me thinks.

Did you get the CD?
35 posted on 03/09/2004 2:04:07 PM PST by abner (FREE THE MIRANDA MEMOS! http://www.intelmemo.com or http://www.wintersoldier.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: diotima; ConservativeGadfly; Interesting Times
You guys see this yet?
36 posted on 03/09/2004 2:09:38 PM PST by abner (FREE THE MIRANDA MEMOS! http://www.intelmemo.com or http://www.wintersoldier.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: abner
Not yet. When did you send it?
37 posted on 03/09/2004 2:21:40 PM PST by Jeff Gannon (Listen to my radio show "Jeff Gannon's Washington" on www.RIGHTALK.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Gannon
About 3 weeks ago...

I guess I will send another.

38 posted on 03/09/2004 2:27:22 PM PST by abner (FREE THE MIRANDA MEMOS! http://www.intelmemo.com or http://www.wintersoldier.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Gannon; abner
Oh boy. Jeff, Jeff, Jeff. Now, don't you know that as a respectable talk show host for Rightalk, you have an obligation NOT to make waves, NOT to stir it up?

;)
39 posted on 03/09/2004 5:53:43 PM PST by ConservativeGadfly (FREE THE MIRANDA MEMOS!!!!!!!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeGadfly
When did RighTalk become NPR? Do I have to improve my vocabulary and start whispering too?
40 posted on 03/09/2004 6:09:01 PM PST by Jeff Gannon (Listen to my radio show "Jeff Gannon's Washington" on www.RIGHTALK.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeGadfly
Yea, like you don't. Hmmmph...

Am I missing an 'h' or does it only have 2 'm's?
41 posted on 03/09/2004 7:03:48 PM PST by abner (FREE THE MIRANDA MEMOS! http://www.intelmemo.com or http://www.wintersoldier.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: abner
I don't know what you are talking about. I am a warm, lovable, harmless little fuzzball. Heh heh heh heh heh...
42 posted on 03/09/2004 9:28:45 PM PST by ConservativeGadfly (FREE THE MIRANDA MEMOS!!!!!!!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Gannon
It really is turning into a bad Saturday Night Live skit, ain't it?
43 posted on 03/09/2004 9:30:02 PM PST by ConservativeGadfly (FREE THE MIRANDA MEMOS!!!!!!!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Gannon
Bump.
44 posted on 03/17/2004 3:49:21 PM PST by Shermy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Shermy
Babelfish translation, touched up by me, difficult to translate (for me) French newspaperese, though.


__________________________________]


http://www.izaronews.org/noticias/%2828_09_03%29/extranjera2.htm


"Liberation," October 1, 2003, Paris (released)


"Bush in the Throes of the Wilson Affair (l’affaire Wilson)"


The White House would have balanced (swung? exposed?) a CIA spy


To see him like that, Joe Wilson, consultant and former ambassador, does not have the appearance of nothing. He is a direct and straightforward guy, democratic (maybe “Democrat”), (a) francophile, (and a) specialist in Africa and Iraq, consulting with the Rock Creek Corporation
firm. When it rains, he bears a beret. By him alone, this man became Bush’s nightmare. In July, he burst open the scandal about the alleged Nigerien uranium deliveries to Iraq, exposing to daylight a presidential lie. The affair, which marked the beginning of Bush’s slip in the polls,
rebounds (gets going again) today. At the time of the controversy in July, two sources in the Bush administration revealed that Wilson’s wife, Valerie Plame, analyst for a private firm, was actually a CIA agent. This leak constitutes a Federal crime, liable for prison in which the Department of Justice is investigating. The affair, has done for two days the one of the newspapers. Democratic
senators want the appointment of an independent investigator.


Bush’s spokesman, Scott McClellan, described as "ridiculous" the suspicion Wilson expressed publicly in August, according to whom the political adviser of Bush, Karl Rove, was the origin of the leak. The President, he indicated, asked his team to cooperate fully with the investigation...


Good profile. In February 2002 the CIA decided to send Wilson to Niger, to check information that Iraq acquired uranium from this country. Wilson had a good profile for such a mission (non-secret -or non secret police-). In the Seventies, he was a diplomat in Niger. In 1990, he was the last American diplomat stationed at Baghdad, as the chargé d'affaires. After having gone to Niamey, Wilson explained to
the CIA that this alleged Niger prodcedure did not hold the road (pass muster).


Despite everything, at the end of January, president Bush affirmed that "British intelligence learned that
Saddam Hussein had recently sought to obtain significant quantities of African uranium". July 6, Joe Wilson takes the pen in the New York Times to criticize the administration, evoking his mission. The article starts a beautiful controversy. One week later, in his chronicle published in several newspapers, the conservative editorialist Robert Novak reports that it is Wilson’s wife
who suggested sending her husband to Niger: Valery Plame, he lets slip out, is a CIA agent specializing in weapons of mass destruction, by quoting "two sources". Joseph Wilson always refused to comment on his wife’s work. "I would not say to you if she is, or not, an agent. But this leak is harmful in both cases ", he declared recently in Libération," If she is indeed an agent, the administration exposes her, as her network. If she is not, she must spend her time contradicting... " According to him, "the goal of the leak was dissuasive: to frighten others who wanted to talk, them also, (about) what they know ".


New revelations. Can the affair turn in the "Wilsongate"? For lack of independent investigator, it is not very probable. But new revelations are not excluded. According to Washington Post in July, "two high persons in charge for the White House had called six journalists in Washington to
reveal the identity and the occupation of Wilson’s wife". What does many people to know the source of the leak.
45 posted on 03/18/2004 12:25:29 PM PST by Shermy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Gannon; mrustow; okie01; Carl/NewsMax; piasa
I posted a (poor) translation, at # 45, of a "Liberation" article about Joe Wilson. He's a "francophile". Money quote "When it rains, he wears a beret." (...bears, or carries)
46 posted on 03/18/2004 12:28:04 PM PST by Shermy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Kenny Bunk

#45 - When it rains, he wears a beret...

47 posted on 03/22/2004 4:09:33 PM PST by Shermy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Ulysse
Do you remember when this guy, former ambassador Joe Wilson, was being quoted in the newspapers and when he was being used against both the UK and the USA by the antiwar leftists?

If you find any information on Joseph Wilson or the Rock Creek Corporation in the French papers please put it on this thread. If you have time, of course.

48 posted on 10/23/2004 6:37:09 PM PDT by piasa (Attitude Adjustments Offered Here Free of Charge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: piasa

Well well, here we are again.


49 posted on 02/17/2005 10:47:29 PM PST by Vis Numar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson