NEWSWEEK: Matt Cooper's Source

Newsweek ^ | July 18 issue | Michael Isikoff

[West Coast Conservative]

It was 11:07 on a Friday morning, July 11, 2003, and Time magazine correspondent Matt Cooper was tapping out an e-mail to his bureau chief, Michael Duffy. "Subject: Rove/P&C," (for personal and confidential), Cooper began. "Spoke to Rove on double super secret background for about two mins before he went on vacation..." Cooper proceeded to spell out some guidance on a story that was beginning to roil Washington. He finished, "please don't source this to rove or even WH [White House]" and suggested another reporter check with the CIA.

Last week, after Time turned over that e-mail, among other notes and e-mails, Cooper agreed to testify before a grand jury in the Valerie Plame case. Explaining that he had obtained last-minute "personal consent" from his source, Cooper was able to avoid a jail sentence for contempt of court. Another reporter, Judith Miller of The New York Times, refused to identify her source and chose to go to jail instead.

For two years, a federal prosecutor, Patrick Fitzgerald, has been investigating the leak of Plame's identity as an undercover CIA agent. The leak was first reported by columnist Robert Novak on July 14, 2003. Novak apparently made some arrangement with the prosecutor, but Fitzgerald continued to press other reporters for their sources, possibly to show a pattern (to prove intent) or to make a perjury case. (It is illegal to knowingly identify an undercover CIA officer.) Rove's words on the Plame case have always been carefully chosen. "I didn't know her name. I didn't leak her name," Rove told CNN last year when asked if he had anything to do with the Plame leak. Rove has never publicly acknowledged talking to any reporter about former ambassador Joseph Wilson and his wife.

[Brilliant]

Where does Rove tell Cooper that Plame was a covert operative?

That's the issue.

[SIRTRIS]

hey, enjoyed the pic ! telling !

[NathanBookman]

If the email Newsweek describes in this article is the key email, then I think this is nothing more than a government official giving background on a story. And if it is doubtful that Plame was a covert agent to begin with, then maybe Fitzgerald is focusing on some sort of perjury aspect.
If Cooper's testimony is consistent with his own email and consistent with Rove's testimony, then there is no perjury. The article quotes an 'unnamed source': "...that there was "absolutely no inconsistency" between Cooper's e-mail and what Rove has testified to during his three grand-jury appearances in the case."
I think Fitzgerald had to push so hard on the reporters to ensure what Rove and the other sources testified to match what the reports say (beyond just their notes). Fitzgerald is striving to tie down every loose end before he can close this case out.
My guess is the final report will say there was no violation of outting a covert op (and testimony was consistent).
As a side benefit, all reporters will think twice before illegally obtaining documents. They will now have to actually work to get their supporting information.

[jmc813]

Hi there, Chief. Haven't seen you in forever. Hope all is well.

[jmc813]

I'm on a mini-vacation so I thought I'd drop by and see how things haven't really changed.

You should stick around. Several of the more prominent moderate freepers have opused out of here since you've been gone and the dialog has gotten a bit diluted.

[Petronski]

Here's a fresh splash of goofiness from that barking moonbat left-wing fever swamp known as the DUmpster:

leveymg <1000+ nutball screeds>

Sun Jul-10-05 07:47 AM
Response to Reply #2

34. People will see through to the fact that Bush-Cheney broke the law, Big

Time. This is a really bad breach of security by Rove. Treasonous. But, in strictly legal terms -- if this is all that Rove said about Plame -- it might be difficult to nail Karl with violation of the Covert Agent Identities Protection Act (CAIPA). That would require a showing that Rove knew Plame was an undercover agent. Plame's covert role was sourced from a second person in the know. That may have been Miller, who has been covering the WMD beat for years. They might well have known each other, personally, in which case Miller would have a pretty good idea what Plame's job was. Anyway, in the end, if Rove lied to the Grand Jury about telling Cooper that Wilson's wife was CIA, that's perjury. It wouldn't be hard for Fitzgerald to convince a jury that Rove directed journalists to other sources so that they would easily discover Plame's covert job, thus outing her. That's conspiracy. The American people won't put up with this. No way. Karl's going to jail, but Bush-Cheney are out the door -- at the very least. I'll settle for that. This is the last chapter for Bush-Cheney.

[NathanBookman]

It would have been nice if Newsweek posted a copy of the original email as opposed to just select snippets.

[cyncooper]

Robert Luskin, confirmed to NEWSWEEK that Rove did—and that Rove was the secret source who, at the request of both Cooper's lawyer and the prosecutor, gave Cooper permission to testify.

Many WH connected people, including Rove, signed waivers and did not fight doing so. The fact that Rove long ago, as did the others, did so and the reporters still balked speaks volumes. This acting like Cooper really really wanted to talk about Rove but was waiting for Rove to finally release him from confidentiality is a flat out lie.

Singling out Rove as if he was the only person being spoken to is deceitful in the extreme (not that I'm surprised).

[NathanBookman]

Per the DU poster comment: "Anyway, in the end, if Rove lied to the Grand Jury about telling Cooper that Wilson's wife was CIA, that's perjury."

That comment does not really make sense. If the gist of Rove's coversation with Cooper was to refute that Cheney or Tenet sent Wilson, how could Rove say it was Wilson's wife WITHOUT anyone knowing she worked for the CIA (implicitly or explicitly)? I don't think any regular working Joe or Jane has the authority to initiate CIA investigations.

Do the libs really believe that Rove would knowingly release the identity of an agent so that agent would be in harm's way?? (not that it appears that she was covert anyway).

[Grampa Dave]

Isikoff, the left wing MSM maggot/liar/spinner/hater of GW and Karl Rove appears to be continuing his bs just like the Koran being flushed in Gitmo.

[steveegg]

And isn't the CIA Director the "DCI" - for "Director of Central Intelligence?"

We're talking about a reporter's notes here; they're not known for accuracy.

[andyandval]

[cyncooper]

I love this:

The controversy arose when Wilson wrote an op-ed column in The New York Times saying that he had been sent by the CIA in February 2002 to investigate charges that Iraq was trying to buy uranium from the African country of Niger. Wilson said he had found no evidence to support the claim. Wilson's column was an early attack on the evidence used by the Bush administration to justify going to war in Iraq. The White House wished to discredit Wilson and his attacks. The question for the prosecutor is whether someone in the administration, in an effort to undermine Wilson's credibility, intentionally revealed the covert identity of his wife.

Wilson is out lying but Spikey (as has a bevy of reporters before him) paints it as the WH making an "effort to undermine" the pompous and prevaricating Wilson.

The exact opposite of the fact that the Wilson gang (including the lovely and daring Valerie) was making a huge effort to undermine a sitting U.S. President at time of war.

And this from the article is exactly right:

A source close to Rove, who declined to be identified because he did not wish to run afoul of the prosecutor or government investigators, added that there was "absolutely no inconsistency" between Cooper's e-mail and what Rove has testified to during his three grand-jury appearances in the case. "A fair reading of the e-mail makes clear that the information conveyed was not part of an organized effort to disclose Plame's identity, but was an effort to discourage Time from publishing things that turned out to be false," the source said, referring to claims in circulation at the time that Cheney and high-level CIA officials arranged for Wilson's trip to Africa.

That is exactly what I and others have said from the start---this "retaliation" idea is ludicrous but was merely explanation for why anti-Bush Wilson had gone to Niger.

I disagree with the Newsweek editorial addition of "referring to claims in circulation" about Cheney---yes, that was part of the sensible and truthful Rove warning to reporters that Wilson was being dishonest---but also the part about the scope and content of Wilson's investigation and "findings".

I would be interested when Rove and others in the WH got the particulars of Wilson going at the behest of Plame story. I contend it was after Wilson's op-ed. But nobody was characterizing Plame as "undercover" until after Novak's column and I'm guessing Rove and others learned it the same way Novak did---by asking why this jerk had been sent on such a mission.

[MizSterious]

Lots of blanks in this thread--looks like you folks had a major troll infestation last night! (But Viking kitties prefer to hunt at night anyway...)

[timpad]

why is Michael Isikoff covering this?

Remember that story that got Newsweak in trouble, the one about the Qu'ran and the toilet at Gitmo?

Guess who wrote that story? Yes indeed, the very same Michael Isikoff.

Newsweak launches another salvo from the S.S. Revenge.

If this is the best they got, it ain't much. DUpeville will love it, but it's just another VoteFraudInOhio sop to their growing fears.

[durasell]

Grunwald's father -- Henry - was one of the great editors of the 20th century. I don't know if the guy is still alive, but he was brilliant. Last I heard he was going blind from some disease.

[cardinal4]

Rove was warning Cooper not to trust Wilson. Rove was entirely correct.

Makes sense to me..

[Kay]

Bookmark

[Grampa Dave]

What is really amazing is a lot of the rat's spin on Plamegate started with a series of lies by Doug Thompson of Capitol Hill Blue. Those lies were exposed right here on Free Republic by :

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/942488/posts

Did Capitol Hill Blue Post An Article With Fabrications?
Me ^


Posted on 07/08/2003 1:32:03 PM PDT by William McKinley


In this article on Capitol Hill Blue, there are the following lines:

"The report had already been discredited," said Terrance J. Wilkinson, a CIA advisor present at two White House briefings. "This point was clearly made when the President was in the room during at least two of the briefings."

Bush's response was anger, Wilkinson said.

"He said that if the current operatives working for the CIA couldn't prove the story was true, then the agency had better find some who could," Wilkinson said. "He said he knew the story was true and so would the world after American troops secured the country."

Serious allegations. But I notice it is a single source. Being a conservative, I value the lessons of experience, and experience has told me that single sources are to be treated with skeptism. When I see one, I want to know more about the source quoted so as to establish if I should treat that source as credible.
So what about "Terrance J. Wilkinson"?

A Google search for "Terrance J. Wilkinson" found no results (which will change when Google picks up the Capitol Hill Blue article).

Google suggested that the name might be Terrence. But a Google search on "Terrence J. Wilkinson" also produced no hits.

Perhaps the middle initial is the problem. Alas, a Google search on "Terrence Wilkinson" CIA gave no hits, and a Google search on "Terrance Wilkinson" CIA also yielded no hits.

A Google news search on Terrence Wilkinson comes up with nothing relevant. So does a Google news search of Terrance Wilkinson.

A Google search on one of the phrases from one of the quotations comes up empty.

I would anticipate a 'CIA advisor' who attends the same briefings as the President to live somewhere near D.C. But there are no listings according to Anywho for a Terrance or Terrence Wilkinson in D.C., Maryland, or Virginia.

A Google search on "CIA Advisor" Wilkinson also comes up empty.

Perhaps Capitol Hill Blue would be better served by providing some more information about the person quoted so that others can judge his credibility. That is, if he exists.