Skip to comments.Cooper Details Rove Conversations About Plame
Posted on 07/13/2005 12:00:18 PM PDT by areafiftyone
WASHINGTON Journalist Matt Cooper (search) on Wednesday told reporters he would give them details of his grand jury testimony detailing a conversations with White House aide Karl Rove (search) about a CIA operative in a future issue of Time magazine.
"I'm not going to scoop myself today," Cooper, a White House correspondent for the news weekly, said outside the U.S. District Court Wednesday afternoon.
Cooper spoke after a two-and-a-half hour appearance before the grand jury investigating the leak of CIA officer Valerie Plame's (search) identity. He was one of several journalists to whom Plame's identity was leaked following the publication of an editorial written by her husband, former ambassador Joseph Wilson (search), in which Wilson criticized the Bush administration.
One of those journalists, Judith Miller (search) of The New York Times, is in jail for her refusal to name the person who revealed Plame's identity to her. Last week, Cooper escaped a similar citation for contempt of court when he told the judge his source had waived confidentiality, freeing him to testify before the grand jury.
"Today I testified and agreed to testify solely because of a waiver I received from my source," Cooper said outside the courthouse. "Once a journalist makes a commitment of confidentiality to a source, only the source can end that commitment."
The grand jury is tasked with finding out if whoever leaked her identity to the press two years ago did so with the intent of burning her cover, possibly in retaliation for Wilson's criticisms of the administration's claims that Iraq's nuclear program.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
This still stinks abominably. I sure hope the prosecutor is turning over some rocks because horrifying creatures are gonna be crawling out.
Im sure the hit piece has already been written...he knows full well Rove won't respond because Rove is honoring the SP request to stay quiet.
All this BS to sell magazines, who'da thunk.
Exactly - Rove is doing the right thing by keeping quiet and this big fat mouth Cooper is yapping! He's an opportunist!
Could Cooper be in trouble for writing about this matter before the investigation is complete? And when does anyone know this is going to happen? Time will tell I guess
Not to worry, anything newsworthy will leak well before he can write his TIME article. Not to mention, people will first learn of any leak on the new media....talk radio and the internet.
The husband of one of Hillary's closest advisors can be trusted to be fair and balaned, right? /sarcasm
ROFLMAO - boils and sores! YIKES!
It turns out he had already been released by Rove way back when and only after it looked like he might go to jail HIS ATTORNEY contacted ROVE's ATTORNEY to see if they still meant it! What a big coward!
There's no restriction on a GJ witness's ability to talk about his own testimony. The restriction is on revealing GJ testimony of anyone other than yourself, AFAIK.
Everything about a grand jury is cloaked in secrecy, and most jurisdictions make it a crime to violate that secrecy. In the federal system, for example, Rule 6(e) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure requires that "matters occurring before the grand jury" be kept secret. The rule also says that if anyone bound by secrecy reveals "matters occurring before" a grand jury, this is "CRIMINAL contempt." The rule of secrecy binds everyone with access to grand jury proceedings (prosecutors, grand jurors, court reporters, and clerical personnel who help a prosecutor prepare for grand jury appearances), except the witnesses who testify before a grand jury.See also http://www.ishipress.com/rule6e.htm <- Rule 6(e) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure
Thanks for the GJ info.
Don't you remember all the Clintonites who gave testimony coming out and immediately revealing their testimony? I do. Some of them even LIED about what happened, we later found out. They are allowed to talk about their own testimony, nothing else. In the case of Rove, he has said the prosecutor asked him not to discuss his testimony.
Could it be that Dem operative Mandy Grunwald learned from Joe Wilson that his wife, Valerie Plame, had sent him to Niger? Could Grunwald then have conveyed the info to Judith Miller, who relayed it to Grunwald's husband, Matt Cooper, in an attempt to obfuscate the connection? (Miller isn't in jail because the Times wanted to protect Rove.) Could other Dem operatives with whom, and for whom, Wilson worked also be involved? Does the name Kerry mean anything to anyone? Just a few speculative questions to ponder.
Exactly! Therefore, this person can fabricate a completely new story out of whole cloth and the prosecutor will not be able to dispute it. I couldn't figure out why he agreed to testify in the first place. Now I understand!
"Once a journalist makes a commitment of confidentiality to a source, only the source can end that commitment."
B.S. Jail scared him. Rove (if he's the only source) gave a waiver long ago.
Miller's got guts, admire her for that.
Since Miller is known for her WMD stories, I believe she sent Cooper down a bogus trail on the Cheney/Wilson story and then he, although possibly inadvertently, set Rove up. Otherwise, why would she be involved at all, considering she did not write a story about the Plame leak. Remember, Cooper originally called about a story he was doing on welfare reform, not the Cheney/Wilson controversy. That in itself is suspicious.
Sorry if this has been discussed into the ground before; been woefully busy and unable to keep up lately. Any opinions welcome to help me get up to date!
I heard Rush say yesterday that Valerie Plame had not been an outside Agent in over nine years. Can anyone verify that? If so, why aren't we hearing more of that. If she was just a regular CIA employee, not a covert agent, what would be the crime?
CIA officer named prior to column - July 23, 2004
By Bill Gertz
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
The identity of CIA officer Valerie Plame was compromised twice before her name appeared in a news column that triggered a federal illegal-disclosure investigation, U.S. officials say.
Mrs. Plame's identity as an undercover CIA officer was first disclosed to Russia in the mid-1990s by a Moscow spy, said officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity.
In a second compromise, officials said a more recent inadvertent disclosure resulted in references to Mrs. Plame in confidential documents sent by the CIA to the U.S. Interests Section of the Swiss Embassy in Havana.
The terms "plame" "moscow" "ames" in a Google search turn up a number of similar articles.
The function of the media is not to illuminate the truth.
This is won't be the last run they take at Rove. They are desperate to get him out before the mid-term elections...
Thanks for the link. I still wonder where Rush got his info that she had not been a covert Agent in over nine years. I still would think that would be a factor.
Maybe somebody clipped the news and showed it to him.
Here's another ... http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2003_10/002395.php
October 11, 2003
VALERIE PLAME'S CAREER....Today's Nick Kristof column on Valerie Plame actually contains some new information:
First, the C.I.A. suspected that Aldrich Ames had given Mrs. Wilson's name (along with those of other spies) to the Russians before his espionage arrest in 1994. So her undercover security was undermined at that time, and she was brought back to Washington for safety reasons.
Second, as Mrs. Wilson rose in the agency, she was already in transition away from undercover work to management, and to liaison roles with other intelligence agencies. So this year, even before she was outed, she was moving away from "noc" which means non-official cover, like pretending to be a business executive. After passing as an energy analyst for Brewster-Jennings & Associates, a C.I.A. front company, she was switching to a new cover as a State Department official, affording her diplomatic protection without having "C.I.A." stamped on her forehead.
"From what I understand, his wife works at the CIA, and she pushed him forward. All I know is, nobody here even heard of him before he was recommended for the job by someone at CIA."
Something about the e-mail that Cooper sent his bureau chief makes me wonder if Rove even mentioned that Wilson's wife worked for the CIA. Cooper wrote that Rove said it was wilson's wife, who apparently works at the agency on wmd [weapons of mass destruction] issues who authorized the trip."
What I wonder is, did Rove say "wilson's wife, who apparently works at the agency on wmd . . .", or did Rove only say "wilson's wife", and Cooper, who already knew where she worked, himself added the explanation of where she worked?
No. He's free to talk about what he was asked and what he said. It better match what he said or Fitgerald may bring him to court again to find out why the discrepancy. Novak, is free to talk as well, althought the Prosecutor asked him not to. He cant force him not to.
When will we learn that they are NOT our friends.
Novak could only be in legal trouble if he got his information from classified material which he had access to as part of his government job. But Novak doesnt work for the government. Even if someone gave him a classified document, it would not be "crime" for Novak to publish it.
Even if Rove had given Plames name to Novak, highly doubtful (I think Powell or Tennant did it), he would have to have gotten the name from classified information to which he was entitled as part of his job, for it to be illegal. From what I read a few days ago there are like five or six factors that must be true for a crime to have been committed. Its likely that Fitzgerald is working on perjury charge.
Didn't Cooper stab Rove in the back?
Who released the e-mail to Newsweak?
Agent Smith, the husband of Mrs. Smith, works for the CIA. Oops. I outed someone. Call the Dems, quick.
The Special Prosecutor is forbidden by law from confirming or denying what was said. Cooper could leak. Just like the Dems leaked the Starr investigation.
I've been attributing Miller's behavior to extortion rather than courage. She's compromised sources before, hasn't she?--think I remember another thread where we were just discussing that. That would seem to rule out principle as her motivation for protecting her source here.
If Cooper's grand jury testimony is supposed to be sealed, it seems like he can say anything he wants about it and no one else can confirm whether it's true or not.
Thanks for clearing up the nine year reference. So, if she was still working undercover in "private industry" type jobs, she would still technically be undercover.
Would Fitzgerald be trying to get a perjury charge against Rove or someone else?
Thanks for the clarifications.
I don't know. Cooper seemed smug to me. Hope this turns out OK.
Finally someone asks the right question, the one NOBODY in the MSM wants to touch. How did Newsweek get this email??? And why??? These are the two most competitive magazines on the planet! WHY would anyone at Time "leak" something this explosive to Newsweek???
As a practical matter, I think that scenario is an impossibility. Once outed as a spy, the person is no longer suitable for spy duty, regardless of any supposed cover story.
Plus, it's well assumed that nobody retires from the CIA, ever.
By William E. Jackson, Jr.See also What was Judith Miller Up To?
Published: April 07, 2005 3:00 PM ET
It is my contention, based on conversatons with legal sources, that she basically was a "carrier," around Washington, of the rumor about Plame's real identity, but not a reporter actively covering a story. She was, in this view, both a source for, and a witness to, disclosure by sources of Plame's identity.
I recently (as in, in the last hour or so) read a very unflattering piece about Miller in Editor and Publisher, that paints Miller as "unstable" during her talking tour.
Cooper also said he would be testifying next week before a Senate committee on a federal shield law for reporters, a measure he supports.
I can't go that far with someone who tipped off potential terrorist fundraisers, allowing them to shred documents beofre investigators could get to them.
You may say whatever you want about your own Grand Jury testimony, but no one else may.
You're thinking Vegas =)