Posted on 10/20/2005 7:14:44 PM PDT by Pikamax
Russert has previously downplayed or neglected to report on his involvement in the scandal.
the mystery behind Russert's silence and his connection with Libby
Russert's silence is strange because, after all, he is a "journalist." ... More below:
Tim Russert was the first journalist to "cave" and cooperate with Fitzgerald. Michael Isikoff reported on August 1 that "[t]he deal was not, as many assumed, for Russert's testimony about what Libby told him: it focused on what Russert told Libby."
An NBC statement last year said Russert did not know of Plame, wife of ex-ambassador Joseph Wilson, or that she worked at the CIA, and "he did not provide that information to Libby."
Andrea Mitchell, Time's Matt Cooper, and even Judith Miller and her attorneys, have been Chatty Cathies about the case. But not Russert. Why? And why did Russert and NBC cave so quickly following Judge Hogan's ruling, while Cooper and Miller fought the subpoenas?
My faith in the media aside -- read that as snark -- the wildest outcome might be if Fitzgerald determines that it was Russert who told Libby about Plame. After all, it might explain Russert's silence and avoidance.
But, really, I am skeptical of the lot of them. Here's hoping that Fitzgerald has documentation -- like the all-important Matt Cooper e-mail -- that'll put holes in their stories.
******
Fallout from the Miller Affair
by Larry Johnson
Thu Oct 20th, 2005 at 07:41:29 PM EDT
by Larry C. Johnson
When Judith Miller went to jail in July I rejoiced because some justice, at least in my eyes, was being visited on a media whore who helped the Bush Administration mix the KoolAid that took us to war.
******
Chickens Come Home to Roost on Cheney
by Larry Johnson
Thu Oct 20th, 2005 at 12:34:45 PM EDT
By Ray McGovern
(for my blog - Larry Johnson)
Indictments are expected to come down shortly as special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald completes the investigation originally precipitated by the outing of a C.I.A. officer under deep cover. In 21-plus months of digging and interviewing, Fitzpatrick and his able staff have been able to negotiate the intelligence/policy/politics labyrinth with considerable sophistication. In the process, they seem to have learned considerably more than they had bargained for. The investigation has long since morphed into size “extra-large,” which is the only size commensurate with the wrongdoing uncovered—not least, the fabrication and peddling of intelligence to “justify” a war of aggression.
Ray McGovern speaking as an analyst on the PBS Newshour after the appointment of Porter Goss as Director of the CIA.
Biography:
Ray McGovern works for Tell the Word, the publishing arm of the ecumenical Church of the Saviour in Washington, DC. He was a C.I.A. analyst for 27 years, and is now on the Steering Group of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity.
The coming months are likely to see senior Bush administration officials frog marched out of the White House to be booked, unless the president moves swiftly to fire Fitzgerald—a distinct possibility. With so many forces at play, it is easy to lose perspective and context while plowing through the tons of information on this case. What follows is a retrospective and prospective, laced with some new facts and analysis aimed at helping us to focus on the forest once we have given due attention to the trees.
In late May 2003, the Education for Peace in Iraq Center (EPIC) informed me that a former U.S. ambassador named Joseph Wilson would be sharing keynote duties with me at a large EPIC conference on June 14.
I was delighted—for two reasons. This was a chance to meet the “American hero” (per George H. W. Bush) who faced down Saddam Hussein, freeing hundreds of American and other hostages taken when Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1990. More important, since Wilson had served as an ambassador in Africa, I thought he might be able to throw light on a question bedeviling me since May 6, when New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof wrote an intriguing story about a mission to Niger by “a former U.S. ambassador to Africa.”
There Once Was an Ambassador in Niger...
According to Kristof, that mission was undertaken at the behest of Vice President Dick Cheney’s office to investigate a report that Iraq was seeking uranium from Niger. The report was an entirely convenient “smoking gun.” Since Iraq lacked any nonmilitary use for such uranium, it had to be for a nuclear weapons program, if the report were true. Or so went the argument. The former ambassador sent to Niger had found no basis for the report, pulling the rug out from under the “intelligence” the administration had used during the previous fall to conjure up the “mushroom cloud” that intimidated Congress into authorizing war.
Kristof’s May 6 column had caused quite a stir in Washington. The only one to have totally missed the story was then-National Security Adviser and now Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice (assuming she is to be taken at her word). Rice claimed that the information did not come to her attention until more than a month later. Right. (And the celebrated aluminum tubes were for nuclear enrichment—not artillery. Right.)
This ostensibly nuclear-related “evidence” was no mere sideshow; it went to the very core of the disingenuous justification for war. The Iraq-Niger report itself was particularly suspect. The uranium mined in Niger is very tightly controlled by a French-led international consortium, and the chances of circumventing or defeating the well established safeguards and procedures were seen as virtually nil. On March 7, Mohammed ElBaradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, announced to the U.N. Security Council that the documents upon which the Iraq-Niger reporting was based were “not authentic.” Colin Powell swallowed hard but took it as well as could be expected under the circumstances. A few days later he conceded the point entirely—with neither apology nor embarrassment, as befits the world’s sole remaining superpower.
******
Libby Fingers Tim Russert
Thu Oct 20th, 2005 at 09:01:33 AM EDT
MSNBC's Don Imus and CNN are buzzin' about the new story on Tim Russert's involvement in the CIA Leak case. Imus joked about Russert's possible indictment (then slipped in that his little boy Wyatt likes Tim who gives him lots of toys). Cozy.
Libby's testimony stated that Rove had told him about his contact with Novak and that Libby had told Rove about information he had gotten about Wilson's wife from NBC's Tim Russert, according to a person familiar with the information shown to Rove, (AP/CNN, Oct. 20, 2005; 6:32 a.m. EDT)
The sources are "people directly familiar with testimony the two witnesses gave" who also said that, during his grand jury testimony, "Rove was shown testimony from Libby suggesting the two had discussed with each other information they had gotten about Wilson's wife from reporters in early July 2003."
One problem is that, according to MSNBC TV today, Russert's testimony shows that he talked to Libby a week after Libby spoke with Rove.
And, unlike the Matt Cooper case, there may not be a "smoking gun" in the form of an e-mail from or to Russert. From the WSJ on July 11, 2005:
Newsweek magazine reported that among Mr. Cooper's notes was an email he sent to one of his editors describing a conversation with Mr. Rove a few days before columnist Robert Novak first identified Valerie Plame as a CIA agent in print [on July 13, 2003].
It's critical to keep in mind that if Matt Cooper hadn't sent that e-mail, he'd have been in a stronger position to resist Judge Hogan and Special Prosecutor Fitzgerald.
This story could be partially recycled news. From the July 23, 2005 WaPo story, "Testimony By Rove and Libby Examined" -- in which the sources were "lawyers in the case and witness statements":
"Libby has testified that he learned about Plame from NBC correspondent Tim Russert, according to a source who spoke with The Washington Post some months ago. Russert said in a statement last year that he told the prosecutor that "he did not know Ms. Plame's name or that she was a CIA operative" and that he did not provide such information to Libby in July 2003. [...]
The possible conflicts in the accounts given by Russert and Libby were first reported yesterday by Bloomberg News.
******
Chris Matthews
"Wilson's wife was fair game?"
Was Matthews calling Wilson to warn him of this Rove statement, or to get some sort of confirmation from him on his wife's occupational choices?
Meanwhile, nobody has anything to say about Able Danger.
Fortunately, nobody watches MSNBC except people who switch over there after FNC starts reruns at 11 pm.
I'm not sure about the timescale of a target letter. Based on info from US Attorney's Manual (see directly below)I thought that they needed to provide the target letter before the witness testifies, but the MSM articles seem to imply that they are issued after the testimony.
From the U.S. Attorneys Manual:
9-11.151 Advice of "Rights" of Grand Jury Witnesses
It is the policy of the Department of Justice to advise a grand jury witness of his or her rights if such witness is a "target" or "subject" of a grand jury investigation. See the Criminal Resource Manual at 160 for a sample target letter.
A "target" is a person as to whom the prosecutor or the grand jury has substantial evidence linking him or her to the commission of a crime and who, in the judgment of the prosecutor, is a putative defendant....
A "subject" of an investigation is a person whose conduct is within the scope of the grand jury's investigation.
SAMPLE OF DOJ TARGET LETTER:
This letter is supplied to a witness scheduled to appear before the federal Grand Jury in order to provide helpful background information about the Grand Jury. The Grand Jury consists of from sixteen to twenty-three persons from the District of ___. It is their responsibility to inquire into federal crimes which may have been committed in this District.
As a Grand Jury witness you will be asked to testify and answer questions, and to produce records and documents. Only the members of the Grand Jury, attorneys for the United States and a stenographer are permitted in the Grand Jury room while you testify.
We advise you that the Grand Jury is conducting an investigation of possible violations of federal criminal laws involving, but not necessarily limited to *. You are advised that the destruction or alteration of any document required to be produced before the grand jury constitutes serious violation of federal law, including but not limited to Obstruction of Justice.
You are advised that you are a target of the Grand Jury's investigation. You may refuse to answer any question if a truthful answer to the question would tend to incriminate you. Anything that you do or say may be used against you in a subsequent legal proceeding. If you have retained counsel, who represents you personally, the Grand Jury will permit you a reasonable opportunity to step outside the Grand Jury room and confer with counsel if you desire
Walter Pincus and Glenn Kessler:
Who was the White House official who leaked word about Wilson's wife to The Washington Post's Walter Pincus, who has never publicly revealed his source?
It sounds that way from this sentence
Mr. Rove and Mr. Libby have been advised that they may be in serious legal jeopardy, the lawyers said, but only this week has Mr. Fitzgerald begun to narrow the possible charges.When this odd sentence is read one way, it sounds like Rove and Libby were advised before [the narrowing of charges] this week.
Query: what are the "facts" regarding the supposed two laws/statutes that indictments may devolve from? One has to do with knowingly revealing the identity of an undercover agent, with intent to harm the U.S., and the other (apparently more likely "vehicle" according to a colleague) is something about simply discussing any "classified information" with a "non-cleared" person...
Of course, I don't feel either of these circumstances apply to either Rove or Libby (??), and certainly not to VP Cheney, but my colleague who is really a dear in many other ways is just gleeful at the prospect of Rove in particular...
He also thinks Judith Miller is a "shill" for the Bush Administration, and that's why she "can't recall" how "Valerie/Victoria Flame" came to be written in her notes...protecting Cheney!!
Your guess...the odds of bogus indictments from Fitzpatrick vs. outing Joe Wilson and whoever else (Valerie maybe?) as the real crooks here?
I just hope the whole idiotic mess doesn't take forever to sort out...it's sickening that such an apparent non-starter (i.e., she wasn't "under cover"!) could cause such disruption when there are so many real issues that need to be taken care of!
That's what it looks like, but as a stock market trader I am trained to not jump to conclusions about anything...lol.
Well if the NY Times says it, it must be ... a LIE!
"Letting the liberal press have their orgasms until the very end."
Yep, and echoing the DNC, Screaming Howie and Nancy Lugoisi's talking point about how 'corrupt', etc., etc., the Bush Administration and the Republicans are, especially coupled w the Delay bogus indictment and Frist's issues.
Um, the WH's chief political advisor being indicted is a bit of a bigger deal.
Amen, sister!
I always hated that.
CA....
Wilson and Plame were Pincus' sources..go read his May article. Ditto with Kristoff..There is the "envoy" and the "CIA analyst" and they are most certainly Wilson and Plame.
Nothing new in this article. Move on.
"Mr. Rove and Mr. Libby have been advised that they may be in serious legal jeopardy, the lawyers said, but only this week has Mr. Fitzgerald begun to narrow the possible charges. The prosecutor has said he will not make up his mind about any charges until next week, government officials say""
What lawyers...what govt people. Fitz folks aint said a word....according to people like the TIMES. So any other lawyer would not be worth a spit for info.
The SLimes needs to decide which road they are gonna take here. Either Fitz folks are talking....or they are not.
It can't be both.
Good post. Shows two things. Showing how the law allows for the human mind.
One could have said something in passing years ago...or sent an e-mail that they did not remember....
Later on in the trial..the person faces that or remembers it..... They were not misleading the first time...they just did not remember it.
FURTHERMORE..... INTENT. the word Knowingly. Good luck convicting on that one, Fitz.
That's funny. Mine was like..."who the hell is Susanne".
Gotta stop talking in my sleep....
There lawyers would not be in when Rove or Libby testified.
And Fitz could not share info on Rove or Libby with them.
OH MAN........MAYBE HE'S GOING AFTER WILSON!!!!
This happy thought was brought to you by ArmyBratProud.
30 plus years of hating liberals.
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.
