Skip to comments.
Cheney Told Aide of C.I.A. Officer, Notes Show
NY Times ^
| 10/24/05
| DAVID JOHNSTON, RICHARD W. STEVENSON and DOUGLAS JEHL
Posted on 10/24/2005 6:28:34 PM PDT by nj26
I. Lewis Libby Jr., Vice President Dick Cheneys chief of staff, first learned about the C.I.A. officer at the heart of the leak investigation in a conversation with Mr. Cheney weeks before her identity became public in 2003, lawyers involved in the case said Monday.
Notes of the previously undisclosed conversation between Mr. Libby and Mr. Cheney on June 12, 2003, appear to differ from Mr. Libbys testimony to a federal grand jury that he initially learned about the C.I.A. officer, Valerie Wilson, from journalists, the lawyers said.
The notes, taken by Mr. Libby during the conversation, for the first time place Mr. Cheney in the middle of an effort by the White House to learn about Ms. Wilsons husband, Joseph C. Wilson IV, who was questioning the administrations handling of intelligence about Iraqs nuclear program to justify the war.
Lawyers said the notes show that Mr. Cheney knew that Ms. Wilson worked at the C.I.A. more than a month before her identity was made public and her undercover status was disclosed in a syndicated column by Robert D. Novak on July 14, 2003.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
TOPICS: Government
KEYWORDS: cheney; cialeak; davidjohnston; douglasjehl; jehl; joewilson; johnston; richardstevenson; richardwstevenson; stevenson; valerieplame
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-50, 51-100, 101-150, 151-200 ... 501-543 next last
Apparently it takes 3 Times reporters to transcribe a leak from Fitzgerald's office...
1
posted on
10/24/2005 6:28:35 PM PDT
by
nj26
To: nj26
If Libby was cleared to recieve the information then why is it relevent who told him?
2
posted on
10/24/2005 6:35:37 PM PDT
by
gondramB
To: nj26
It's all chicken and no egg, Pinch. Why? Because she wasn't NOC, she was a desk jockey, and apparently well known inside and outside the Agency. So just eat a salad and relax, hippie. You got nothing.
To: nj26; blogblogginaway
And what a set of losers they are: ... by DAVID JOHNSTON, RICHARD W. STEVENSON and DOUGLAS JEHL
4
posted on
10/24/2005 6:37:04 PM PDT
by
piasa
(Attitude Adjustments Offered Here Free of Charge)
To: nj26; frankjr
it looks like they were holding this leak until this week. all the chatter last week about the "links to Cheney" - this must have been the basis for them.
get ready for a rough week.
5
posted on
10/24/2005 6:38:04 PM PDT
by
oceanview
To: nj26
Am I the only one who failed to see any actual citation of the "notes".
Was all that "...reported.." and "...lawyers said..." stuff persuasive to anyone here??
6
posted on
10/24/2005 6:39:31 PM PDT
by
norton
(This is not about the DIA or the CIA. This is about CYA...)
To: oceanview
So Tenent put Ms Plame's name in play?
7
posted on
10/24/2005 6:39:46 PM PDT
by
gov_bean_ counter
(It is easy to call for a pi$$ing contest when you aren't going to be in the line of fire.)
To: oceanview
On your ocean, maybe, not mine.
To: nj26
The notes, taken by Mr. Libby during the conversation, for the first time place Mr. Cheney in the middle of an effort by the White House to learn about Ms. Wilsons husband, Joseph C. Wilson IV, who was questioning the administrations handling of intelligence about Iraqs nuclear program to justify the war.
gotta love the tone of this by the Slimes...nowhere does it mention Wilson lied in the article about the VP sending him to Niger- I could see them saying after his report and the lies contained in it, "who the hell is this guy"...
9
posted on
10/24/2005 6:40:23 PM PDT
by
God luvs America
(When the silent majority speaks the earth trembles!)
To: nj26
Amazing how many freaking "leaks" this grand jury has. If it was a ship, it would have sunk within 5 minutes of being launched.
10
posted on
10/24/2005 6:41:02 PM PDT
by
COEXERJ145
(Cindy Sheehan, Pat Buchanan, John Conyers, and David Duke Are Just Different Sides of the Same Coin.)
To: StAnDeliver
fair enough. someone has to be the optimist on these threads, it might as well be you.
To: nj26
LOL, to the NYT bathhouse boys the theater of absurd reigns supreme!
To: norton
I don't trust anything "leaked" by the times. I think we should just wait & pray. I really mean pray.
13
posted on
10/24/2005 6:42:56 PM PDT
by
Linda Sandoval
(mom's for common sense judges)
To: oceanview
get ready for a rough week.
I don't believe Cheney ever testified before the grand jury.
Since we know that there was no crime committed in the first place, unless Cheney committed some violation of process with Fitzgerald, then there is nothing he can be charged with.
14
posted on
10/24/2005 6:42:59 PM PDT
by
counterpunch
(- SCOTUS interruptus - withdraw Miers before she blows it -)
To: nj26
You beat me to it while I was posting this...
My comment there was:
The NYT is trying to make up for the Judy mess. The question is - who (outside of Fitzgerald's office) would know that questions were being asked about these notes? Judy's lawyer comes to mind.
"Did Mr. Libby tell you that the Vice-President told him about Ms. Wilson?"
Judy, stung by the criticism from within, may be seeking redemption. [i.e., sending her lawyer out to scoop for the Times]
15
posted on
10/24/2005 6:43:40 PM PDT
by
lugsoul
To: nj26
I'm not a lawyer (thankfully!) but if Fitzgerald has Libby's own notes, wouldn't it be hard for him to claim that Libby was obstructing justice if his testimony differs from his notes (as opposed to fuzzy memory of long-ago events)? I have had personal experience with trying to recall long-ago conversations, only to later find a contemporaneously-written note that appered to conflict with my memory of the event.
16
posted on
10/24/2005 6:43:53 PM PDT
by
Zeppo
To: nj26
Monday's gone. Three more days to annouce indictments or extend the probe.
The DUers must be positively nerve-wracked.
17
posted on
10/24/2005 6:44:16 PM PDT
by
ez
(I believed Juanita Broaddrick and I believe Harriet Miers.)
To: Zeppo
"I have had personal experience with trying to recall long-ago conversations, only to later find a contemporaneously-written note that appered to conflict with my memory of the event."
That's probably their best defense. Mistaken recollection of their conversations about a nobody like Joe Wilson.
18
posted on
10/24/2005 6:45:17 PM PDT
by
nj26
To: gov_bean_ counter
"So Tenent put Ms Plame's name in play?"
He might have just said "wife."
Naturally Cheney would want to know about Wilson. By that time Wilson was leaking to the press that he was sent to Niger at the behest of the VP's office. Wilson also leaked, falsely again, that he debunked something and the Administration was hiding it.
19
posted on
10/24/2005 6:45:43 PM PDT
by
Shermy
To: oceanview
It looks like Dick Cheney's vice presidency will not survive the year; he shall go to jail to do hard labor for a minimum of five years and forever shall he be denied any medical care whatsoever.
The question: if Bush stands still, who will he select for the office of the vice-presidency? (Remember, the Senate confirmation requires 61 affirmative votes.) And if not, how would Speaker Hastert do as President with Democrats in control of both houses of Congress? Or will he, too, fall? And then, who becomes vice president?
20
posted on
10/24/2005 6:45:48 PM PDT
by
dufekin
(US Senate: the only place where the majority [44 D] comprises fewer than the minority [55 R])
To: StAnDeliver
It's all chicken and no egg, Pinch. Why? Because she wasn't NOC, she was a desk jockey, and apparently well known inside and outside the Agency. So just eat a salad and relax, hippie. You got nothing.
You're absolutely right, of course...but there will still be Republican Administration folks indicted, and the 'Rats will gorge and feast on that point for next year's conveniently timed election cycle.
I can already hear Nancy Puke-losi shrieking about "corruption"...
21
posted on
10/24/2005 6:46:37 PM PDT
by
ErnBatavia
(Like a midget at a urinal - stay on your toes...)
To: ez
The DUers must be positively nerve-wracked.Like some of US aren't?
22
posted on
10/24/2005 6:47:04 PM PDT
by
digger48
To: StarFan; Dutchy; alisasny; BobFromNJ; BUNNY2003; Cacique; Clemenza; Coleus; cyborg; DKNY; ...
ping!
Please FReepmail me if you want on or off my miscellaneous ping list.
23
posted on
10/24/2005 6:47:26 PM PDT
by
nutmeg
("We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good." - Hillary Clinton 6/28/04)
To: nj26
It would not be illegal for either Mr. Cheney or Mr. Libby, both of whom are presumably cleared to know the governments deepest secrets, to discuss a C.I.A. officer or her link to a critic of the administration. But any effort by Mr. Libby to steer investigators away from his conversation with Mr. Cheney could be considered by Patrick J. Fitzgerald, the special counsel in the case, to be an illegal effort to impede the inquiry. The old Martha Stewart gotcha. If anything ever said or done on an issue by the targets they want to nail can be classified as illegal obstruction, then you can get anybody for anything.
24
posted on
10/24/2005 6:47:43 PM PDT
by
JustaCowgirl
(I could care less if the Gitmo prisoners got force-fed.)
To: oceanview; norton; the Real fifi; Shermy; frankjr
The lawyer involved with the leak is Bob Bennett. What is this "Under cover Status" BS again?
"Some lawyers in the case have said Mr. Fitzgerald may face obstacles in bringing a false statement charge against Mr. Libby. They said it could be difficult to prove that he intentionally sought to mislead the grand jury. Lawyers involved in the case said they have no indication that Mr. Fitzgerald is considering charging Mr. Cheney with wrongdoing." I thought George Tenet was before the GJ. The theory is that Tenet was Novak's source, and once Tenet confessed Novak was never summoned.
But any effort by Mr. Libby to steer investigators away from his conversation with Mr. Cheney could be considered by Patrick J. Fitzgerald.
Not so. The US Supreme court ruled that "Lying" to investigators was not obstruction of Justice, unless Libby was told that his evidence could be presented before a GJ.
It appears that that Cheney broke no law, duh!
25
posted on
10/24/2005 6:47:54 PM PDT
by
Perdogg
("Facts are stupid things." - President Ronald Wilson Reagan)
To: nj26
26
posted on
10/24/2005 6:49:11 PM PDT
by
NormsRevenge
(Semper Fi ... Monthly Donor spoken Here. Go to ... https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
To: digger48
I'm not nerve-wracked. I think either he's got nothing or, if he indicts, he'll get no convictions.
There's a big push to make R's appear corrupt before the Queen set forth.
27
posted on
10/24/2005 6:49:25 PM PDT
by
ez
(I believed Juanita Broaddrick and I believe Harriet Miers.)
To: oceanview
You trust the N.Y. Slimes? You base your opinions on what appears in its pages?
Okay, then hope that President Bush, VP Cheney, Rove, and Scooter Libby are ALL indicted, as well as Secretary Rice and all the members of WHIG. Dennis Hastert will then be the president. Happy now?
To: dufekin
29
posted on
10/24/2005 6:49:42 PM PDT
by
golfisnr1
(Democrats are like roaches, hard to get rid of.>)
To: gov_bean_ counter
Do you blame Tenat for wanting to know who was behind sending a flunkie like Joe Wilson to Niger on a mission he knew nothin g about?
30
posted on
10/24/2005 6:49:42 PM PDT
by
MJY1288
(Whenever a Liberal is Speaking on the Senate Floor, Al-Jazeera Breaks in and Covers it LIVE)
To: nj26
Tenet to Cheney to Libby.
"Mr. Libbys notes indicate that Mr. Cheney had gotten his information about Ms. Wilson from George J. Tenet, the director of central intelligence, in response to questions from the vice president about Mr. Wilson.
But they contain no suggestion that either Mr. Cheney or Mr. Libby knew at the time of Ms. Wilsons undercover status or that her identity was classified."
And if the leaker to the NYT is neither Libby nor his lawyer, an investigation should be launched.
That irksome Rule 6(e) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.
Not that Fitzgerald or anybody at Justice cares.
To: NautiNurse; doug from upland; Mia T; ALOHA RONNIE; jwalsh07; Born Conservative; mhking; ...
32
posted on
10/24/2005 6:50:31 PM PDT
by
nutmeg
("We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good." - Hillary Clinton 6/28/04)
To: nj26
When in danger, when in doubt, run in circles, scream and shout. Methinks that about sums up the NYT rag.
33
posted on
10/24/2005 6:50:32 PM PDT
by
Ursus arctos horribilis
("It is better to die on your feet than to live on your knees!" Emiliano Zapata 1879-1919)
To: Zeppo
Generally, no Obstruction of Justice. Perjury, well, no, There has to be MENS REA and you have to prove it beyond reasonable doubt.
34
posted on
10/24/2005 6:50:33 PM PDT
by
Perdogg
("Facts are stupid things." - President Ronald Wilson Reagan)
To: nj26
This is Bennett, Judith's attorney & probably NYTs too putting out information not the prosecutor, IMO. If the prosecutor's office is leaking that would be rather ironic. Maybe they should start an investigation about that! I think that's exactly what David Kendell did during Monicagate. He would leak something to the press, then claim it came from Starr's office. An investigation was started by Reno and then Kendell's office would find out about what Starr was investigating. There should have been a RICO case against the Clintons. They are as slick as any mobster in the country.
35
posted on
10/24/2005 6:51:03 PM PDT
by
kcvl
To: nopardons
36
posted on
10/24/2005 6:51:17 PM PDT
by
MJY1288
(Whenever a Liberal is Speaking on the Senate Floor, Al-Jazeera Breaks in and Covers it LIVE)
To: nj26
The question left begging is this: Why would Cheny disclose a CIA agents name? It is because the CIA had launched a covert operation using Wilson as a plausibly deniable foil for a public campaign against President Bush's Iraq policy. Cheny had a valid reason for drawing
the Wilson CIA connection. The Liberal 5th column inside the CIA, those responsible for NOT apprehending the Al Quaida terrorist operations in the USA, were and are
reassigned or drummed out of the CIA. Our president was quietly cleaning house and replacing the CIA Director.
In other words Cheny had a valid reason for making a Wilson/CIA connection, and it was his duty to do so.
The CIA is out of conmtrol here, and it needs to stop.
37
posted on
10/24/2005 6:51:43 PM PDT
by
Candor7
(Into Liberal Flatulence Goes the Hope of the West)
To: JustaCowgirl
Now, and this is a big if, if this is true, this is not illegal. But.... Libby apparently told the grand jury that he heard Valerie Plame's names from reporters.
Assuming this is correct, my guess is he didn't want the boss involved, and he perjured himself. The only thing might be the Martha crime.
To: nopardons
as Rush was saying last week:
- either all these stories we've seen since late last week are totally invented - which would mean the MSM is totally pathological. Or, Fitzgerald has been compromised and they have first hand leaks about what is happening.
take your pick.
To: dufekin
Please tell me you forgot your sarcasm tag..
To: dufekin
Please tell me you forgot your sarcasm tag..
To: StAnDeliver
Wilson was selling his story around town for months before his July column to Novak.
Even Andrea Mitchell said she all the reporters in town knew Wilson's wife worked for the CIA.
Wilson and his wife were part of the social scene in washington. There was no secret.
To: oceanview
In kind, someone has to be a defeatist, it most deservingly be you!
43
posted on
10/24/2005 6:52:49 PM PDT
by
MJY1288
(Whenever a Liberal is Speaking on the Senate Floor, Al-Jazeera Breaks in and Covers it LIVE)
To: Wild Irish Rogue
44
posted on
10/24/2005 6:53:36 PM PDT
by
Perdogg
("Facts are stupid things." - President Ronald Wilson Reagan)
To: nj26
A leak here, a leak over there, indictments tuesday, no indictments wednesday, rove is going to jail, cheney will resign, Chris Matthews is having numerous orgasms!!
ENOUGH ALREADY
WHERE ARE THE F##KING INDICTMENTS!!!!
Shit or get off the pot!
To: johnmecainrino
Wilson's July 6th column. Novak's column was july 14th.
To: nj26
I swear, if Fitzgerald has these notes and Libby testified differently (honestly misrecollecting) there is no way in hell you can in clean conscience indict on perjury or obstruction. Surely, Fitzgerald would've asked Libby about the notes themselves during testimony and Libby would've realized he had been in error about who he learned about Plame from first.
If there is no crime to begin with and contemporaneous documents were handed over in timely fashion who cares if Cheney found out who sent Wilson. It only makes sense he'd like to know since he was being accused of sending Wilson himself!
This Wilson thing smells rotten.
47
posted on
10/24/2005 6:54:32 PM PDT
by
newzjunkey
(CA: Stop union theft for political agendas with YES on Prop 75! Prolife? YES on Prop 73!)
To: MJY1288
To: oceanview; StAnDeliver
fair enough. someone has to be the optimist on these threads, it might as well be you.You're not alone StAnDeliver. The glass is always half full in my world.
49
posted on
10/24/2005 6:54:37 PM PDT
by
Chuck54
(Free Tom DeLay)
To: kcvl
Yep. That's my call, too.
50
posted on
10/24/2005 6:54:42 PM PDT
by
lugsoul
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-50, 51-100, 101-150, 151-200 ... 501-543 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson