Posted on 11/17/2005 6:12:45 PM PST by YaYa123
What to think of the quite astonishing revelation that Bob Woodward was told by administration sources—not Scooter Libby or Karl Rove, it seems clear—that Joseph Wilson's wife worked at the CIA, and told a month before what Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald said was the first revelation by an administration source, Libby, to a member of the press?
Here's the story from yesterday's Post on Woodward's testimony, and here's Woodward's statement, printed next to the story on the jump page. Here's the story by the Post's excellent media reporter Howard Kurtz on Woodward's apology to Post Executive Editor Leonard Downie for not telling him about this some time ago.
(Excerpt) Read more at usnews.com ...
Thanks, YaYa123. Remarkable story.
Heck, Wilson was an administration source.
And I suspect that Moynihan would say he's changed his mind today.
I'd take 30 million Mexican workers in exchange for the leftists, if that's the only way it could happen.
Wow. This story kind of pulls the rug out from under the Fitzmas crowd.
From Fitzie's press conference:
"In fact, Mr. Libby was the first official known to have told a reporter when he talked to Judith Miller in June of 2003 about Valerie Wilson."
The "first official known" by investigators who don't do their job very well.
Another quote from Fitzie's press conference:
"But also the reporter is the eyewitness, and what I think people don't appreciate is we interviewed lots of people, very high officials, before we ever went to the reporters."
Why does Fitzgerald give so much deference to reporters?
The source has gotta be Tenet or Richard Clarke.
Excellent catch!
I think it's the best too. Barone has a way of explaining the entire subject, without making your eyes glaze over. I believe he's got it right too, that Colin Powell is the likely leaker.
I especially enjoy how Barone's clear, very fair appraisal of the situation, (with intelligent background), contrasts with Chris Matthews' hysterical, over the top, conspiratorial rants about "rolling disclosures".
Besides being a rabid partisan, Matthews is careless and impatient, often very quick to make judgements and pronouncements based mostly on wishful thinking. The exact opposite of Michael Barone.
I have been wondering if this source is necessarily a "Bush aministration source." If it is a Clinton administration source, maybe it's Linda Tripp (knows all, sees all).
It is pretty much common knowledge that Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Rove were all opposed to Collin Powell. That is why he was replaced by Condi.
Why would Powell come forward to Fitzgerald and say that he had leaked to Woodward. What would that do for or against Libby? And it has gotten Woodward a lot of negative press for hiding this from his bosses. Why would Powell want to get his buddy Woodward in trouble?
Libby is the one facing trial. Someone coming forward after the indictment can only have one of two reasons. That person wants to help Libby or that person wants to hurt Libby. The person who outed Woodward is the leaker.. perhaps the only leaker.
We know Fitzgerald has said that leaking Plames name and job was not against the law. The law says she had to be covert with in the last five years. It had been 9 years since she had been covert.
But up until the indictment of Libby there was no way for the Leaker to know Libby was going to be indicted.
Libby was indicted for saying his source of information about Plame was Tim Russert of NBC. Libby said other reporters mentioned it to him, but Russert made a big enough deal that it stuck in his mind.
Russert says he was not Libby's source. Thus Russert says Libby was lying. And to support the belief that libby was lying the prosecutor says Libby was the first one to mention Plame to the press.
So according to Fitzgerald Russert was not Libbys source and Libby committed Perjury when he said Russert was his source.
Why would the leaker come forward now? It is obvious to me that Novak told the Prosecutor who his source was. But leaking info about Plame was not a crime .. according to Fitzgerald. Covering up by lying was the crime. Had Libby said.. yes I leaked it he would not have been indicted .. according to Fitzmas.. And if you believe that you are really not well.
But what if the Leaker was really wanting to get Plame in trouble.. for hiring her husband. What if it were a CIA official who had taken some flack from the group to which Plame and Wilson belong. The object was to get Plame in trouble for hiring her husband. Only Bush bashers could believe nepotism is good.
We know the leaker told Woodward... But Woodward never published the story. It was leaked to the Washington Post, Time magazine and the New york times. Novak went with the story. The Post, NY Times and Time did not.
Who else got the story and did not use it. The leaker had to be pretty well down the list before he decided to leak to Novak. People leak to Novak when no one else will print or broadcast the story.
But what happens to the Libby case if the leaker leaked to Russert early on and so testifies? What if Russert says to the leaker .. you are lying you did not leak to me. But what if the leaker says I leaked to Woodward and You and several more who are under oath saying I did. Woodward admitts he was told by the leaker.
Since Libby says Russert was his source and Russert says he could not be the source becuase he did not know, then if it can be proved that Russert did know, Libby is home free. And Russert could face perjury charges.
For Libby to be lying Libby had to believe that Russert would lie to cover for him. That is hard to believe. No Bush administration official and certainly not libby could believe that Russert would lie to cover for him.
My bet is Russert is the one not telling the truth and it is going to come out in the press or in court.
I think Russert knew that no member of the press would rat on him. And Russert never once imagined that the leaker would turn himself in and finger Russert.
Karl Rove has had two years to think about his case. Rove is a certified Genius. Rove undoubedly had a defense prepared no matter who or what charges were brought by Fitzgerald.
I think Fitzgerald was certain that not a single reporter would step forward to save Libby. I doubt it occrued to Fitzgerald that Rove might line up a leaker or to to step forward to save Libby.
This is the first leak case in my memory where the leaker revealed the Reporters to which he leaked.
If I am right then it does smell like a Karl Rove strategy. .. doesn't it.
Do you think we have to wait 32 years to find out who Woodward source was?
You've got that right!
Bush's mistake was in not firing Tenet on the first day of
his administration. Powell was no doubt a mistake also, but
it is hard to see how he could have avoided appointing him.
Poor Libby indicted for covering up a non-crime.
It would be more accurate to say that he is a former administration source.
Don't go off the deep end on us. Woodward meant "the current administration."
Barone thinks Woodward's source could have been Colin Powell. Others think it was Ari Fleischer.
The important thing is Woodward made clear in his deposition to Fitzgerald: that whoever Woodward talked to, the person was not intentionally outting a covert CIA operative.
After 911 the Administration felt that a drastic change in policy was needed to protect this country. Removing Saddam was part of that approach - motivated by his well-known antipathy to this country, his willingness to use WMD, and his supposed possession of them (according to many in the intelligence services).
Well, the last turned out to be wrong...and many who opposed the new strategy have tried to use it to discredit the Administration.
There are no villians here. Only people with vastly different outlooks and approachs trying to get their way in a political climate which is dirty, mean-spirited, and hatefull - as usual.
I got an email which described Libby's indictment this way:
"Libby has been indicted for having an imperfect memory."
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.