Jan 12 2006

Watch What You Ask For!

Published by at 3:56 pm under All General Discussions,Plame Game

What is nice about Tom Maguire on a role is he saves me lots of typing. I am much more bullish on the results I expect to see from Libby’s trial than Tom – but he does have the right list of topics:

(1) It *MAY* be the case that Tim Russert and Andrea Mitchell of NBC News are conspiring to conceal misleading and possibly perjured testimony by Tim Russert to Special Counsel Fitzgerald. Since that testimony was central to the indictment and resignation of the Vice President’s Chief of Staff, this little glitch in Russert’s testimony has had dramatic (and unforeseen) consequences.

Their *POSSIBLE* motive – the protection of other sources, possibly including (I am serious) Alan Greenspan and Dick Cheney.

(2) The NY Times will take a hit when (*IF*) Nick Kristof is forced to admit that he was aware of Valerie Plame’s CIA connection prior to the publication of the Novak column, and that he had previously used Ms. Plame as a source for some columns. Since Mr. Kristof’s columns of May 6 and June 13 2003 triggered the Wilson story, his previously undisclosed involvement will raise eyebrows. To say the least.

(3) The Washington Post will find another Bob Woodward on their hands when (*IF*) Walter Pincus is forced to admit that the Plame leak he received on July 12 2003 was *not* his first leak of the news that Wilson’s wife was at the CIA. We will learn (I am *GUESSING*) that Mr. Pincus was apprised of her status through State Department (or possibly CIA) sources back in June 2003. Why did he keep quiet, and how did the WaPo miss this? Well, why did Woodward keep quiet? Source protection.

My predictions are Mitchell did know, and so did Russert. As I posted earlier, Russert says so on his Tim Russert Show with Mitchell:

RUSSERT: Well, that’s exactly right. “Meet”–Joe Wilson had been on “Meet the Press” on Sunday, which you moderated because I was on vacation.
RUSSERT: I came back after that interview, after The New York Times piece, and there was a discussion about Joe Wilson and I didn’t know very much. And then when I read Novak’s column the following Monday, I said, `Oh, my God, that’s it. Now I see. It’s his wife, Valerie Plame, CIA, sent him on the trip. Now I understand what everybody was trying to figure out.

Emphasis mine. So Tim comes back after the NYTimes piece ran and the Wilson interview to an NBC meeting where Joe Wilson was discussed, and obviously Joe’s wife – but not Valerie Plame. It is not until he reads Novak’s article that he connects Valerie Plame, CIA and Wilson’s wife. All things he discussed with the NBC team.

As people know I am firmly convinced Valerie was the only other source to back up Joe’s claims about the debreifing on his Niger trip who would also link the Niger Forgeries. The NY Times and Washington Post would not go with the story only on Joe’s word, and both Pincus and Kristoff claim ‘sources’ in their articles. Well there were only 4 people at the debriefing at the Wilson home: Joe, Val and two DO agents who testified under oath no mention of Niger Forgeries were made during the debriefing. So that leaves Joe and Val.

Which means the NY Times and Washington Post knew before Libby did who sent Joe Wilson to Niger and where she worked!

I have no doubt this will come out in the trial and there is no way for the media to stop it from coming given the charges against Libby. If these claims are true, then Libby is innocent of the charges.

Tom has a lot of other evidence of previous knowledge. But I feel confident that Kristof and Pincus screwed themselves when they admitted in their stories to having sources, plural, at the debriefing. I don’t think they were smart enough to ask the question of whether the debriefing happened at the CIA or someplace else. And I don’t think Val and Joe were smart enough to realize that if Pincus or Kristof referred to sources that would point directly at them because they had embellished the report to include the Niger forgeries (which the DO agents would NOT concur were discussed in February 2003 for obvious reasons).

This is why you do not lie. You can never cover all the tracks.

Comments Off on Watch What You Ask For!

Comments are closed.