Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

WP Kurtz: Gannon told FBI never had secret memo - read it in WSJ

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-20-05 08:25 AM
Original message
WP Kurtz: Gannon told FBI never had secret memo - read it in WSJ
Saturday, February 19, 2005


Former reporter breaks silence on expose


By Howard Kurtz / The Washington Post

Comment on this story
Send this story to a friend
Get Home Delivery


WASHINGTON -- Jeff Gannon, the former White House reporter whose naked pictures have appeared on a number of gay escort sites, says that he has "regrets" about his past but that White House officials knew nothing about his salacious activities.

<SNIP>

Gannon says he was questioned by the FBI in the Valerie Plame leak investigation after referring to a classified CIA document when he interviewed the outed CIA operative's husband, former ambassador Joe Wilson.

But he said Friday: "I didn't have the document. I never saw the document. It was written about in the Wall Street Journal a week before. I had no special access to classified information."

SNIP
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Racenut20 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-20-05 08:29 AM
Response to Original message
1. Well, that settles it. Could anyone not believe all this dude says?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NewJeffCT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-20-05 10:41 AM
Response to Reply #1
9. I know, how can we question his honesty now?
That would be akin to questioning the honesty of our feckless, I mean fearless leader.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
prodigal_green Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-20-05 08:31 AM
Response to Original message
2. Which still leaves the question...
how did he know Joe Wilson's wife was an agent?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-20-05 08:32 AM
Response to Original message
3. but they did know about his tax lien
Edited on Sun Feb-20-05 08:33 AM by cap
if they ran the background check... and nobody asked him about his company?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trumad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-20-05 08:53 AM
Response to Original message
4. This is what Digby has to say about that...
Pass The Parsing

Could the next reporter who gets JimJeff in his crosshairs please pin him down on this Plame memo issue? This is ridiculous. He has never really answered the question properly.

Here's the passage from the February 11th interview with E&P

Although he hinted that he had not seen a classified CIA document after all, he added, "I am not going to speak to that. It goes to something of a nature I do not want to discuss."



He said nothing about the Wall Street Journal.


Here's from his interview with Wolf Blitzer on February 14


GANNON: And the FBI did come to interview me. They were interested in where -- how I knew or received a copy of a confidential CIA memo that said that Valerie Plame suggested that Joe Wilson be sent on this mission, something that everybody -- they have all vigorously denied but is, in effect, true.

BLITZER: So they didn't make you go testify before the grand jury?

GANNON: No.

BLITZER: Do you have to reveal how you got that memo?

GANNON: No.

BLITZER: They didn't ask you?

GANNON: Well, the FBI kept asking. I said, well, look, I'm a journalist, I can't --

BLITZER: You didn't tell them?

GANNON: Yes. Can't divulge that. And they accepted that, and I've never been asked again.



Again he didn't mention the WSJ article.

Here's an excerpt from Anderson Cooper's interview on Friday


GANNON: I didn't do that at all. I didn't do that at all. If you read the question, and I provided -- my article was actually a transcript of my conversation with Ambassador Wilson -- I made reference to a memo. And this...

COOPER: How did you know about that memo?

GANNON: Well, this memo was referred to in a "Wall Street Journal" article a week earlier.

COOPER: So that wasn't based on any information that you had been given by the White House?

GANNON: I was given no special information by the White House or by anybody else, for that matter.



Suddenly he's pointing out that the memo was mentioned in the Wall Street Journal but he doesn't say explicitly that he read it there.

Here's what the NY Times reported today:

"What I said was no more than what was reported in The Wall Street Journal a week before," he said.



In none of those statements does he simply say, "I got the information from the WSJ story." Look how he dances around it. No "special" information. "What I said was no more that what was reported." He has been coached to parse his answers this way.

There is enough evidence now to indicate that he is not being straightforward on this question. Did he get the information from the WSJ article or not and if not, where else did he hear about it?

The question was who was spreading this bogus state department memo. From the Washington Post at the time:

"Sources said the CIA is angry about the circulation of a still-classified document to conservative news outlets suggesting Plame had a role in arranging her husband's trip to Africa for the CIA. The document, written by a State Department official who works for its Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR), describes a meeting at the CIA where the Niger trip by Wilson was discussed, said a senior administration official who has seen it.

"CIA officials have challenged the accuracy of the INR document, the official said, because the agency officer identified as talking about Plame's alleged role in arranging Wilson's trip could not have attended the meeting."



Now maybe Gannon did just read about this in the Wall Street Journal. But if he did he sure has acted strangely about it, even as recently as yesterday when talking to the NY Times. It's possible that he played games with the FBI when they came knocking and pretended that he had a confidential source when he didn't. That, of course, would be against the law. A law that when broken can cost you a lot of money and possible jail time. You cannot lie to the FBI. That is why Martha Stewart is in jail and it's why Henry Cisneros spent almost a decade in the dock of a special prosecutor ---- he didn't tell them the exact amount of money he paid his ex-lover.

I don't know if that's what happened, but something did. I do know that Gannon could end all the speculation by simply saying "I never saw the memo, I read about it in the paper and pretended that I did." The question is why doesn't he?

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2005_02_13_digbysblog_archive.html#110887576770336801
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BuyingThyme Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-20-05 09:33 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. You've done a very nice job of isolating the suspect language.
Edited on Sun Feb-20-05 09:33 AM by BuyingThyme
Why did he invoke some kind of journalistic privilege when questioned by the FBI?

And, if he didn't, why did he say he did?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Occulus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-20-05 10:44 AM
Response to Reply #5
10. Speaking of suspect language
In one of his Freep posts (I found and posted this in another thread over a week ago) Gannon, speaking of the CIA memo, says in response to poster "JohnGalt":

"Looks like I outed another one!"

Had he not been involved, he would have said something like "Oops, looks like I outed one, too!" Using the words "another one" implies that he had outed someone once before, and was 'caught' doing so again.

Suspect language, indeed....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-20-05 09:41 AM
Response to Reply #4
6. Gannon's retelling seems to be a lawyer's account
Would like to see the WSJ account vs. Gannon's report. See if there's anything in Gannon that isn't in the WSJ
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flyarm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-20-05 12:37 PM
Response to Reply #6
19. two great timelines of gannon and the valerie plame leak
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/2/5/212837/3714

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/2/9/191334/0754

two great timelines of gannon and the valerie plame leak info..


from my files..hope this helps!!

fly
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flyarm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-20-05 12:42 PM
Response to Reply #19
20. some good gannon links!!!


http://democraticwhip.house.gov/media/press.cfm?pressReleaseID=1021
Around the Web: Hoyer Statement on "Jeff Gannon" Connection to Valerie Plame Leak
Tuesday February 15, 2005
Other items about: Jeff Gannon • Talon News




http://mediamatters.org/items/200502140009
Gannon won't give clear answer on whether he's seen classified memo on Wilson-Plame case
Monday February 14, 2005 • 119 comments
Other items about: Jeff Gannon • Talon News


http://mediamatters.org/items/200502120003
In taped CNN interview, Gannon misrepresented Senate Intel report findings on Joe Wilson
Friday February 11, 2005 • 140 comments
Other items about: News from CNN • Jeff Gannon • CNN



hope this helps!!!

fly


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flyarm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-20-05 01:01 PM
Response to Reply #6
21. Cached articles by jeff gannon. about joe wilson..from talon
these articles are avail by cached section only gannons articles about the joe wilson/valerie plame leak..talon has scrubbed

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&c2coff=1&q=%22by+jeff+gannon%22+site%3Atalonnews.com&btnG=Search


http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&c2coff=1&q=%22by+jeff+gannon%22+site%3Atalonnews.com&btnG=Search
a Media Matters for America review of Gannon's catalogue of work for Talon (still available as cached documents via Google) showed that Gannon often used his news articles as a platform to defend the Bush administration and attack its opponents.



http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:TEowY4Mm4fEJ:www.talonnews.com/news/2003/october/1029_wilson_interview.shtml+%22by+jeff+gannon%22+site:talonnews.com&hl=en&ie=UTF-8
Talon News -- Wilson Says Iraq Not a War for WMDs
Printer-Friendly Version. Wilson Says Iraq Not a War for WMDs By Jeff Gannon Talon
News October 29, 2003. WASHINGTON (Talon News) -- Ambassador ...
www.talonnews.com/news/2003/ october/1029_wilson_interview.shtml - 21k - Cached - Similar pages


http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:8xuRcess_WsJ:www.talonnews.com/news/2003/october/1029_wilson_interviewp.shtml+%22by+jeff+gannon%22+site:talonnews.com&hl=en&ie=UTF-8
Talon News -- Wilson Says Iraq Not a War for WMDs
Wilson Says Iraq Not a War for WMDs By Jeff Gannon Talon News October 29,
2003. WASHINGTON (Talon News) -- Ambassador Joe Wilson, the ...
www.talonnews.com/news/2003/ october/1029_wilson_interviewp.shtml - 11k - Cached - Similar pages



http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:sIttUxBPytMJ:www.talonnews.com/news/2003/november/1103_wilson_interview.shtml+%22by+jeff+gannon%22+site:talonnews.com&hl=en&ie=UTF-8
Talon News -- Wilson Says President has been Badly Advised
Printer-Friendly Version. Wilson Says President has been Badly Advised By
Jeff Gannon Talon News November 3, 2003. WASHINGTON (Talon ...
www.talonnews.com/news/2003/ november/1103_wilson_interview.shtml - 34k - Cached - Similar pages



hope this helps..had in files!!

fly

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dpbrown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-20-05 12:13 PM
Response to Reply #4
17. He saw the memo...it's clear by his nondenial and "journalistic privilege"
Someone, probably Rove, is telling him how to lie and get away with it.

This guy's involvement goes all the way to the top.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KharmaTrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-20-05 12:28 PM
Response to Reply #4
18. Contrast This Transcript With Cooper's From Friday
...which is what Whorie wrote his article off of. HE didn't interview "Gannon"...he lifted that quote that he immediate wants you believe as fact from the Cooper interview...where "Gannon" obviously is lying and made this source up when cornered. Instead of taking this lying cad (how many lies do GOOPs get? Unlimited!) word, why not actually get off your fat, GOOP-fed ass, Whorie and have one of your interns check the WSJ archives. It's called "fact checking"...I know, takes away from your drinkie-drinkie parties and double & triple dipping.

We need a big name "media type" to champion...someone with a reputation a Whorie Kurtz or the GOOP Slime Machine can't outshout or distort.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-20-05 10:04 AM
Response to Original message
7. Does anyone have the WSJ story and Gannon's report?
Let's line them up and see if G's report is strictly WSJ material. Also, anyone have more on the State Dept. report being bogus - if so, sure sounds a lot like same modus operendi in Rather's TANG docs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-20-05 11:11 AM
Response to Reply #7
11. Dec. 2003 WP story touches on Talon (Gannon?), referenced INR doc,
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A30842-2003Dec25?language=printer

Leaks Probe Is Gathering Momentum

By Mike Allen and Dana Milbank
Washington Post Staff Writers
Friday, December 26, 2003; Page A01


The Justice Department has added a fourth prosecutor to the team investigating the leak of an undercover CIA officer's identity, while the FBI has said a grand jury may be called to take testimony from administration officials, sources close to the case said.

>SNIP<

According to administration officials and people familiar with some of the interviews, FBI agents apparently started their White House questioning with top figures -- including President Bush's senior adviser, Karl Rove -- and then worked down to more junior officials. The agents appear to have a great deal of information and have constructed detailed chronologies of various officials' possible tie to the leak, people familiar with the questioning said.

The Justice Department has added a prosecutor specializing in counterintelligence, joining two other counterintelligence prosecutors and one from Justice's Public Integrity section.

Agents investigating the matter have been increasingly apparent at CIA headquarters in Langley over the past three weeks, officials said. "They are still active," a senior official said.

But sources said the CIA believes that people in the administration continue to release classified information to damage the figures at the center of the controversy, former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV and his wife, Valerie Plame, who was exposed as a CIA officer by unidentified senior administration officials for a July 14 column by Robert D. Novak.

>SNIP<

Sources said the CIA is angry about the circulation of a still-classified document to conservative news outlets suggesting Plame had a role in arranging her husband's trip to Africa for the CIA. The document, written by a State Department official who works for its Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR), describes a meeting at the CIA where the Niger trip by Wilson was discussed, said a senior administration official who has seen it.

CIA officials have challenged the accuracy of the INR document, the official said, because the agency officer identified as talking about Plame's alleged role in arranging Wilson's trip could not have attended the meeting.

"It has been circulated around," one official said. CIA and State Department officials have refused to discuss the document.

On Oct. 28, Talon News, a news company tied to a group called GOP USA, posted on the Internet an interview with Wilson in which the Talon News questioner asks: "An internal government memo prepared by U.S. intelligence personnel details a meeting in early 2002 where your wife, a member of the agency for clandestine service working on Iraqi weapons issues, suggested that you could be sent to investigate the reports. Do you dispute that?"

>SNIP<

FBI agents have told people they have interviewed that they may be asked to testify before a grand jury, according to sources close to the case. That could indicate that prosecutors believe they have a case, or it could be a routine method of getting testimony on the record even though no indictment is ever sought.

White House officials profess to be unconcerned about the outcome of the investigation. Some administration officials said they believe charges will eventually result, although it could be as long from now as 2005. A Republican legal source who has had detailed conversations about the matter with White House officials said he "doesn't get any sense at all that they're worried or concerned, or that they're covering up."

Still, the White House is eager for the findings to emerge soon, or wait until after the November election. "The only fear I've heard expressed is that the investigation will be too slow or too fast and will kick into a visible mode in a way that is poorly timed for the election," the Republican said. "If they prosecuted someone tomorrow, I don't think the White House would care. And they can do it in December 2004. They just don't want it to become an issue in the election."

FBI agents showed up unannounced last week at the home of a private citizen who was believed to have some knowledge of White House handling of Plame's identity, according to a source involved in the investigation. The source refused to identify the person who was interviewed, but said it was a man who had only peripheral knowledge of the case and had discussed it with officials in the White House.

>SNIP<

Staff writers Walter Pincus and Susan Schmidt contributed to this report.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-20-05 11:27 AM
Response to Reply #7
12. Here's the Oct 17 2003 WSJ Article - thanks Cryptome
I hate this SNIP stuff - tried not to omit important bits

http://cryptome.org/plame-memo.htm


17 October 2003



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Wall Street Journal, October 17, 2003

Memo May Aid Leak Probe
Document Details Intelligence Meeting On Iraq-Niger Reports

By DAVID S. CLOUD
Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL


WASHINGTON -- An internal government memo addresses some of the mysteries at the center of the White House leak investigation and could help investigators in the search for who disclosed the identity of a Central Intelligence Agency operative, according to two people familiar with the memo.

The memo, prepared by U.S. intelligence personnel, details a meeting in early 2002 where CIA officer Valerie Plame and other intelligence officials gathered to brainstorm about how to verify reports that Iraq had sought uranium yellowcake from Niger.

Ms. Plame, a member of the agency's clandestine service working on Iraqi weapons issues, suggested at the meeting that her husband, Africa expert and former U.S. diplomat Joseph Wilson, could be sent to Niger to investigate the reports, according to current and former government officials familiar with the meeting at the CIA's Virginia headquarters. Soon after, midlevel CIA officials decided to send him, say intelligence officials.

Classified memos, like the one describing Ms. Plame's role, have limited circulation and investigators are likely to question all those known to have received it. Intelligence officials haven't denied Ms. Plame was involved in the decision to send Mr. Wilson, but they have said she was not "responsible" for the decision.

How Ms. Plame got involved in the decision to send Mr. Wilson to Niger has been a mystery since July, when columnist Robert Novak first publicly identified her as a CIA officer and said she was responsible for her husband being chosen for the job, citing two sources. Mr. Novak's column was written after Mr. Wilson publicly accused the administration of twisting intelligence "to exaggerate the Iraqi threat." It didn't explain how she got into the discussion and, by implication, suggested Mr. Wilson hadn't gotten the job on merit.

<SNIP>

Mr. Wilson has told reporters repeatedly that his wife wasn't involved in his selection, and accused the White House of leaking his wife's name to punish him by ending her career as a clandestine operative. He said in an interview with The Wall Street Journal Thursday that he is unaware of any role played by his wife. "My wife knows of my particular experience with Niger. If there was such a meeting, I have no knowledge of it. It would be perfectly appropriate, though." He said that he hasn't asked his wife if she did suggest him for the mission because of the restrictions imposed by her job at the CIA.

According to current and former officials familiar with the memo, it describes interagency discussions of the yellowcake mystery: whether the reports of Iraq's uranium purchases were credible; which agency should pay for any further investigation; and the suggestion that Mr. Wilson could be sent to check out the allegations. Other officials with knowledge of the memo wouldn't say if it mentions Ms. Plame by name as the one who suggested Mr. Wilson, or if her identity is shielded but obvious because of what is known now about the mission. Operations officers like Ms. Plame are sometimes identified only by their first names even in interagency meetings.

TRACING THE LEAK
Events leading up to the criminal investigation into the leak of an undercover CIA officer's identity:

Early 2002: Spurred by Vice President Cheney's office, intelligence officials gather to discuss reports that Iraq is trying to buy uranium yellowcake from Niger. CIA officer Valerie Plame recommends her husband, former U.S. diplomat Joseph Wilson, for a mission to investigate the claim.

March: Upon his return from Africa, Wilson tells CIA the reports are "highly doubtful," echoing the sentiments of two U.S. officials who made similar inquiries.

September: CIA expresses "reservations" about a British report that says Iraq is seeking uranium in Africa.

January 2003: White House officials tout the British report in speeches, Bush cites it in his State of the Union address.

July 6: Wilson writes an op-ed piece criticizing Bush's use of intelligence.

July 14: Columnist Robert Novak reveals that Wilson's wife works for CIA.

Sept. 26: Justice Department opens investigation into who leaked information about Plame's status as a CIA officer to Novak.

>SNIP<

The investigation was given a big push in early 2002 after Vice President Dick Cheney asked his CIA briefer for an assessment of the reports. According to Mr. Cheney's spokeswoman, Cathie Martin, the CIA reported back quickly that it was possible Iraq had made attempts to purchase yellowcake, but the agency couldn't be sure because it said the information "was fragmentary and lacked detail."

How Mr. Cheney first learned about the yellowcake reports isn't clear. Ms. Martin said he had heard of them independently of his regular CIA briefing. Once he received the agency's response, she says, he made no further inquiries about the information.

Mr. Wilson said he believes the CIA decision to send him to Niger was prompted by Mr. Cheney's inquiries. CIA Director George Tenet said last summer that decision was taken at the agency's own initiative.

Officials familiar with the early 2002 meeting at CIA headquarters said intelligence experts were uncertain about what further steps they could take to try to track down the yellowcake allegations. The CIA has no station chief in Niger, but the U.S. ambassador there already had made her own inquiry. These officials also say some participants at the meeting were skeptical of the Italian report. State Department officials, in particular, felt that 500 tons of uranium was such a large amount that there was no way it could secretly be transferred to Iraq.

Mr. Wilson says the first time he heard about a possible trip to Niger was when he was called to a meeting at CIA headquarters in February. About a dozen representatives of government intelligence agencies were present -- but not his wife, he said. He said he was asked to attend because of his expertise on Africa and his knowledge of the African uranium trade, gained during his years at the Clinton White House.

He said the meeting in a windowless conference room opened with a mention of Mr. Cheney's inquiry about the African connection to Iraq. He said that in the course of that meeting, officials raised the possibility of his traveling to Niger and told him they would contact him with a decision. A few days later, he said, they told him to go.

When Mr. Wilson returned from Niger's capital Niamey in early March, he said he told CIA officials it was "highly doubtful" any transfer of uranium took place. Current and former Niger officials he talked to said they were unaware of any contract being signed with Iraq.

<snip>

In September 2002 -- seven months after Mr. Wilson's trip -- the Niger puzzle got even more intriguing. An Italian journalist walked into the U.S. Embassy in Rome and presented documents purporting to describe a contract signed by Iraq to purchase uranium from Niger. The documents were transmitted back to State Department headquarters in Washington. It took until March of this year for the CIA to analyze the documents and conclude that they were a hoax. By then Mr. Bush had already given his January State of the Union speech describing reports that Iraq had sought uranium in Africa.

On July 6, Mr. Wilson wrote an opinion piece asserting that the intelligence on Iraq and yellowcake had been "twisted" to exaggerate the Iraq threat. Eight days, later Mr. Novak revealed Mr. Wilson's wife's name in print and that she was the one who "suggested sending to Niger."

Write to David S. Cloud at david.cloud@wsj.com

Updated October 17, 2003 12:19 a.m.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bpilgrim Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-20-05 10:39 AM
Response to Original message
8. sounds like someone has been reading DU
thats the same argument burtworm was making here lastweek... the info was already in the public domain or it could be true :shrug:

the point is this guy is well connected and until we get to the bottom of those connections we will all be left guessing.

peace
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-20-05 06:13 PM
Response to Reply #8
23. Billy, the point is that Gannon may have seen or cited a leaked NRI doc
If he's truly arguing that he first saw reference to it in The WSJ, that appears to be a bald lie that Kurtz has perpetuated.

As we see, the WSJ first made reference to the State Dept report on 10/17/03 - nearly two weeks after Gannon makes first public disclosure of that doc.

Kurtz is perpetuating a lie, not merely distorting the facts. As to whether Gannon broke the law, that's a question that Fitzgerald needs address.

The WashPost has a lot to answer for here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-20-05 11:38 AM
Response to Original message
13. Gannon's Oct 6. 03 report link below - Kurtz conveyed Gannon lie?!
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/2/5/212837/3714

Oct 6, 2003 - Gannon (Talon News) writes an article about Wilson

http://www.gopusa.com/news/2003/october/1006_wilson_blasts.shtml


It was after his article appeared that columnist Robert Novak revealed his wife's name, calling her a "CIA operative." Novak discussed the possibility that Wilson was selected for the assignment in Africa because of the position and influence of his wife at the CIA.
It is still unknown as to the reason Wilson was sent on the February 2002 mission to Niger, but allowed that it could have been at his wife's suggestion. Some have suggested that his clear partisanship cast doubt on the findings in his report.

Gannon makes clear that he doesn't know anything other than what is in official reports as of Oct. 6th... yet 22 days later his interview with Wilson is published where he states definitively the existence of the CIA memo and the reason Wilson was sent to Niger. But he is in the loop enough to know he needs to push the partisan politics aspect in his article.

October 7, 2003 - President Bush says that he is not sure if the Justice Department will determine source of leak. (Stevenson and Lichtblau, "Leaker May Remain Elusive, Bush Suggests
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-20-05 12:08 PM
Response to Reply #13
15. GOPUSA link scrubbed - ANYONE HAVE GANNON 10-06 REPORT?
copy was supposed to be at: http://www.americablog.org/
But can't find Gannon's original story.

PLEASE?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spazito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-20-05 11:44 AM
Response to Original message
14. Kurtz is really trying to bury this story, what is he so afraid of?
It is fascinating to watch and read him. He has thrown away any facade of being objective and is hammering away at trying to cover for 'gannon'. One sure has to wonder why?

He must have gotten the orders from Rove to bury this and bury this quck.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-20-05 12:11 PM
Response to Reply #14
16. WE HAVE KURTZ NAILED - STILL NEED GANNON'S 10-06-03 REPORT, ANYONE?
ADMIN - PLEASE MOVE TO MAIN PAGE
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-20-05 06:05 PM
Response to Reply #16
22. Found this that seems to quote Gannon's 10-06-03
article. Can't vouch for it's authenticity:

http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:52rcMM3JzaMJ:www.able2know.com/forums/about45347-20.html+Talon+Gannon+October+6&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

BLOGGER COMMENTARY IMMEDIATELY, BELOW. GANNON'S ARTICLE QUOTED (PERHAPS) FOLLOW

And if you recall, from his October 6, 2003 article he says this:

Some have suggested that his clear partisanship cast doubt on the findings in his report.

As detailed by Cloud above, the CIA (presumably, because he just says "intelligence" officials) would not confirm that Plame suggested this or even that she was identified by name. Neither would Novak's CIA source. So how is Gannon able to make this claim definitively... he may not have seen the memo, but someone definitely told him about it. It is possible that he just decided to use the info from Novak and Cloud to paint Wilson into a corner, but there is no way he would have known that this was indeed accurate and then his "gotcha" moment (i.e. Wilson lied to me) would have been for naught since no one went on the record (other than Novak's "two senior administration officials") to verify the claim. This is also the first time Gannon drops all qualifiers - i.e according to reports, some say, etc.

Except, once Gannon thought the storm had passed, he reveals that he was leaked the memo, or at least told of its contents... (sometime last year in an article on his website

THE ABOVE IS COMMENTARY BY THE BLOGGER - GANNON'S ARTICLE QUOTED BELOW (MAYBE)

"<http://www.jeffgannon.com/Jeff%20Gannon's%20Washington/joe_wilson_lied_and_owes_bush_an.htm Joe Wilson Lied and Owes George W. Bush and America (and Me) an Apology>".

There is no date stamp on the article)


A memo written by an INR (Intelligence and Research) analyst who made notes of the meeting at which Wilson was asked to go to Niger sensed that something fishy was going on. That report made it to the outside world courtesy of some patriotic whistleblower that realized that a bag job was underway.
....

The classified document that slipped out sometime after the meeting put her name before the public, albeit a small group of inside-the-beltway types, but effectively ended the notion that she was still covert.

....

I raised all of these questions with Wilson in October 2003 in an interview for Talon News. Since I was aware of the INR report, I confronted him about it.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-21-05 10:54 AM
Response to Reply #22
24. NOT THE 10-06-03 ARTICLE - A LATER GANNON RECOLLECTION
How does one say this - I don't think there's evidence here to refute Gannon's alibi. Was never able to find Gannon's 10/06/03 article. Looked again at the DailyKos Timelime (several postings above) which contains an extract that does not make reference to any classified materials. The account immediately above is not the 10/06 article, but is instead a later (undated) recollection by Gannon. The Blogger's commentary is very misleading.

Gannon could very well have learned what he knew from 10/17/03 WSJ article prior to his inverview with Wilson.

This doesn't mean that someone didn't share classified materials with Gannon, but there just isnt sufficient evidence to support that charge based on the above materials. My apologies to Kurtz on this one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-22-05 12:14 PM
Response to Reply #24
25. That is the crux of the matter.
There is no evidence to refute Gannon's alibi. I wish more people here would deal with that.

I applaud your intellectual honesty on this. May it spread like wildfire.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oasis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-22-05 12:19 PM
Response to Original message
26. Kurtz dives headlong into the Gannon story,investigative journalism lives.
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue May 07th 2024, 06:29 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC