Twilight of the Idols Speculation .....

Part One:

{1} Bob Woodward had been told by an unidentified senior official from the White House that Wilson's wife was a CIA analyst/operative. The person who told him was not Libby or Rove.

{2} Bob Woodward had a degree of access to previously classified information when writing "Plan of Attack" and "Bush at War" that shocked intelligence experts. He did not violate the law, because he got the information from the president and vice president.

{3} Two senior White House officials had told Robert Novak about Valerie Plame. One was Karl Rove. The other remains unidentified publicly; however, there is reason to believe that others know his/her identity.

{4} Dick Cheney was Lewis Libby's original source for Plame's identity. Scooter, however, has been charged with five counts of lying to investigators and the grand jury investigating the case.

{5} Leaks from attorneys for both Rove and Libby have been the source for much of the "inside" information on the case. It appears that each camp has reason to direct attention at other people potentially involved in the case.

{6} Chris Matthews, of MSNBC's Hardball, was the first journalist to warn Joe Wilson that Rove called to tell him that "Wilson's wife is fair game." In the past couple of weeks, Matthews has been focused on VP Cheney's possible role in the scandal.

{7} John dean has stated that he believes the case is headed in a direction that will result in VP Cheney's resignation.

{8} Bob Woodward, who has been a critic of Fitzgerald's investigation, reveals that he had inside information on this case.

Part Two:

{1} Who told Woodward about Plame?

{2} Who was the first person to tell Novak?

{3} Who decided to release information on Woodward's role?

{4} Who are they trying to protect?

(5) Does Matthews know that that Cheney was talking to select reporters, something he normally does not do?

{6} If Joe Wilson's information was "no big deal," what information was such a big deal that Cheney took such a proactive role?

Here's my answer and why:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x5367957

Libby's attorneys, who had suggested they would go with a "constitutional defense" on the morning of his arraignment, will attempt to show that numberous journalists had been told about Valerie Plame. While this does not change the simple fact that Scooter purposely lied to investigators and the grand jury, it does hint at his purpose for attempting to cover up the truth. His attorneys are going to play hardball, though they are putting the pressure on the White House.

fit together? It's starting to appear that we are getting to the end of this puzzle and the big picture is beginning to appear.

:hi:

which have far more posts than my feeble effort, the question of if people like Cheney, Woodward, and Libby thought that Plame's identity was classified or secret is being discussed.

In an effort to pump new life into this faltering thread, I would remind people of the third section of Fitzgerald's indictment of Libby, specically paragraph 13:

"Shortly after publication of the article in The New Republic, Libby spoke by telephone with his then Princiipal Deputy and discussed the article. That official asked Libby whether information about Wilsn's trip could be shared with the press to rebut the allegations that the Vice President had sent Wilson. Libby responded that there would be complications at the CIA in disclosing that information publicly, and that he could not discuss the matter on a non-secure telephone line."

Sounds like Libby knew there was something sensitive there, does it not?

that Plame's identity was well known?

A: If we move on to the next section of the indictment, regarding on Scooter's actions after Wilson's op-ed, we find paragraph 16 answers this:

"On or about July 7, 2003, Libby had lunch with the then White House Press Secretary and advised the Press Secretary that Wilson's wife worked at the CIA and noted that such information was not widely known."


Q: Wouldn't this indicate that information leaked by one defense attorney, that suggested the White House Press Secretary first learned about Plame by reading a memo that Colin Powell had on a trip on AF1?

A: Yes, it exposes yet another lie. DUers should be aware that there will be sophisticated disinformation campaigns involved in this case.

:kick:

orchestrated the entire leak situation, just as he has done so with the war, I wonder if this Woodward business brings B*** into play? The ultimate achilles heel for this administration. After all he is the one who has made Woodward's 2 books possible and has given him unusual access. And what is BW up to here? Speculation is that his testimony may let Libby off the hook and Libby's lawyers are saying about FitzG. "see, he doesn't know everything!" And consider how critical Woodward has been about FitzG. So what is Woodward really up to? Been called in to save the baby?

told FBI investigators that he learned about Plame in a phone conversation with Tim Russert. He gave a detailed description of the conversation. However, that conversation -- as recounted by Libby -- never occured. Libby was lying. Hence, he was indicted for this lie.

Now, Mr. Libby is charged on five counts; this one, however, is the key to the other four. The Russert issue is the single most important. In order to be of any value to Mr. Libby, Woodworm would need to offer some evidence that Tim Russert indeed told Libby those things that Libby told FBI investigators and the grand jury.

Because Woodworm has no direct evidence at all about the Libby-Russert conversation, his role is not one of protecting Scooter. That should narrow it down a little.

This presidency is in trouble. It's been reported that daddy said "at all costs save yourself", is Woodward baby's life preserver? Do Libby;s people believe he is there to save him while BW's mission is something else entirely? What is the point of all this, and how, exactly, did this info mange to wiggle it's way out now? Who told FitzG. about Woodward?

about Mr. Woodward? Now there is a fascinating question.

I've used the "mobile over a baby's crib" model, with Bush, Cheney, and Rove all shifting about since Scooter got clipped. Certainly, any one of these three may have. Of them, it may be that Rove and his very capable attorney have had the closest contact with Fitzgerald.

But we would do well to keep an open mind, and be aware that an individual with a last name that starts with the letter "H" has also been looking to stay balanced on the mobile, especially as he fills in some of the Libby space.

To finger anyone but themselves. The trick is going to be figuring out who's really in play now. If Hannah is dipping his wick here, does Libby know, will it tick him off?

as far as I'm concerned.

It has been bothering me all morning; since I first read about this story.

What is very troubling to me is how everything in this administration is so incestuous. Everything is related. Look at the Abramoff scandal. All the Administration's "heavy hitters" are in that up to their ear drums. It's the same with the Plame investigation...all the big players are involved: Bush*, Cheney, Rove, Libby, Hadley, Rice, Matelin, Hughes, Bolton and on and on and on....

So knowing this, there is this "acorn in my chest" about Fitzgerald deciding at the last minute NOT to indict Rove. Rove gave him some information (and no, I don't buy the mitigating circumstances defense being floated by Rove's lawyer) and Fitz just followed up on it....I believe that whatever that information was, it ultimately lead Fitz to Woodward. There's more here than meets the eye.

There's no such thing as coincidence with these people.

We're seeing the picture through a soda-straw lens. We can't see the whole picture. Not yet anyway.

That "mitigating circumstance" business was nonsense.

I do not believe in coincidence.

In fact, was attempting to spin it otherwise on Larry King Show and elsewhere. He lied about a CIA finding that he said found no damage done by the leak....???

Woodward was either:

A: An active participant in the cover-up; or,
B: A "useful idiot" for Cheney and Bush to use like a 2-bit crack whore....

What does Woodward have to gain by aiding and abetting?

I can only speculate. But if I need an electrician, I don't call a gardener. I call an electrician. In this case, I think that someone at the White House needed some type of plumber.

I remember thinking when his last book came out that Woodward seems to be a pressure relief valve for the administration...a way to partially expose minor flaws while hiding bigger ones. Woodward never crosses the line...doesn't ever go from gentle discussion of forgivable administration sins to honest rebuke of misdeeds.

He deserves a seat next to Armstrong Williams, Judith Miller, Guckert, Hannity, and O'Reilly. Fake.

Not to contradict, but my answer to the quiz would have been the unlisted(though it probably should have been an option) all of the above.Seems to me that Bob's an aging fame junkie trying to extend his 15 minutes. Kos and contributors have a pretty good analysis deconstruction of this situation.I can't see that it's going to help the busheviks in any way but I'm interested to see how the kool-aidists and freepers will try to spin it to try to exonerate the whole crew from the family dog on up.

that the jury gets a chance to decide who they believe: Tim Russert or Lewis Libby.

I would put the chances that Russert is lying, and Scooter telling the truth, as about equal to the chances that Jackie had a small pistol in her pink hat, and that she was the source of the magic bullet.

What's with the pretty stones pictured? I've been sick for a few days and the Woodward involvement is news to me. You really fill in the blanks. :hug:

The sub-title of Nietzsche's "Twilights of the Idols" is "How One Philosophizes with a Hammer." Being mildly bored in the early morning hours, I thought that this would be a perfect excuse to post a picture of my collection of artifacts -- including hammer stones -- from Bed 1 of Olduvai Gorge in Tanzania. These are artifacts used by our ancestors an estimated 1.75 to 1.88 million years ago, at the site made famous by the Leaket family.

Also, because I posted this as my morning coffee was brewing, and because my mind was not working well, the picture reminded me a bit of the cover of Paul's album "McCartney," with the cherries outside the bowl. Paul was making a statement about the break-up of the group, and while I don't think we can compare the Ashcroft songs to any of the Beatles', I do think the administration group is breaking up.

I'm glad I asked. :D

How the hell am I supposed to get any work done with threads like this dancing around in my brain?

I ask myself. Being a mad man is, uh, "hard work."

My theory on the stones was that you were making a sort of metaphorical statement about Bu$hco being like a basket of rocks .... as in dumb as a box of rocks... To my credit, I did see the rocks out of the basket as some of the * folks going off the reservation, like rats abandoning a sinking ship.

I like the real story better...

that the rocks can from inside my head, and that their rattling around was what woke me up so early. A cruel joke .... just what one would expect from an Al Haig fan.

Caughtcha!!!!!

You know darn well that's not what I meant :spank:

And leave Al out of this!!! :D

would this be from bush's camp in effort against cheney? I'm thinking there is a divide between the prez & cheney, they are at odds at this point.

Why is that?

That word "Wednesday" seems significant.

Maybe it was FitzG. and something he did that forced Woodward into the open. Considering that the less than credible journalist kept his mouth shut until now one really has to wonder. Did Rove or Libby give him up. And is there now going to be a scramble, as the pieces of the mobile crash into each other, for each of them to knock the others down. I think it's going to get really down and dirty from here on in and will Timmy boy Russert have to come out swinging to save himself and his integrity? So many questions, enough to keep you answering all day into the night and tomorrow.

remember that others connected with MI are trying to influence the investigation. There is that liar that was on Fox last week, saying Wilson told him that Valerie was CIA.

I think he snuck in a little testimony time with Fitzgerald and didn't want to make a big deal of it.

Then the WH had to switch gears and act like things were great with their old buddy. So great everyone couldn't wait to get him in a room alone. No wonder they didn't want any cameras anywhere near some of his high level meetings.

ideas being floated above in this thread, you all will keep me thinking tonight.

Thanx!

Had forgotten about that rhyme

She is protecting someone - I say it's Cheney. And my guess is that Woodward heard it from Bush. Naming Plame was the weekly talking points.

{1} Bob Woodward had been told by an unidentified senior official from the White House that Wilson's wife was a CIA analyst/operative. The person who told him was not Libby or Rove.

That would seem to leave either Cheney or Bush? And, I may be wrong, but since Woodward's books were mostly about Bush and he had unprecedented access to Bush himself, is it not at least possible that Woodward's 'source' was Bush himself?

{2} Bob Woodward had a degree of access to previously classified information when writing "Plan of Attack" and "Bush at War" that shocked intelligence experts. He did not violate the law, because he got the information from the president and vice president.

Is this really true? Is it not true that if a journalist or even private citizen, becomes aware of what they know to be classified information, they must report it to the proper authorities and not disseminate it themselves?

I'm not really clear on this but trying to recall the law which stated that those who have security clearance should not even 'verify' such information, if they learn that it is in the possession of the press, eg. That is why Rove and Libby, both of whom did verify the information were thought to be in legal jeopardy, isn't it?

But, I'm not clear whether this would extend to members of the press. Maybe someone knows more about the law regarding this.

{6} Chris Matthews, of MSNBC's Hardball, was the first journalist to warn Joe Wilson that Rove called to tell him that "Wilson's wife is fair game." In the past couple of weeks, Matthews has been focused on VP Cheney's possible role in the scandal.

If Rove actually told Chris Matthews about Valerie Plame, isn't he guilty of violating the law based on this alone? I know that Rove did not have the clearance to have this information at the time, so someone else told Rove, however, once he knew, was he not obliged to keep it to himself?

Thank you for this post, H2O MAN, I was no aware that Woodward had been questioned by the Special Prosecutor.

puts to rest the theory that Fitzgerald had stopped investigating. The news about Woodward being questioned on Monday by Fitzgerald came out last night, as I'm sure you have seen on the many wonderful, related threads today.

Clearly, there is a lot going on beneath the surface. Were I to venture a guess, I'd say that things do not look good for Vice President Spiro Cheney at this point.

Repubs despise Woodward for his role in taking down their hero, Richard Nixon. They would love to pin something, anything, on Woodward.

that many republicans felt Woodward hurt the country. On the other hand, many republicans believed he did the right thing. I think that the second group held more power then, and that they do today.

Alignment in the Heavens occurred when Fitzgerald was appointed the Special Prosecutor. His need for the Truth and his Love for the Law have given him an unassailable platform. That is much to the chagrin of the Bush (Mis)Administration.

This is now a forensic investigation. Libby was sloppy in the way he executed the leak. Cheney was committing a crime in full view of the media and the media is wholly complicit. Libby announces his legal strategy is to put the media on trial and lo and behold today Woodward has to turn on his political patrons and *journalistic* benefactors. Meanwhile, Judy Miller had notes. Woodward has to have notes somewhere - it would be completely out of character for him not to have notes.

Fitzgerald is coming at Cheney from multiple fronts on the criminal intent front. The journalists, Cheney's staff and the president's staff have major competing agendas. The current crop of *witnesses* also have to prove good intentions which means corroborating evidence and multiple sources.

The delicious irony of Woodward being a scholar and original player in the Watergate scandal just makes this rich with parallels. Karma is making itself known in a myriad of ways. Woodward the big defender of Judy is now officially rolling around in the slime with her. Judy Woodward the new journalistic low.

Fitzgerald is slowly but surely unraveling the Bush Gordian Knot. The more Fitzgerald tugs the rope, the more the Bush administration unravels.

Seriously great stuff H20Man! You should ALWAYS regularly publish on Wednesday for your fans! :toast:

Off to get some :popcorn: Need more Fitzmas wrapping paper too...

I mentioned that one of my relatives has come to know Mr. Woodward in the approximate time period of the Plame scandal being investigated by Mr. Fitzgerald. This relative believed Woodward's tale that Judith is a noble human, jailed for the sake of journalistic conscience. No longer; the articles in the NY Times after Judith's testimony changed that.

I have warned my relative that Mr. Woodward is a snake. I thought he was a snake decades ago, and have not changed in that opinion.

First I have to make a correction to my previous post in this thread regarding not being aware of Woodward's role in the Plame leak. I was just reminded that Woodward's role was discussed on the day after the indictment of Libby here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=5219462

Thanks to the DUer who drew our attention to that thread.

Also, I just heard an interview on MSNBC with a WAPO reporter on Woodward's involvement.

So, back to Fitzgerald. The reporter was asked if the revelation that Woodward knew of Valerie Plame's identity in June of 2003, and BEFORE the earliest proof of Libby's knowledge (his meeting with Judy Miller), would this now help Libby's defense, since Fitzgerald had stated that Libby was the first to reveal Valerie Plame's identity. While I don't have the timeline of when Woodward apparently spoke about Plame's ID, the WAPO journalist seemed to be saying that we now know that Woodward was the first, not Libby, to reveal her identity.

The question DUers asked back in the above linked thread about who told Woodward, and when, is now being asked again, it seems.

The main question in the above thread was 'who told Woodward that no damage had occured as a result of the leak' a statement he made definitively and without the qualifier 'sources tell me'. Another well-known reporter, Greenspan's wife, made the same statement, btw. Who gave her that information?

That also reminded me that Fitzgerald had demanded records of who had attended a WH dinner. The list of guests is not available, except that we know Greenspan and his wife, Andrea Mitchel, were there. I wonder who else was on that list who attracted the interest of Fitzgerald? Woodward, maybe?

Libby's meeting with Miller is not "the earliest proof of Libby's knowledge" of Plame. It is well-documented that he knew about her significantly earlier.

Also, was it during the press conference that Fitzgerald said Libby was the first to reveal Plame's identity? It sounds familiar, but looking through the indictment, I do not find that.

Strange case, eh?

without reading the transcript again. But, it seems that Libby's lawyers are now jumping on the revelation that someone, not Libby, leaked the information to Woodward (in mid-June, 2003) to say that Fitzgerald was wrong to conclude that Libby was the first official to contact reporters with the information (ie, his June meeting with Judith Miller). I agree with you that Libby knew before that, but it's the revelation to reporters, his lawyers are focusing on, not when he knew privately.

It sounds familiar to me too, and I'm assuming that Fitzgerald may have said Libby was the first official to speak to reporters.

But Woodward is not revealing who his source was. It was not Libby, and a spokesperson for Rove, says it was not Rove.

Woodward did not tell his editors at WAPO either until recently. He claims to have 'mentioned it' to Walter Pincus, but Pincus denies that, and says Woodward didn't mention it to him until October of 2003!

It's interesting that Woodward became a spokesperson on the leak without revealing his own role in it, basically downplaying the importance of it . Just like Judy, when she reported on Dr. Kelly's death without revealing her own relationship with him. Both of them Pulitzer prize winners!!

So, there are questions now regarding Woodward. Shouldn't he have gone to Fitzgerald himself as soon as the investigation began?

Who told Fitzgerald of Woodward's role? The WAPO article says that 'an official' told Fitzgerald, one week after the Libby indictment. Was the same official who spoke to Woodward in June, 2003 and why reveal that only after Libby's indictment?

And of course, who is the 'official' who spoke to Woodward? I have three possible suspects ~ Bush himself, Cheney, or Rumsfeld.

The other question is, was the 'official' who alerted Fitzgerald to Woodward's role trying to help Libby? If Libby is protecting Cheney, then that would mean the 'official' is in Cheney's camp, and might have been pointing a finger at the Bush camp, assuming there is a split ~

was in the news conference.

I would suggest that there is a person who is a suspect in the case, who has a legal team that is in contact with Fitzgerald. That person has a vested interest in pointing a pudgey finger at VP Cheney.

Could be. Trying to protect Bush and make a deal to save himself. After all, from the beginning, many observers did say that Rove was not that important as a target ~ just a slimey, political hack. And, he'd probably be finished as far as that goes, in terms of trust, if he gave up Cheney ~ just to protect himself.

Fitzgerald and the defense attorneys will show the level of access and opportunity because it will go to motive. The media is in a vice grip and potentially ruining their chances of getting a federal shield law by being in bed with the bush administration. The media is turning tricks for free meals with members of the Cheney administration. Russert, Mitchell, Woodward, Miller, & Cooper would be the target audience for this administration. One weekly, one national newspaper and one network - ordered up by the Cheney administration.

Fitzgerald wants more than one person to confirm that the information was had earlier than stated by Libby or Miller. Fitz is aiming to prove that they KNOWINGLY lied and conspiracy is justified. He is not showing everything all at once because this involves the incestuous web that is political Washington.

Bob Woodward is the Assistant Managing Editor of WaPo and decides what gets in the paper and where to place the stories...

:popcorn:

As much as I enjoy following new leads in this fascinating and important case, I also find myself feeling sad not only that our government is so corrupt ... but also the betrayal of the public trust by the media. I expect the corporations that own the tv stations and newspapers to be without conscience, but for whatever reason, I still hold out hope that the journalists would have some degree of integrity.

higher esteem than the public. That is an indictment on them personally and the quality of work product that they bring to the public square. It saddens me terribly that credibility and integrity is rare and unusual. Hopefully, we will one day be able to rejoice at the dawning of aresponsible Age of Enlightenment & Reason in journalism and politics.

You sleep with dogs you get fleas.

source of Plame's name?

It is possible Bush knew about Plame. It is certain that Cheney did.

crimes against America and the world.

to see the polls that show the majority of Americans think he lied to the country in order to bring us to war in Iraq. And that a larger majority thinks Cheney was involved in the Plame scandal.

I think that the current information that Fitzgerald is uncovering will damage the administration even further.

take away from this experience is to never trust politicians who want to run the government like a business. There are not many democratic businesses, there are not many moral business.

I remember some Republican official referring to us as "customers." It is difficult to offend me, but a government official calling us "customers" was deeply offensive. I am not a customer, I am not a consumer, I am a citizen. Such mentality is why the Republican model will fail. They have little knowledge or love for democratic forms of government. All they know is the bottom line of business.

A president is not a CEO. A CEO is only accountable to his shareholders. It appeared that bush, the CEO saw the shareholder as the wealthy and powerful business interests. We were just customers.

To make matters worse, he didn't believe in the customers always being right. If we disagreed, we were "small focus groups." Well, these "little focus groups" are growing, and they will show up at the polls Nov 7 2006.

the corporate approach to government and the total lack of responsiveness to the concerns of the average citizen is campaign finance. At this point, the federal government is bought, paid for and owned by the interests with the money that fund the campaigns, primarily corporations and the wealthy. That goes for both parties. The first law of politics is that if you can't raise campaign money, you cannot get elected. Those candidates who are brought to the dance owe those what brung 'em. That's why we get all this garbage that benefits special interests and screws the rest of America. If we don't go after campaign finance with a vengeance we will be doomed to having to put up with the kind of jaw-dropping crimes and misdemeanors we are talking about today. In 20 years we'll still be gripping about the same crap, only the names of the politicians will be different.

be the only way out.

of the job - it's the number one requirement in Bushworld.

that will prevent him from paying the price for his crime. Let's see, how about making everything he says declassified after the fact (at the discretion of the president).

body guard. There's more than a few grieving parents out there that would love to rearrange their faces. Just like Pinochet never getting a moment's peace, members of bush's junta will have to look over their shoulders for the rest of their lives. They will not be able to travel to many countries out of fear of arrest.

As far as I am concerned, they have lost the right to be considered part of human society. Their crimes are so great. Even if they escape the courts, they will treated as non persons. they will be shunned. The paths they walk will be spat upon.

I would love to see them spend the rest of their lives in a cold, dark cage, separated from all that's good in life. I want them to experience life as those souls in Abu Ghraib, Gitmo and the secret CIA prisons.

A prison of their own making. Will they care? I do not know,
perhaps they are beyond the pale of human existence and nothing matters to them but their greed. I think that Cheney will not care at all what people think. Bush may.

food, or that the aren't mocking them behind their backs.

Being heckled everywhere they go. Wonder what it is like
to be hated by the entire planet.

I think if they had a brutal domestic police force at their command, they could have made Pinochet look like a slacker.

and I'm still crossing out boxes and putting in circles.

;)

Thanks for laying this all out in such a succinct manner.

What an interesting/mind-blowing irony that Woodward is involved in this scandal, especially given his history in the Watergate matter.

in a private e-mail to another DUer with a long-time interest in the Plame scandal, I mentioned that Chris Matthews was aware of a new development in the case, that related to Cheney's role in passing information on Plame to journalists. This strange case is going to get much stranger between Thanksgiving and Christmas.

this would make sense that it was Woodward. I wonder who is tipping Matthews off at this point. His "turn around" has been amazing. I've wondered why.

Also after all of last weeks blockbuster shows...he appeared this Monday with dyed hair and eyebrows to match. His hair is darker and more red but it looks very fake. I wondered why he would pick now for a hair change... (I know this may sound trivial...but one doesn't usually change ones appearance in the middle of breaking some news very damaging to this Aministration when one has been toadying to them for years, without it being of interest.)

Another thing, Imus interviewd Tweety Monday and at the end kept saying: How are you doing....how are things with you..? It was asked in a way that someone would inquire about an ill family member or a friend who has been through a rough time...there was concern by Imus (hardly someone who seems to have any compassion for anyone but himself.) Matthews said he was doing well and one of his sons in working with Aids Programs in Africa, the other is trying his hand with acting and his daughter is going off to college. He sounded a little off when he replied...a little down.

Just throwing out observations that Tweety seems to be very "wired in" these days and doing a 360 degree turn...has some significance...but I haven't figured out what unless GE/MSNBC's lawyers are scared as hell that Russert, Andrea Mitchell or Tweety might somehow get dragged into all this by Fitz.

David Schuster has been allowed to do the hardest hitting reporting on air that I've seen or ever expected to see. He's been given the "green light" by someone. WHO?

(just a bit of rambling observations here, on my part)

I have a vague recollection of him mentioning at the end of a broadcast recently and doing a short tribute to his dad.

I must tune in to "Hawdbaw" nightly as this is getting very interesting.

That's why Rove was not indicted initially. This was the info he gave Fitz to take some of the heat off of him. Rove is trying to sic Fitz on Cheney. The split in WH between Chimpy and Cheney is real and Rove is trying to save his and Chimpy's ass by serving up the Dick. Rove told Fitz that the Dick told Woody.

I also think Woody was blindsided by this. My bet is that Woody wasn't expecting it and had thought Fitz hit the dead end w/ Libby. This is why he felt safe going around blabbing about how the whole thing was no big deal and why he has been hiding his involvment. If his source was Cheney, he had every reason to believe that his involvement would be very, very protected information and that he could get away w/ pretending he wasn't involved, or in fact that he HAD to pretend he wasn't involved.

Very good. Very good, indeed.

make sense, I have to agree ~ it was always pretty flimsy evidence to think that Rove dissauded Fitzgerald from indicting him based on an email he 'found' showing that he didn't mention Plame!!

This makes way more sense. But, Rove's spokesperson has stated that Rove was not Woodward's source!! He would hardly lie about that now with the Special Prosecutor watching.

Oops, just realized that this is probably true. What we don't know is who told Woodward. But to accept Beetwasher's assessment, that it was Rove who told Fitzgerald about Woodward, Rove would have to know who Woodward's source was, wouldn't he?

Are we to believe that Fitzgerald knows? Did Woodward give up the source to Fitzgerald this week? It's possible Rove did, and Fitz pressured Woodward for verification?

I just heard on the news that Woodward has apologized to the Washington Post for not telling them of his involvement!

Fitz in that direction. So maybe I'm still half right.

there may be a reason that Mr. Hadley approached Fitzgerald on 11-2.

I seem to recall Larry Johnson saying that Hadley was telling friends he expected to be indicted. Perhaps Fitz offered a deal that made it worth his while to sing.

The promotion was an attempt to keep him under thumb.

that Mr. Hadley is in a comfortable position.

There has been an aura of smug, complacency about him whenever he was spinning this case. He also, given his days in naval intelligence, and his ongoing role as an asset for part of the CIA (the neo backers?) maybe thought he was too smart by half and had his bases covered. The reviews on him, today, by other members of the media are not too kind, and it has been pointed out that it wasn't a sense of civic responsibility that brought him forward.

And to those media wonks who keep saying this lets Libby off the hook, think again. The indictment didn't cover the leak, it had to do with perjury and conspiracy. In addition, if there are one or more people leaking or involved in a case, X doesn't cancel out O. They are both subject to the law.

if they believed for even a brief moment that this somehow favors the lads in the White House. Fitzgerald called on Woodward, not the other way around.

as to the subject and context of CM's show today?

The first ladies' shoes?

In Woodward's statement yesterday, he claims the reference to Plame was "casual and off-hand and that it did not appear to be either classified or sensitive." He then writes he "told Walter Pincus without naming my source."

If indeed it was just "casual and off-handed" why did Woodward feel he needed to protect his source?

Woodward is simply hard to believe, because he lies so much.

CNN just showed a clip of Wayward on Larry King lying through his teeth. Any takers on a bet that we see that clip over and over?

It's a classic.

according to Raw Story. Now what else did Hadley spill, and what about Wurmser?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x5376230

watching Hardball.

Aside from R. Cohen, there were some pithy points made and I want to hear them again. Love how CM is not shying away from the Cheney name at all.

I assume you heard him say who he believes leaked to Woodward.

Nothing surprises me. So when schizo Joe said Cheney, adamantly, I didn't fall on the floor.

(1) Woodward says he testified to Fitzgerald on Nov. 14 about his conversations "about small portions of interviews I conducted with three current OR FORMER administration officials" that relate to the.... (investigation).

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/plame/woodward.plameCIA.pdf

(2) The Washington Post article says that: "Fitzgerald interviewed Woodward about the previously undisclosed conversation after the official alerted the prosecutor to it on Nov. 3 -- one week after Vice President Cheney's chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, was indicted in the investigation."

And more, further down in the article:

" It would make the unnamed official (i.e., the official who went to Fitzgerald with this info on Woodward on Nov. 3) -- not Libby -- the first government employee to disclose Plame's CIA employment to a reporter.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/15/AR2005111501857.html?nav=rss_politics/administration

So, Woodward had talked to three current OR FORMER administration officials, and ONE of those (current or FORMER) officials alerted the prosecutor about it on Nov. 3.

November 3rd is AFTER the indictment. Remember, Rove & his attorneys got Rove temporarily off the hook RIGHT BEFORE the indictment. So...it seems to me it WASN'T Rove that told Fitzgerald on Nov. 3 about conversations with Woodward, since Rove was already getting off the hook with something else (temporarily).

We know that Ari Flescher is a "former" administration official who has already been interviewed by Fitz. There are many other officials who have already been interviewed by Fitz, and it could be any one of them who turned in Woodwards name to Fitz.

There is nothing in the statements that would seem to indicate that Bush OR Cheney would go to Fitz and whisper in his ear that THEY are the ones who outed Plame to Woodward before they told Libby. It seems to me that it would be someone, present or FORMER official, who has already spoken to Fitz, and has turned.

Whomever it was that told Fitz, it is someone who is CONFESSING to Fitz that they had spread the Plame message to Woodward, and it's probably NOT the first time that this person has CONFESSED to Fitz that he/she had a part in disclosing the information.

Cheney and Bush just ARE NOT going to be telling Fitz that "hey! Look at Woodward! We told him before Libby!" But Ari Flescher might, and we all know that he saw the fax about Plame!

:kick::kick::kick:


On edit:

Never mind: Hadley is the one who dunnit.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x1929318

He's been very front and center this week as the state dept. defender, not let go of his job. Previously he told friends that he expected to be indicted. Is he off the hook yet, has he coughed up all the fur balls FitzG. wants? My source, otherwise known as the op of this thread posted the following on another thread "the information on Woodward was brought to Fitzgerald's attention on 11-2-05, at about 1:20 pm est." and posted on another

there may be a few sources.

He has been carrying a lot of water for this administration. I have not read any of his books lately, but may need to take them out of the library.

It seems that he has become part of the RW machine.

As an aside, who is this guy Cohen from the WP that was on Hardball? He was frightening to me with the "this is all about nothing" meme. Is he just sucking up to Woodward?

The film clips of him saying the Plame scandal is insignificant, and calling Fitzgerald names was low. When you put it in the context of his having first-hand, inside knowledge about the case that he didn't want to share with Fitzgerald, he becomes a disgusting excuse for an American.

His supervisor doesn't want to trash him today. Give it time. The NY Times didn't want to trash Judith at first.

Fitzgerald is patient and organized. The more lies that are told for cover, or snippets of truth that slip out to protect another of the many who took part in Plame's outing, the more rope they are giving to hang themselves. I see this as a positive development, as the more information Fitzgerald has, both in lies and truth, the stickier the web becomes.

that this should not be viewed as a positive for the administration. Woodward tried to hide his role, and did not want to testify as part of Fitzgerald's investigation.

Forget about Woodward's former role in Watergate. He has shown his true character this time. Not coming forward and telling the truth about what you know to be already true in such an unprecedented time in out country's history, is a most unforgettable crime, and he should be held accountable.

that's for sure

Secret Admirers: The Bushes and the Washington Post

By Michael Hasty

Even before Woodward put the finishing touches on the Post's post-9/11 portrait of George W as a fearless wartime leader, the paper's staff was otherwise busily enhancing the mythic status of Junior's persona—first by downplaying and fogging over the media recount of the voting in Florida, which showed that the only circumstance in which Bush could have occupied the Oval Office was what had actually happened, with the US Supreme Court halting the original vote recount; and then on December 12, 2000, crowning Bush "King of the Christians" in a front page article announcing, "Pat Robertson's resignation this month as President of the Christian Coalition confirmed the ascendance of a new leader of the religious right in America: George W. Bush."

Almost as important as 9/11 in bestowing a Post imprimatur of legitimacy on the Bush regime's occupation of the White House and on its "war on terror" was the newspaper's fierce encouragement of Bush's invasion of Iraq. The pro-war drumbeat on the Post's editorial and op-ed pages was so markedly one-sided that a number of media analysts felt compelled to write about it. Colin Powell's presentation of US "evidence" of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction to the UN Security Council was not only reproduced word-for-word next day in the Post, but it received unreservedly glowing reviews on the front page, the editorial page, and from the Post's entire stable of establishment pundits, from liberal Mary McGrory rightward. The paper richly earned its prewar reputation as "the most hawkish newspaper in America."

<snip>

The most important propaganda stage the Post has built for George W to act the role of "president" upon was, of course, what the corporate media still prefers to portray as the "defining moment" of Junior's reign—the events of September 11. The challenge was made more difficult by Bush's Fredo Corleone performance on the day the attacks occurred. After acting clueless enough to dawdle in front of a classroom of second-graders for nearly a half-hour following the crash of the second plane, he then spent the rest of the day flying erratically around the country ("Just trying to get out of harm's way," as he later told a reporter), and appearing perplexed and too small for his suit as he addressed a national television audience that night.

This was a job for Superman—which the Post provided in the form of its premier Washington insider, presidential chronicler and US Navy Intelligence veteran, the legendary Watergate reporter, Bob Woodward. Along with Post reporter Dan Balz, Woodward employed his impeccable journalistic fellatio in an eight-part, front-page series of articles giving a moment-to-moment White House account of the first days of the "war on terror," inflating the image of a cowardly dauphin into that of a credibly decisive commander-in-chief. The articles became the basis for Woodward's subsequent bestseller, "Bush At War"—which is probably best viewed as a sequel to his book about the first Gulf War, "The Commanders," featuring many of the same characters.

Woodward's relationship to the Bush family is particularly interesting (see Part 1 of this series for more details). For the uninitiated, Woodward fairly successfully inoculated himself from any future suspicion that he might be too close to the subjects of his writing with his historic coverage of the Watergate scandal. In the matrix of the corporate media, Woodward is still portrayed as the archetypal intrepid investigative reporter who, with his scruffy partner, Carl Bernstein, spoke truth to power and brought down a president.

In the real world, Woodward has proven to be uncannily close to the highest centers of power.

More of Part 1:http://www.onlinejournal.org/Media/020504Hasty/020504hasty.html



Part 1 of a two part-series
Secret admirers: The Bushes and the Washington Post

By Michael Hasty
Online Journal Contributing Writer

February 5, 2004—Ever since the days of the Watergate scandal, when a series of front-page articles by Washington Post reporters Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein ultimately led to the resignation of President Richard Nixon, the Post has had a reputation among many Americans as one of the elite bastions of the "liberal media."

This opinion is especially prevalent among conservatives, who also fault the Post for its publication (along with that other "liberal" icon, The New York Times) of the Pentagon Papers—an action they correctly view as having made a major contribution to undermining domestic support for the war in Vietnam. During the '70s, there was an angry conservative boycott of the paper in the Washington, DC, area, with "I Don't Believe the Post" bumper stickers appearing on cars and WP vending boxes.

At the heart of the Post's "liberal" reputation is the sense that its coverage represents the thinking of what used to be known as the "Eastern Liberal Establishment" back in the days when Republicans could be liberals (with a favorable view of internationalism and the welfare state) and before the Establishment moved to Texas and got saved by Jesus, its favorite political philosopher. This was the same period when the Central Intelligence Agency, still dominated by the Establishment Ivy Leaguers who organized the "oh-so-social" OSS in World War II, was also widely seen as a "liberal" institution.

With a 21st-century perspective, where internationalism has become globalization, and monopoly capitalism is so powerful it no longer needs to mask its agenda with welfare programs, we can see the Establishment's "liberalism" for the ruthless neoliberalism it has always been. Yet the more powerful and elite the ruling class, the greater its need for an effective propaganda system to maintain that power; and the Washington Post remains, as writer Doug Henwood described it in 1990, "the establishment's paper."

More of Part2:http://www.onlinejournal.org/Media/021104Hasty/021104hasty.html



During WWII the precursor to the CIA, the OSS, started to develop a psychological warfare strategy to catch up with Nazi's development of principles in Adolph Hitler's 'Mein Kampf' and Edward Bernays' 'Propaganda'.
http://www.icdc.com/~paulwolf/oss/foundations.htm

Intelligence spooks now manage the American 'mainstream media' as a psychological warfare tool. Harry Truman signed into existence the Psychological Strategy Board in 1951 to mandate the CIA with coordinating all propaganda in the US and out.
http://www.trumanlibrary.org/hstpaper/physc.htm
http://www.mega.nu:8080/ampp/roundtable/SPEciaL.html

Woodward was a naval intelligence agent going to the White House to regularly brief the Joint Chiefs of Staff during the Vietnam War. That's where he met Mark Felt, 'Deep Throat,' although there were many FBI men who wanted to help oust the CIA-Nazi cabal that Nixon fronted for Allen Dulles and Prescott Bush.
http://www.webcom.com/ctka/pr196-woodward.html

In 1971 the JCS spied on Nixon because he and Kissinger were making secret peace overtures to China and the USSR and the JCS were horrified to have another 'Kennedy problem.' That is, a president acting as if he was president.
http://prorev.com/hoff.htm

So many in the last five years, all built on fakery and misdirection. Many of us in NY certainly didn't view his speech from the rubble as "noble", as Chris Matthews often describes it. I look for more defining moments to come, but in the future, I hope they are moments which define truth. Great articles SLaD, and shocking confirmation of what we know to be true.

On a different note, Libby's lawyers keep saying today's news is a real boon for him, as FitzG. is wrong, given that he said that Libby was the first person to speak to a journalist. Tonight on KO, he showed a tape where what FitzG. actually said was that Libby was the first KNOWN person. That 5 letter word makes all the difference. It needs to be repeated each time Libby's lawyer spin their unctuous lies.

Do you think Cheney and Bush are worried about Fitzgerald`s investigation or do you think they`re confident they can choreograph another snowjob?

administration has viewed what has happened so far as damaging. I think that there are divisions brewing within different camps; the Rove forces certainly would prefer to blame the Cheney/Libby forces than to accept responsibility. Bush wants to survive as a president with power.I think they will put up a fight in the upcoming months. But it will not be as coordinated as their previous campaigns.

The repugs are going to have to hang together or hang separately. They have a good chance of besting Fitz as long as they lie, spin, delay together. And Bush can pardon everyone in the end anyway.

These have all been certainties but now looking like these two factors are now wild cards. This is going beyond politics to group and individual psychology. Can the group maintain a cohesive stance and lie/spin/delay together? And Bush's mental status is not good. His actions are not predicable anymore, his old time loyalty may be over come with angry vengefulness. So a pardon is not such a sure thing.

This situation is becoming a study in group and individual psychology/dynamics as much as politics.

saying her name at once and it becomes "common knowledge". Rove's assignment-Novak Hadley--Woodward Libby-Miller; Cooper. All orchestrated by Cheney. Now he is going down which is why he is being so unusually vicious. He will go on his own terms, unfortunately.

at the correct answers, and you've laid out some excellent questions there. I'll be waiting for Part Three, which I hope will involve additional Fitzgerald indictments.


Edited to add:
...and the title alone should get some sort of DU award. I can't recommend it, sadly, as I have come across this too late.

For what it's worth, the picture of Armitage was shown on Imus this morning.
Truth is that there are always more minions than we first think of.
:dem: