WoodWard In Layman's Terms

So, let me see if I got this right.

Cheney is pissed off at Wilson for the letter to the New York Times. Cheney's talking to Woodward all the time anyway because Woodward has become a mouthpiece for the Administration. Woodward will write up anything if it will keep him in intimate contact with power. That intimate contact is essential for Woodward because his ability to make his living writhing books, along with occasional reporting, depends on it.

In a conversation between Cheney and Woodward Cheney calls Wilson everything but legitimate and discloses Valerie Plames's secret identity. In disclosing Wilson's wife's occupation - something which is illegal to do - Cheney hopes the nepotism angle will find its way to print. Essentially Cheney says (my version of what was said) to Woodward, 'That son of a bitch Wilson should be taken out and shot and his wife fired. The only reason he got the free ride to Africa in the first place was because his wife's a spy at the CIA and recommended him'. This would seem to ignore the fact that the mission to Africa was initiated by the Vice President's Office but that is another story.

Woodward doesn't catch the hint and never publishes the anti-Wilson smear. Just telling one source, Cheney to Woodward, wasn't enough. So Cheney tells his under underling (Libby) to get on the phone to a bunch more reporters and tell enough of them so that the smear gets published. Libby leaks the information to a half a dozen reporters, including Judith Miller, who he happens to be banging, and the lowest one of that select group - Robert Novak - finally puts the smear in print.

Later on all this blows up and Woodward is standing there saying to his own dull self ... "Shit, I knew that!"

Of course Woodward was having a bit of a senior moment earlier when he testified before the Grand Jury that he had not got Plame's identify from Libby. In fact Libby hadn't even bothered to mention the connection to Woodward - why bother? It didn't sink in months earlier when the boss tried.

It just seems odd that Woodward would not have volunteered the information that he had indeed not heard the information from Libby but that he had heard it earlier from someone else in the White House. Would not that lack of disclosure itself be an obstruction of justice?

I think that pretty much describe whats going on.

You suggest that Cheney was reacting to Wilson's OpEd piece in the NY Times.

The timeline doesn't back that up.

Both Woodward and Miller testified to being told by Cheney's right-hand men weeks before the piece was written that Wilson's wife worked for the CIA.

Why did her name even come up then?

There was something else going on there that I think Fitzgerald will figure out.

It makes me smile and I hope it makes others smile, too.

written.

I've seen a few web sources say that Wilson was talking to media denizens about what he found/didn't find for a few weeks before his editorial was published, but haven't seen that claim sourced very well. If true, it means Wilson's name would have started to surface as reporters asked about his claims weeks before his op/ed piece was published, and the WH would have started asking about who this Wilson fellow was, what he was doing in Niger, and what he was doing talking to various media folk.

Of course, the questions would have been behind-the-scenes, and the WH response would have been behind the scenes.

and made this up hoping to help Libby out so Libby wouldn't rat on Cheney and bring down the neocon administration he so adores

They kept leaking until someone delivered the goods for them to the newpapers. Novakula was happy to comply.

Mz Pip
:dem:

that Woodward was spinning the repug angle on MSM but not disclosing what he knew, pretending to be an uninvolved observer, while simultaneously discrediting the prosecutor and the alleged crime.

Just put that part in immediately after Woodward says "Shit, I knew that".

That sounds likely-I have not heard anything else about the Libby-Miller relationship. I kept wondering when sex would enter the equation. Has anyone else seen or heard anything about a possible relationship between these 2????

Cozy might be another word I might choose to peak your imagination.

NYT. Kristof's May 6, 2003 article with a thinly veiled anonymous former ambassador talking about his trip to Niger in 2002. Wilson had already been a critic of the Administration and publicly said they had info that the Niger claims were bogus as far back as March.

According to the indictment, Libby was talking to State Dept getting info on Wilson in late May. By June 12 several Admin folks were sharing info re: Wilson and his wife among each other. At least three people, including Cheney told Libby by that time.

Woodward's source most likely is not Cheney and speculation to that effect in the media apparently ignores Woodward's own statement regarding his testimony. Woodward notably did not publicly specify the date of his dicussion with his source. Only said "mid June." If one reads Woodward's statement in the WaPo, it appears he hadn't yet spoken to Cheney since on June 23 he was telephoning Libby about submitting questions to him that he wanted to discuss with Cheney. (On June 23 Libby also first meets with Miller and talks about Wilson and his wife.) On June 27 Woodward meets with Libby and gives him the questions for Cheney. That suggests Woodward had not yet talked to Cheney and thus Cheney wasn't his source in "mid June."

Previous to that, on June 20 he talked to someone else (presumably Andrew Card) who he also said was not his source. So the source was someone he spoke to in mid June, who was not Libby or Card. And again, he hadn't yet talked to Cheney.

Woodward was working on a book, doing research. And saving the good bits for his book publisher not the WaPo. He sat on it and not from fear of being subpoenaed as he claims, since there was no investigation at all until around October of that year. And the investigation was seemingly going no where until Ashcroft recused himself and Fitz was made special counsel on December 30. And no subpoenas were issued to journalists until about May 2004, almost a year after Woodward's chats with WH staff. Meanwhile he uses his "credibility" and reputation for "integrity" to trash the Plame investigation without disclosing his own personal knowledge of the case.

Only when he no doubt was tipped off that his source was going to talk to Fitzgerald and Woodward knew he would be dragged in to talk to Fitz, does Woodward tell his WaPo bosses.

Woodward hadn't previously been drawn into the case. He hasn't testified before any grand jury. Monday he gave a deposition under oath to Fitzgerald.

Despite Libby's lawyer's claims, it doesn't change the case against Libby.

company out of the way?

but, for example, I don't agree that Woodward had a "senior moment". I think Woodward is an accomplished liar and dissembler.

There is another facet to the smear, too, I think.

WE, the masses, now know about Cheney's war with the CIA. But back then I think only the cognoscenti really knew about this. I think when Cheney/Libby/etc. decided what nasty thing they were gonna say about Wilson, it was not only a charge of "nepotism", but also, the idea was, "Hey, look, of COURSE this Joe Wilson guy would talk bad about us! He's in with the CIA crowd! Of COURSE the guys we're fighting with would say bad stuff about us! So it's no big deal--someone's enemy ALWAYS says bad stuff about him!"