Larry Johnson "Leopold Had Multiple Sources"

Larry_Johnson (1 posts)

It is not just Jason Leopold. Joe Wilson heard the same from other sources. And, more importantly, Jason is reporting based on multiple, more than two, sources. His editors realized what a big story this is and did the appropriate checking before posting. They are called Truth Out for a reason. Getting the truth out.

Posted with Larry's permission from this thread http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=1183131&mesg_id=1183804

Thank You Larry for the info.

I think I'll pour another whisky... to celebrate. No sense holding back. :)

kudos!

Things are good!

I tended to believe the Leopold story....this one is too big not to be very, very careful. Unless someone is scamming big time, I think it is true.

::praying::

But never mind their track record. We'll find out next week.

where truthout ran Wayne Madsen.

Please.

...Nice try, but no cigar.

They are called Truth Out for a reason. Getting the truth out.

:)

All the naysayers will be called the "Truthhurts". LOL! :hi:

:grr:

Posted by TalkLeft
May 13, 2006 11:55 PM
Yes, he's standing by the story. And yes, I believe him. As to when it will be announced, that's a different story, because of Bush's speech planned for Monday night. They may hold it until Tuesday or even after.


http://talkleft.com/new_archives/014835.html

She had said in an earlier post there that she had been in contact with Jason by email all day/night.

:applause:

...and I'm guessing that Johnson & Wilson are two people who are in the know ;)

Fair Game

Fair Game

Fair Game

Fair Game

Fair Game

Fair Game

Fair Game

Fair Game

Fair Game

Fair Game

Fair Game

Fair Game

:toast:

Welcome to DU, Larry_Johnson.

:hi:

in this place ever sleep? :)

:)

well, almost always. ;) :hi:

This time. ;) :hi:

We here at DU all know this administration will do their best to keep this secret as long as possible. We also know the MSM will do all they can to help protect this bunch of thugs.

has become. Silly, silly us. I did expect at least a web-exclusive at 3am, posted for 5 minutes and then archived. They didn't even bother with that.

I guess we should retire the term corporate media for them and just go with corporate organ.

Thanks to Mr. Johnson for adding this information to the discussion. There are some people who, though I do not know them, I have a good deal of respect for. He is one. Joseph Wilson is another. And, as I have said before, although I only "know" Will Pitt from this forum, I respect that he has a love of journalism, and appreciation for the role it should play in our culture, and he is invested in doing his job correctly.

The truth is that a number of journalists in Washington have heard from reliable sources that something big has happened to Mr. Rove. Another respected journalist on another forum had speculated a while back that a number of other administration officials could be indicted, perhaps on a monthly basis, in the next 5-7 months. It's important that we recognize the distinction between these two: the first is something that many people around Washington have been told HAS happened, while the second is a journalist making a prediction of what has happened.

Why isn't the "mainstream" corporate media reporting on things Rove? That's an interesting question, but let's expand on it, at least for a moment. News teams were going to be at the courthouse Friday. On Thursday evening, there were commercials on MSNBC promising reports on Hardball on the grand jury and on Rove's situation. Same thing for Scarborough Country. Why didn't David Shuster even mention the grand jury, or Rove? Is it likely that the journalists decided it was no longer a story of interest? Or was there a decision made somewhere else, to hold off on a specific story?

with the Truthout story.

"Why isn't the "mainstream" corporate media reporting on things Rove? That's an interesting question, but let's expand on it, at least for a moment. News teams were going to be at the courthouse Friday. On Thursday evening, there were commercials on MSNBC promising reports on Hardball on the grand jury and on Rove's situation. Same thing for Scarborough Country. Why didn't David Shuster even mention the grand jury, or Rove? Is it likely that the journalists decided it was no longer a story of interest? Or was there a decision made somewhere else, to hold off on a specific story?"


I don't doubt that Rove has a sealed indictment but when did it happen? Why is the MSM holding back? Why did Fitz tell Rove's attorney's that Rove had "24 hours to get his affairs in order" but then we haven't seen Rove booked? My questions revolve around some of the details of JL's story but not the fact of the indictment.

I can't imagine they are ignoring the story of a possible/probable indictment Rove. However, after Rathergate from almost 2 years ago, I'm guessing that there may be some fear there on the part of MSNBC (and others) after what happened to Dan Rather & 60 Minutes almost 2 years ago when they had a fact-based report on Bush's past that was just missing one dotted i in the facts behind the story.

It doesn't excuse them from not going with the story... just that there may be extra caution on their part until Fitzgerald actually schedules a news conference.

looking at this in the context of the Watergate model. Of course, it is not perfect, but it may shed some light on current events.

A few people who claim a media back-ground have stated on DU that a news report on the Rove situation requires a document or a copy of a document, rather than "rumors" from people in the hallways of the Washington buildings. Well, thank goodness Woodward & Bernstein went on the "rumors" of the Deep Throat operation.

It has been stated that Woodward & Bernstein had two sources for everything they brought to their editor, and that Leopold fails to meet that requirement. First, that claim reflects a profound ignorance of what happened before, and what is happening now. B&W at times relied upon Mark Felt. Though Felt often pointed them to others, there were times that he alone was their source. Next, Mr. Leopold has reported that he relies upon sources -- plural -- and that has been backed up on DU by his editor, Will Pitt, and by Larry Johnson. This does not mean that two sources insures that no errors can or will take place, any more than a "document" is proof positive.

During the Watergate era, the Washington Post was not the only newspaper reporting on the scandal. But they did take the lead in many significant areas. They provided reports that no one else dared to, because there was a vindictive administration that made clear that they would punish any news source -- including editors -- that printed certain stories.

Some have asked for "proof" about a letter from Mr. Fitzgerald regarding Rove's status as a target. I have asked that they consider the "proof" that Libby had such a letter. Those with ears hear what I am saying.

In the past 30 months, I believe that the non-mainstream media has reported more accurately on the Plame scandal than the corporate media. In fact, a few people who are close to the scandal have either directly or indirectly made use of the progressive media (particularly the internet) to try to communicate those "rumors" from the hallways of Washington to the public at large. They may be forced to do this because the corporate media is either unwilling or incapable of reporting some of the issues involved. Perhaps a couple examples will help illustrate that: first, we think of Judith Miller not answering to her NY Times editor(s), but instead to "unidentified" sources who provided her with misinformation to spoon-feed the public in a coordinated effort with the WHIG; second, Bob Woodward feigning objectivity on the scandal, when he was in fact a player; and third, Fox News using Newt Gingrich, who left elected office in disgrace, but who is an agent of the shadow government, pretending to be a objective contributor to the discussion of the Plame scandal, when in fact he was an active participant in the WHIG meetings where the "work up" on Ambassador Wilson had its genesis.

Perhaps in a short time, we will see a fuller reporting on the corporate media, which explains not simply why they are not reporting on what Mr. Leopold has reported, but just as significant, on what they had advertised they would be reporting on Friday. As John Lennon said, a conspiracy of silence speaks louder than words.

This morning, on the talk shows FTN had Hadley on, while MTO focused on Newt for the entirety of a half hour +, ABC had David Brooks, the hapless Donna Brazile and George Will making the admins' case and over at Reliable Sources John Stossel. All sorts of cases were made for why we should be spied on and continue to support this admin. And if they weren't talking about that the topic du jour was Hillary Clinton.

The insane thing is that they all think this is happening to "us" not them. So they really don't see it as a problem. There have been all manner of discussion here on DU about the disconnect over the last 5 years and no answer suffices. What will it take to shake the media out of it's zombie state is anyone's guess.

Rove being indicted is a tsunami of a story. The blogs are now burning up with it. Do they think they can get away with not reporting it? God knows they may try, but our ace in the hole is the prosecutor. He'll put the story out. It's just a question of when. Monday, Tuesday? This story is going to keep building and is why we need to keep the conversation going

I don't quite understand why this was done, the indictment, in the dark of night, behind closed doors...I'm sure there is an answer and am banking on FitzG. to give us one. He has worked long and hard to get

*shadow government*

They just informed me that the pretzeldunce will be speaking on the hot button issue (immigration).
This will mean nothing to the righties if Rover goes down. It is only looked on as a witch hunt. The racists want to protect Amurica and the brown people are threatening.

:sarcasm:

they will be brought kicking and screaming to the rove/cheney/us dollar plunging/iraq war debacle/iran trumped up nuclear issue etc., etc, and still put a big newsbunny smilie face on it!

:(

On Tweety's show this morning he said CNN is going to undergo a total revamping because of failing ratings, and MSNBC's is going up. The reason (mho) their ratings are improving are KO, David Shuster, and the reporting he has done on his show regarding Plame. We are the people providing that ratings boost which gives them more advertising dollars. Perhaps there is hope....even if it is for the most basic of reasons.

A friend spoke to a Qwest exec who was knowledgeable about their decision not to give numbers to NASA. According to them, it was purely a business decision. Qwest thought it was illegal especially as they couldn't get anything in writing and as a consequence they would have the pants sued off them. So they passed.

So maybe, if we can make our money speak louder, it will be another wedge in our favor.

*shadow government*

I would like an answer to the MSM question myself.

just based on the grand jury's schedule of meeting on Friday. Was Tweety simply duped by a schedule and his own exuberance? Or did Tweety have some info that seriously led him to believe things were going down on Friday? He expected a public announcement. There wasn't one. Did nothing happen on Friday? Or did something happen but did not culminate in a public announcement as anticipated?

And as you noted, unless I missed something, it appeared to me there was virtually dead air Friday night in regard to the Plame matter and the expectations. Not even a "No announcements from Fitz today but rumors continue to swirl..." Perhaps I just missed relevant coverage but if I didn't my impression is like there was almost a blackout on the story Friday night.

2: I recall when Larry Johnson posted a link on his blog to Larisa's story that Plame's work concerned Iran and nuke proliferation monitoring. At the time she was all alone out there on that info IIRC. And no "legit" media picked up on it. I found that not just interesting but a sort of not so overt affirmation of the story. If Johnson knew or learned what Plame was working on I doubt he would/could say. If the story was suspect or completely unfounded (and he might be in a position to know) would he link to it? JMO admittedly, but I thought not.

Now maybe Mr. Johnson was just all caught up in the moment and just casually posted a link to Leopold's story in an excess of glee and a lack of caution as to the basis and credibility of Leopold's article. But maybe he didn't.

Admittedly, I'm just reading old leftover tea leaves and am just speculating. I'm just not so sure that just because we didn't hear that something happened via the usual corporate venues means nothing happened of any significance.

And ok a third thing: Fitz made it clear at the Libby indictment press conference that grand jury stuff is secret and that which does not result in or is related to an indictment won't be public. He's not an independent prosecutor and there will be no report of findings. So whoever may have cooperated and cut a deal to avoid indictment and much other stuff may never be revealed. (And yeah, that irks me to no end. LOL)

:(

With Marc Ash's latest posting, stating that others in the "msm" have backed their reporting of the incident, but were told by the powers that be at their respective outlets that they can not discuss it, it fits with what you have posted just fine.

I, too, have asked that similar questions about the media stakeout that day. If all the cameras were there, what, exactly, did they say that they aren't talking about?

rely so heavily on the MSM. Have we not had enough already people??!!
I trust Truthout.

protested against the Iraq invasion BEFORE it occurred, look how well the MSM covered the Colbert appearance, one can go on and on about how the MSM has been vigilant - NOT - at getting the story out. They only do the 30 second blurb on stories that are harmful to the bush admin when the can no longer avoid it. Right now, they are avoiding the Rove story like the plague.

to go to bed! I'm glad he confirmed what we'd been reading! :thumbsup:

And why do you like dark sunglasses so much?

n/t

Thanks to you and Larry! Happy Mother's Day! :toast:

Larry I have heard your reports on the media and they sound reliable to me. I hope you will spend some time with us on DU in the future.

--IMM

and trusts them. Larry Johnson is right on top of the Plame case.

see link

http://noquarter.typepad.com/my_weblog/

is one in the same.

And it's ridiculous for these other people to claim that this really is Larry Johnson.

I think it is him because why would someone go to the trouble of posing as him, just to say they believe a report? Sure it could be a fake. It doesn't matter that much to me either way. It is kind of funny if he is a poser.

I got some info about it via e-mail today from a professional listserv (I'm a librarian).

http://processmediainc.com/press/mini_sites/news_junkie/

repeatedly. I know they are diligent in their efforts and would not put out such a declaration unless they were certain for it to be true.

God bless ya Larry, and God bless all that are working to hard to get the truth out.

Rumor #1: Joe Wilson heard the same from other sources, etc.

Rumor #2: Claiming that this is the REAL Larry Johnson, ex-CIA agent.

Is there a reason why you created a DU thread that simply duplicates another DU thread? In my book, that's called "spamming".

And it's a good thing this thread was created because the naysayers stunk up the other thread and had the mods lock it.

Cheers!

Crossposting can be beneficial to those who have been away from the computer.

I stated that I was posting it, with Larry's permission, and linked to the original post as well.

Can't get much easier than that to see that it was crossposted from another thread.

Not meaning to bust any humps, it's just that it was there from the getgo, so I don't understand the other comments made in this thread about spamming. :shrug:

I thought it was well worth a thread of its own, especially for those who are familiar with Larry Johnson's stand in the Plame case.

Spam, schmam...don't worry about those who find it easier to stand out by whining. In particular, I get annoyed with those who choose to take a self-martyred stand against Leopold just in case he turns out to be wrong.

My thinking in regard to Leopold is, here is someone who is breaking his back digging for facts, putting his reputation on the line by reporting what he has learned, & I'm appreciative of the information. He says he has more than 2 sources; I believe him.

I feel that those who are genuinely skeptical would have come off looking more respectful if they had ignored the threads on Leopold's article or had been more tactful by saying, "I will wait (until the MSM, who happens to have the reputation of shielding the WH, verifies Leopold's story)." I don't trust the MSM. If anything, I wait until the left bloggers verify their information. I can't wait until the ungrateful have been proven wrong.

Emotions are running high so some of the hand wringing is understandable.

I, too, thought that this post deserved a post of it's own. The fact that Larry couldn't do it for himself was not lost on me, so I offered. Important news needs to get out.

Here's hoping that we have much to celebrate in the coming week! :cheer:

Thanks Sydnie! :hi:

I, Larry Johnson, owner of NoQuarter.typepad.com, do solemnly swear that I am the one who posted the piece re Jason Leopold. Check it out on my blog. I spoke with Joe yesterday. We're all hopeful that the sources who spoke to Jason and Joe separately aren't doing drugs of some sort.
LJ

We are all a twitter with excitement ... and after waiting for so long, nerves are wearing a bit thin, I fear.

Here's hoping that we see you posting here more often.

who deeply appreciate the difficult stands you've taken for truth, for the Wilsons, for the integrity of the CIA as an honorable institution, and for the rule of law.

Very glad to have you here, whenever you have an opportunity to join us.


:patriot:

I've enjoyed reading your work and look forward to seeing more of you here!

:hi:

I have been following your opinions since the day you, Vince Canistraro, & Jim Marcinkowski testified during the Democratic committee hearing back in October 2003. The testimony was riveting & heartfelt.

Thanks for responding here!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

Thanks for your input & love your blog!!!:patriot:

How's Ambassador & Mrs Wilson taking the news?

Thanks for this and, your valiant efforts to hold this administration accountable for their wicked, wicked deeds.

*shadow government*

Thanks for keeping us "current"...

:hi:

You've made a tense period of uncertainty a little bit easier.

Welcome to DU! :toast:

(snicker)

Very cool of you to join us.

:hi:

Thank you

...

:hi:

:yourock:

Did you apologize?

:rofl:

:spray:

Too funny, my friend!

bad, bad atheist...:spank:

Sid :evilgrin:

I saw several points of views reflected there - Luskin law firm, Rove's entourage just to name a few. And the paralysis in the media response? Helooo! The puppetmaster is otherwise engaged - so the puppets can't dance.

Anyone verify if this is the real Larry Johnson?

No, really. I am. ChavezSpeakstheTruth can vouch for me. PM me for details.

Well, I actually thought I'd have to die to ask you...

But what it like to be in such close company with Marilu's tatas for all of those years?!

:rofl:

confirmed that he had posted here.

...were this not the real fellow.

Most posters just ignore it.

That was such good reading. I love it when those well moneyed lawyers and politicians get their utopias disturbed.

:kick:

:hi:

Please confine discussion of this topic to this thread link here. Thanks!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1224473