Why I Believe That Cheney's Office Is the Source of the Two Torture Tapes Story

In a series of DU journals, I have speculated that the "Two Torture Tape" story benefits Cheney, the White House and the NeoCons by drawing media and public attention away from Iran NIE-Gate (which broke only days before) and by making the CIA out to be a bunch of liars and criminals and by supplying payback for Scooter Libby (now the CIA is the one up for obstruction of justice charges). The journals are listed at the bottom of the page. Note the one in bold. It is about the NYT story itself and about the troubling body of work of reporter Mark Mazzetti, whom I believe may have been used by someone with a NeoCon agenda (whether he realized it or not).

Mark Mazzetti broke the "Two Torture Tape" story, without mentioning a source and without questioning the timing of his source(s) motives in revealing this scandal--even though a person would have to be an idiot not to understand that a story about criminal obstruction of justice at the CIA two days after the release of the Iran NIE looked a lot like an attempt to discredit the Iran NIE. Here is his original story.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/07/washington/07intel.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

Although there is no source, the author implies that his source is within the intelligence community with this:



However, the next day, we learn that he has been talking to the White House, because he knows that Harriet Miers knew. This is important. If there is no White House involvement, then Congress is unlikely to drop Iran NIE-gate--an investigation of the lies that Bush and Cheney told about Iran when they knew that country had no nuclear weapons program---in order to pursue Two Destroyed Tapes-gate.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C07E0DA1E31F93BA35751C1A9619C8B63



It worked. After the revelation about Harriet Miers involvement, the left wing bloggo-sphere, Kieth Olberman (and his frequent guest Jonathan Turley) and the Democrats went absolutely wild for Two Torture Tapes-gate.

Harriet Miers name by itself was more likely to have been mentioned by someone at the White House than someone within the CIA. If the CIA was attempting to cover its ass, it would throw out all the administration names it knew. If the White House was attempting to catch Congress and the public's attention, it would want to do as little damage to itself as possible. Since Miers is Bush's gal, his team would be unlikely to name her. That makes Cheney's team the likely culprit.

The suspicious timing of Mazzetti's story in relationship to the Iran NIE has occurred to more people than just me. Keith Olbermann has mentioned it on Countdown. No doubt readers of the New York Times have wondered about it, particularly in light of that newspaper's troubled past with Judy Miller and Scooter Libby and their more recent history with Michael Gordon, the human voice activated tape recorder dedicated to repeating administration propaganda about Iran. This would have made Mr. Mazzetti's editors cautious about his follow up stories on the Two Torrure Tapes scandal. It might have made them question him about his sources. It could have made them assign him partners and demand more specifics, more accuracy. If this story was played right, it would be another Pulitzer Prize in the newspaper's crown. It played the wrong way, it could turn into another Judy Miller scandal.

Yesterday, we got a new twist in the story, Bush Lawyers Discussed Fate of C.I.A.Tapes: "Involvement of White House officials more extensive..."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=3106680&mesg_id=3106680

Today, the White House protested the subheadline. Here is why. Obviously it suggests that the White House played down its own role and tried to pin all the blame on the CIA, which implies a cover up. But the title is meaningless unless you assume that the White House has been talking to Mazzetti about the story. In other words, one of Mazzetti's sources is the White House. And if the White House is involved in a story about how the CIA destroyed two torture tapes in 2005 and the story broke a couple of days after the Iran NIE and included a token reference to one ex-White House Counsel (who said "Don't do it, guys!"), then the story is definitely meant to be a distraction and a smear against the CIA.

The story Mazzetti told yesterday is much worse for the White House. And, because his editors now have their eyes on him, much more likely to be accurate. Plus, if he suspects that he has been (unknowingly) used by someone in the White House, he will want to restore his honor and get some journalistic payback.



Note that one of the White House attorneys is David Addington, Cheney's current chief of staff. That means that Cheney knew. Therefore, this story could have come from his office. And Cheney is mad as hell about what happened to his boy Scooter.

Now, the part that confirmed for me that the White House was a major source if not the primary source for this story.

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/white-house-asks-nyt-to-remove-sub-headline-from-cia-tape-story-2007-12-19.html



"we have not described" Dana Perino says. Is this true? Or, did someone in the office of the Vice President spill this story to the New York Times? My instinct tells me it is a case of the latter, because this is exactly what Cheney did to the CIA, when he was thwarted by Joseph Wilson. He concocted a deliberate plan to out a CIA agent, jeopardizing the agency's entire WMD program, for petty revenge and to assert his power and to discredit someone he saw as an enemy. When he launches a dirty tricks campaign, he makes use of journalists. He does not worry about consequences. Hell, he emerged from Plame-gate unscathed, why should he worry about this scandal?

The New York Times has complied with the White House's request. The offending subheadline is gone.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/19/washington/19intel.html?hp

However, the administration did itself terrible harm in drawing attention that that subheadline. Now, all the world knows that the White House thinks that it has something to hide, and that something has to do with what has been said by White House personnel about the Two Torture Tape scandal.

This is beginning to sound like the Plame Affair all over again.





http://journals.democraticunderground.com/McCamy%20Taylor/105 Smoke in Our Eyes: CIA Torture Tape Story Attacks NIE, Pulls Bush-Cheney Feet From Fire

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/McCamy%20Taylor/106 Smoke In Our Eyes II: The WaPo Takes Over Anti-NIE/CIA Propaganda

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/McCamy%20Taylor/107 or http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/12/11/17513/711/239/420817
Nuke the Messenger: The New York Times vs. The Iran NIE

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/McCamy%20Taylor/108 “The CIA is enemy territory” Paul Wolfowitz Against US Intelligence

Why not? Individuals can certainly telephone NYT reporters and ask them questions. Ask him his source for the torture tape story. Yes, you'll probably get a voice mail, but at least the heat will have been applied.

And we can also e-mail. I'll get his addy.

Let's gin things up.

stored at cheenie's office were a fire had happened?

It takes a sharp mind to keep up with the internecine fighting and palace intrigue.

Recommended.

That was my first thought. Discredit the messenger, who one day before discredited Bush/Cheney....

wasn't from the inside. The NIE is a direct threat to Cheney and the White House. The NIE was known by Cheney for over a year and Bush knew probably since August of this year that the NIE was not going to make overwhelming claims for a war on Iran, and in fact stated that Iran had suspended the program in 2003. Now that is an Impeachable offence. Directly lying and creating a situation of worldwide tension could land them in jail... So, here comes the CIA tape destruction. Number one it points out that the CIA is torturing, that they destroyed tapes even though they were told not to, and gets back at some of these people becasue they are one of the agencies providing information for the NIE. Its like the Plame thing all over.

However, I can walk and chew gum at the same time. I would say those tapes were in all likelihood destroyed under the order of the White House (* can't remember if he did watch them or not). I also can see that this is one more peice in a long line of offences that just is disgusting. We have spying, torture, and invading countries illegally... They've corrupted almost every branch of govt we have. Its the reason we cant get rid of them. Its the reason why we need to ensure that someone who is going to deliver business as usual not ascend to the thrown. We cannot have these offenses scraped under the rug and hidden from the American People.. God Forbid everyone get amnesia again and elect another Neo-Con Bush.. who's entire family has been working for a long time to destroy America and insert their sick, perverted Fascist state.

Cheney's office would implicate Addington and Bellinger? I'd be more inclined to believe that Mazzetti's source is a CIA friendly individual inside the White House - or even someone at Langley (in which case Mazzetti is lying about his sourcing).

I get the feeling that The Times is on the side of the Establishment Intelligence/Media/Congressional cabal that has finally decided to bring down Bush/Cheney. Just speculation of course, but so is your piece. :)

editor suggested that Mazzetti dig deeper and find out more about who was involved at the WH (if he did not already know). I suspect that the WH was the primary source for the original pair of stories, and while he may have talked to members of the intelligence community, it was only to confirm what his WH sources were feeding him. I also suspect that he has had a NeoCon WH source for a while, whom he has had to keep happy in order to keep getting info and that this explains the exteremely odd "Syria did so have a nuke and that was what Israel bombed" series of stories that he wrote this fall.

This could have come from Israeli intelligence, but why would he want to please Israeli intelligence? A highly placed source within the WH would be much more important to a name brand NYT reporter like Mazzetti.

So, in summary, Mazzetti and the NYT are not playing by Cheney's rules now, though initially they were. Now, they are covering their own asses.

If the neo-cons have lost The Times, then the gig must almost be up.

on edit -- i see your point about the CIA... nevermind.

this point and that fact is totally necessary. And speculation by serious students always seems to turn out to be on mark.

I visualize all the wars the White House is having - especially the office of the VP in terms of cannons facing in all directions.

The Cheney cannons firing away at Congress (swearing at one of them on the Senate floor was the least of acts).

The Cheney cannons firing away at the CIA with the DIA circling Cheney and handing him the wmds for the cannon.

The Cheney cannons firing at Brewster-Jennings and their many families of employees, with one making the headlines because they could not and did not remain silent.

The State Dept has cannons in the form of black shirted, bearpaw wearing doctored up vigilantes doing their thing, the State Depts thing, and probably doing it the reverends' things, as well - for a lot of disappeared money belonging to the citizens.

... but, on the other hand, Bush made no counter to the intelligence that the Iran nuclear weapons program had been abandoned, effectively admitting this was true.

Bush would have done better to fight back on the "Iran has nukes" front in the media, immediately. To sow distrust of the CIA based on the record. To again blame the CIA for Iraq. But they didn't have time.

The "Iran has nukes" argument is dead. By not refuting it immediately, Bush has lost that round. By worldwide recognition of the report by all allies, it zeros out chances for more sanctions and takes military action off the table. Unless Bush can uncover and reveal more VERY convincing evidence of a resuscitated Iranian nuclear program, that avenue of attack is closed. So much the better for world peace.

At least the CIA has made sure it won't be blamed for attacking Iran for WMDs!

The CIA might even have leaked Tape-gate themselves, knowing they had identified a scapegoat who was instructed to destroy the tapes, and that this would eventually look bad for the White House.

Their lackeys in the press challenged it in carefully scripted editorials in the NYT and WaPo that weekend that used the Two Torture Tapes scandal to propose that the Iran NIE could not be trusted because the CIA was guilty of obstruction of justice. Other than that, Bush and Co. want the nation to forget that the letters N and I and E have any association with each other.

That is why it is so important that Congress not forget to hold investigations into the lies that Bush and Cheney knowingly told the American people during the time that they were preventing the US intelligence community from releasing the Iran NIE.

Also, keep in mind that Negroponte released the news that US Intelligence was likely to say "Iran is not after nukes" a couple of years ago, when we still had a Republican Congress. The shit hit the fan, Negroponte was kicked upstairs into a different job and replaced, and everybody in the MSM pretended that he had never said what he said (including Negroponte which makes me think he was blackmailed with some old Iran-Contra crap).

Everybody knew what the US Intelligence Community was going to conclude, even though the WH kept juggling those in charge, hoping that they could get someone to say something else. That means that it is likely that the WH and the NeoCons have been conducting an ongoing disinformation campaign directed at US intelligence for a long, long time.

I predicted a while ago that when the "Iran is building a nuke" story was discredited, Cheney and Co, would try a new tactic to start a war. There are plenty of scenarios that have been used in US history. Remember the Maine. Rescue the Hostages. Come to the Aid of Our Ally. None of these would require the mention of a nuke. Since they have known for years that they would be challenged on the "No Nukes" scenario, they are bound to have one or two contingency plans up their sleeves. However, good military script writing requires that they not jump right into the next one, when the "No nukes" one has been debunked.

I say give them until March. Unless Cheney gets impeached and needs a distraction before that.

and CIA got their payback licks in very quickly. They sent their boy Kiriakou out to the talks shows and so on to show the WH they weren't going down again for Mr. Cheney. Those are the two most probable sources for Mazzetti. The Bush people are trying to keep the distance they've been cultivating from the outset of this mess.

CIA seems to be winning this one which is why we have fires in the EOB, imo.

Bravo! Again, you make a compelling case. Related to this, does anyone honestly the EOB fire was an accident? The question is: What motivation might they have had to cover things up? Just after a court orders them to turn over torture materials the EOB quarters of the VP staff goes up in smoke? Does anyone at all believe this is only a coincidence? Our paper made not a mention of the timing of this fire.

This was also my first instinct with regard to this leak. I dismissed because I thought it was a bit paranoid.

Still The Neo's looking to get revenge ont he CIA for telling the truth on the NIE doesn't sound unreasonable. And if it changes the story to how bad and incompetant and evil the CIA looks it does detract from their case against a Nuclear Iran.