So in other words Libby was still lying to Miller, since the report didn't show that Iraq was vigorously trying to procure Uranium, and the whitehouse new that intel agencies had come to the consenses that it was doubtful that Iraq did try to procure Uranium from Niger. I will post some relevant info and questions I had about your stance on this issue, here. Here it is. It describes Fitzgerald's own words from his filings, and then includes some great recounting of events by Wilson himself. I know people have said things contrary to what is being stated here. But this seems pretty legit and definitive. Does anyone have evidence to the contrary of what is being put forward here? This part is from Fitzgerald himself and it lists the motive for the leaking of Plame's name as being revenge for Wilson's actions against what the whitehouse was pushing. It mentions Wilson as the target. Next they address what basso, and the President claim to be attempts to get the truth out there or correct things that weren't true. If Bush wanted people to see the truth and set the record straight why did he declassify a document that was deemed to be not credible, declassify it, but only let Libby, Cheney, and one reporter know? Is that really setting the record straight? The head of the CIA didn't even know it had been declassified. Anyway here is more with Wilson himself discussing several things including the claim which basso and others have made that Wilson's report supposedly backed up the idea that Iraq was trying to purchase Uranium in Africa. basso, and anyone else... Is there any part of that that you find to be inaccurate? Here is more which again states that Fitzgerald has indeed stated Plame's identity was classified. basso, is the lawyer di Genova where you are getting your information from, or is he a source that your source has been using? This sounds exactly like what you have been saying, and it appears to not be true, unless Wilson, and the media are telling bald faced lies about what Fitzgerald has said. I'm asking because it seems despite what basso claimed earlier in this thread Fitzgerald did mention Plame's status as being covert, and Wilson points out that violating that status would be a crime. Wilson also corrects the record on his report saying that it never supported the claim that Iraq wanted to buy Uranium from Niger. I am curious because things you present as fact(i.e. Fitzgerald never mentioned that Plame's status was classified) seem to be incorrect. It looks like Fitzgerald has remarked on this multiple times. I would like to understand how we can both look at evidence and statements and see them in such a different way.
here's a cnn article on this new info http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/04/13/libby.lawyers/ Libby's lawyers: Prosecutors withholding information WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Attorneys for I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, the indicted former aide to Vice President Dick Cheney, are accusing federal prosecutors of withholding information needed to provide their client with a thorough defense. In documents filed Wednesday, Libby's attorneys said prosecutors can't "have it both ways" by claiming that issues in the perjury case pertain only to Libby while broadening the case by offering details about the disclosure of parts of the classified National Intelligence Estimate. The lawyers said broadening the case requires the defense to ask for more information in the discovery process before trial. Defense lawyers noted that Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald set off "an avalanche of media interest" last week by filing documents indicating Libby had testified that Cheney told him in 2003 Bush had authorized the release of parts of the NIE. (Full story) In a follow-up letter to the judge released Wednesday by the court, Fitzgerald said Libby understood that he was to tell a reporter "among other things, some of the key judgments of the NIE, and that the NIE stated that Iraq was 'vigorously trying to procure' uranium." In their Wednesday filing, defense attorneys said, "We emphasize that, consistent with his grand jury testimony, Mr. Libby does not contend that he was instructed to make any disclosures concerning [Plame] by President Bush, Vice President Cheney or anyone else." [long article]
I don't know if the investigation is really broadening or expanding or not, but I would welcome it if it did. But I don't know if I agree that they have clearly already done so.
Well, it looks like Libby will remain loyal to his former bosses and his attorneys will intensify the semantics game. Is leaking her maiden name or a nickname somehow less of a crime? Kind of like posting a picture of her on the internet without her name then falling back on the argument that "no name was released". Unfortunately everyone still knows who she is etc... ________________ Aide won't argue Bush ordered leak of agent's name An indicted former White House aide does not contend that President George W. Bush and U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney ordered him to leak the name of a CIA officer whose husband criticised the administration's Iraq policies, the aide's lawyers said. "Mr. Libby plans to demonstrate that the indictment is wrong when it suggests that he and other government officials viewed Ms. Wilson's role in sending her husband to Africa as important," said the filing late Wednesday night. "Consistent with his grand jury testimony, Mr. Libby does not contend that he was instructed to make any disclosures concerning Ms. Wilson by U.S. President George W. Bush, Vice President Cheney, or anyone else," the filing said, using Plame's married name. Libby's lawyers said they would call senior Bush adviser Karl Rove, who remains under investigation in the leak case, to testify. Prosecutors had previously said they no longer intended to call Rove. link
Seems there's been some movement this morning... CNN is told by three force sources familiar with the investigation that this morning Karl Rove, the president’s deputy chief of staff and top political adviser, is meeting with his attorney and is to meet this morning — if it is not already under way — with the special prosecutor, Patrick Fitzgerald. Our understanding, Karl Rove is meeting with his attorney this morning, meeting with the special prosecutor this morning and the hope from Rove’s camp is that he can answer the few remaining questions about his involvement, his back and forth with reporters, during that time frame, his comments to the FBI and other investigators including the grand jury that is investigating this for quite some time now. And the hope from the Rove camp, all can be resolved and Karl Rove cleared of wrongdoing in the relatively near future. http://thinkprogress.org/2006/04/26/breaking-rove-meeting-with-special-prosecutor-about-leak-case/
From http://thinkprogress.org ... Fox News’s White House correspondent Carl Cameron just reported that Rove will testify before the grand jury today.
I have a question Does anyone else find it interesting that this comes up this morning the same time rumors start flying at the Washington Post that Woodward might be resigning?
Target Letter Drives Rove Back to Grand Jury Karl Rove's appearance before a grand jury in the CIA leak case Wednesday comes on the heels of a "target letter" sent to his attorney recently by Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, signaling that the Deputy White House Chief of Staff may face imminent indictment, sources that are knowledgeable about the probe said Wednesday. It's unclear when Fitzgerald sent the target letter to Rove's attorney, Robert Luskin. Sources close to the two-year-old leak investigation said when Rove's attorney received the letter Rove volunteered to appear before the grand jury for an unprecedented fifth time to explain why he did not previously disclose conversations he had with the media about covert CIA operative Valerie Plame and her husband, former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, who criticized the Bush administration's use of pre-war Iraq intelligence. Last week, Rove was stripped of some of his policy duties in a White House shakeup orchestrated by incoming Chief of Staff Joshua Bolten. The White House insisted that Rove was not demoted, but insiders said the executive branch is bracing for a possible indictment against Rove. http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/042606I.shtml
the republicans might have to rethink who they are going to have running their big 06 reelection push. culture of corruption..................
good question What's that east Texas saying? "It's like puttin' earrings on a hog; there's some ugliness you just cain't hide."
