Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage pauses while meeting Russia’s Security Council chief Igor Ivanov in Moscow in this Oct. 28, 2004, file photo. Armitage’s official State Department calendars, provided to The Associated Press under the Freedom of Information Act, show a one-hour meeting marked ‘private appointment’ with Washington Post reporter Bob Woodward on June 13, 2003. The mid-June 2003 meeting occurred the same time the reporter has testified an administration official talked to him about CIA employee Valerie Plame.

Captain Ed has Just A Plame Waste Of Time

Michael Isikoff and David Corn have a new book coming out that reveals the inside details of the leak that allowed Valerie Plame’s identity as a CIA agent to be uncovered. As widely speculated, the leak came from Richard Armitage, Colin Powell’s key deputy, and it came without malicious intent.

Read it all.

Like Flap said before here – this investigation by Patrick Fitzgerald was a waste of time. Now it turns out it was just an ordinary Washington witch hunt.

Tom Maguire has The ‘Hubris’ Of Richard Armitage

Flap asks when will the Scooter Libby prosecution be dropped?

Hopefully soon and the Wilson’s lawsuit?

Please…..

Previous:

CIA Leak Case Watch: Was it Richard Armitage?

CIA Leak Case Watch: Karl Rove Won’t Be Charged in CIA Leak Case

Plamegate Watch: Valerie Plame Cashes IN

CIA Leak Case Watch: Bob Novak – “President Knows Leak Source”

Technorati Tags: RichardArmitage, BobWoodward, ValeriePlame, JosephWilson, CIA, CIALeakCase, PatrickFitzgerald, RobertNovak, ScooterLibby

AP: Calendars show Armitage met reporter

The No. 2 State Department official met with Washington Post reporter Bob Woodward in mid-June 2003, the same time the reporter has testified that an administration official talked to him about CIA employee Valerie Plame.

Official State Department calendars, provided to The Associated Press under the Freedom of Information Act, show then-Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage held a one-hour meeting marked “private appointment” with Woodward on June 13, 2003.

And why is a June 13, 2003 meeting important?

Let’s look at a time line:

Now, we know why the Fitzpatrick prosecution of Karl Rove has been dismissed. But, what about Scooter Libby, Vice President Cheney’s former chief of staff?

Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald has investigated whether Bush administration officials intentionally revealed Plame’s identity as a one-time CIA covert operative to punish her husband, former ambassador Joseph Wilson, for criticizing the administration’s march to war with Iraq.

When contacted at home Monday night, Woodward declined to discuss his meeting with Armitage or the identity of his source in the CIA leak case. Instead, he referred to his statement last year that he had a “casual and offhand” discussion about Plame with an unidentified administration official in mid-June 2003.

The “LEAK” or “OUTING” of Valerie Plame occurred a few weeks before Joseph Wilson’s column in the New York Times and Robert Novak’s column.

So, this entire FLAP has been about NOTHING – an off-hand comment by Richard Armitrage on background to Washington Post Bob Woodward prior to the supposed Bush Administration vendetta to GET Plame and Wilson.

NO VENDETTA

Bob Woodward is seen Monday, Dec. 5, 2005 at the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University in Cambridge, Mass. Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage’s official State Department calendars, provided to The Associated Press under the Freedom of Information Act, show a one-hour meeting marked ‘private appointment’ with Washington Post reporter Bob Woodward on June 13, 2003. The mid-June 2003 meeting occurred the same time the reporter has testified an administration official talked to him about CIA employee Valerie Plame.

A person familiar with the information prosecutors have gathered, who spoke only on condition of anonymity because the material remains sealed, said Woodward’s meeting with the confidential source was June 13, 2003.

The calendar released to the AP is the first confirmation that Woodward and Armitage met during the key time in the CIA leak case that was the focus of Fitzgerald’s probe.

The identity of Woodward’s source remains one of the big mysteries in the case because the Post reporter is the first member of the news media known to have discussed Plame’s CIA employment with an administration official.

Woodward’s former Post editor, Ben Bradlee, has speculated publicly that Armitage was the reporter’s “likely source.”

Flap first reported this “likely source” of Armitage last Fall here. And Woodward’s knowledge and critique of the Fitzgerald investigation here.

And defense attorneys for I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, the lone administration official charged in the CIA leak case, also have suggested that Armitage could have been Woodward’s source when they unsuccessfully tried to persuade a court to order the release of State Department documents.

Fitzgerald’s office declined to comment Monday. Reached at his home in Virginia, Armitage said he could not discuss his cooperation with Fitzgerald’s office, the meeting with Woodward or any details of the case.

Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage pauses while meeting Russia’s Security Council chief Igor Ivanov in Moscow in this Oct. 28, 2004, file photo. Armitage’s official State Department calendars, provided to The Associated Press under the Freedom of Information Act, show a one-hour meeting marked ‘private appointment’ with Washington Post reporter Bob Woodward on June 13, 2003. The mid-June 2003 meeting occurred the same time the reporter has testified an administration official talked to him about CIA employee Valerie Plame.

Libby, the former chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney, faces trial in January on charges that he lied to authorities about conversations he had with reporters about Plame.

Libby’s lawyer, William Jeffress, said Monday that Armitage’s calendar only bolsters the defense’s argument that information about the State Department official’s role in the CIA leak affair should be released.

So, shouldn’t the prosecution of Scooter Libby be halted?

YES

The entire prosecution has been a WASTE of taxpayer money. But, then Flap has said this before. Why is Fitzgerald stubbornly proceeding? No jury will convict Libby.

Woodward has said Plame came up incidentally during an interview he was conducting for a book he wrote on the Iraq war. He said the source told him that Plame was a CIA analyst on weapons of mass destruction, and no evidence has emerged in public that Woodward’s source actually knew she had been a covert agent. Fitzgerald has signaled there are no plans — beyond the Libby indictment — to prosecute any other officials for releasing Plame’s identity.

Armitage’s calendar also shows that a week before Woodward’s meeting with Armitage, the deputy secretary of state met for 15 minutes with Libby.

Two people familiar with the meeting, however, said the Libby-Armitage meeting dealt with issues involving Pakistan and said the subject of the CIA leak case wasn’t raised. Both spoke only on condition of anonymity because some information about the meeting remains classified.

NO PLOT and NO CRIME

Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald should END this two year plus investigation.

Captain Ed has Was Armitage The Plame Leaker?

If Armitage sourced the Plame connection, it would also explain the lack of prosecutorial interest on the part of Patrick Fitzgerald. An Armitage lead pretty much stops at Armitage, given his relationship with the rest of the administration. The fizzling of Fitzmas becomes more comprehensible.

Of course, no AP report on this subject would be complete without a little misinformation:

Wilson reported back to the Bush administration that he was unable to
verify the claim, but the administration continued to use the
information to bolster its argument for war. Wilson has cited the
decision to rely on the bad intelligence in his criticisms of the
administration.

The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence has long established that this version is nothing more than fiction. Wilson reported that the Nigerien PM believed that an offer from Iraq for secret trade involved uranium, and that he had rejected the overture. The Bush administration said that Iraq had attempted to purchase uranium, based on British intelligence that the UK still insists is accurate. Wilson twisted his report to claim that Iraq had not purchased uranium, which was true — but the Bush administration never claimed it had.

Maybe once we establish the actual source of the Plame leak, we can get the press to establish the truth about Wilson’s claims. Unfortunately, we will probably wait at least as long for that development as we did for the Armitage/Woodward meeting to come to light.

Previous:

CIA Leak Case Watch: Karl Rove Won’t Be Charged in CIA Leak Case

Plamegate Watch: Valerie Plame Cashes IN

CIA Leak Case Watch: Bob Novak – “President Knows Leak Source”

CIA Leak Case Watch: Valerie Plame Retires From CIA

CIA Leak Case Watch: Time Reporter, Viveca Novak, Asked to Testify

CIA Leak Case Watch: Woodward Expresses Regret But WON’T Reveal Source

CIA Leak Case Watch: Is Armitage Woodward’s Source?

CIA Leak Case Watch: Fitzpatrick Proceeds Before NEW Grand Jury

CIA Leak Case Watch: Joe Wilson wants Washington Post to Probe Woodward

CIA Leak Case Watch: Time to Withdraw the Libby Indictment

CIA Leak Case Watch: Woodward Claim on CIA Leak Disputes Charge

CIA Leak Case Watch: Charges Don’t Directly Address CIA Leak

CIA Leak Case Watch: Lack-Of-Memory Defense for Libby?

CIA Leak Case Watch: Joe Wilson wants Washington Post to Probe Woodward

CIA Leak Case Watch: Time to Withdraw the Libby Indictment

CIA Leak Case Watch: Woodward Claim on CIA Leak Disputes Charge

CIA Leak Case Watch: Charges Don’t Directly Address CIA Leak

Technorati Tags: RichardArmitage, BobWoodward, ValeriePlame, JosephWilson, CIA, CIALeakCase, PatrickFitzgerald, RobertNovak, ScooterLibby

Plaming Out: Joe Wilson Jumps the Shark

And how high can they jump?

Technorati Tags: ValeriePlame, JoeWilson

Former CIA operative Valerie Plame and her husband Joseph Wilson listen to questions at a news conference at the National Press Club in Washington July 14, 2006. Plame sued Vice President Dick Cheney , top White House aide Karl Rove and others on Thursday for their role in disclosing her classified CIA employment.

AP: Plame Says Government Betrayed Her Trust

Former CIA officer Valerie Plame and her husband, former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, said Friday they decided to sue Vice President Dick Cheney and presidential adviser Karl Rove because they engaged in a “whispering campaign” to destroy her career.

Plame told at a news conference she trusted the government to protect her and that the government “betrayed that trust. I’d much rather be continuing my career as a public servant than as a plaintiff in a lawsuit.”

Right. And you and your husband, former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, are not Democrat Party partisans who want to embarass President Bush and the GOP administration.

Give Flap a BREAK.

Instead of confronting Wilson on his criticism, the lawsuit said, the White House officials “embarked on an anonymous ‘whispering campaign’ designed to discredit … (the Wilsons) and to deter other critics from speaking out.”

The lawsuit alleges that Cheney, Libby and Rove “secretly spread rumors” that Plame used her position at the CIA to get her husband sent on the Niger trip. It accuses the White House officials of violating the Wilsons’ constitutional rights to equal protection and freedom of speech. It also accuses the officials of violating the couple’s privacy rights.

Thw Wilson’s have a substantial burden of proof in proving their allegations. Why have a news conference if you are pursuing this case in the courts?

Now, wasn’t the news conference arranged so they could make more on writing books and other media?

This lawsuit is going nowhere.

Former CIA operative Valerie Plame and her husband Joseph Wilson arrive to speak at a news conference at the National Press Club in Washington, July 14, 2006.

Update:

Captain Ed has the poop on the complaint and who the judge that the Wilson’s will now try to disqualify.  Ed is right about one thing……the Kossaks must be fuming……

Previous:

CIA Leak Case Watch: Vallerie Plame Sues Vice President Cheney, Scooter Libby and Karl Rove

CIA Leak Case Watch: Robert Novak – “My Leak Case Testimony”

The CIA Leak Case Files

Technorati Tags: RobertNovak, ValeriePlame, JoeWilson, CIALeakCase

AP: Former CIA officer sues Cheney over leak

The CIA officer whose identity was leaked to reporters sued Vice President Dick Cheney, his former top aide and presidential adviser Karl Rove on Thursday, accusing them and other White House officials of conspiring to destroy her career.

In a lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court, Valerie Plame and her husband, Joseph Wilson, a former U.S. ambassador, accused Cheney, Rove and I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby of revealing Plame’s CIA identity in seeking revenge against Wilson for criticizing the Bush administration’s motives in Iraq.

The lawsuit accuses Cheney, Libby, Rove and 10 unnamed administration officials or political operatives of putting the Wilsons and their children’s lives at risk by exposing Plame.

“This lawsuit concerns the intentional and malicious exposure by senior officials of the federal government of … (Plame), whose job it was to gather intelligence to make the nation safer and who risked her life for her country,” the Wilsons’ lawyers said in the lawsuit.

Flap supposes the revenue from the Wilson’s books is not enough. This suit has no merit but the attorneys will make some COIN.

Captain Ed says the lawsuit will be dropped in a New York minute.

For those who think that the Wilsons still have any credibility left, please see my omnibus post on the various efforts by Joe Wilson to obfuscate the truth until put under oath by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. Undoubtedly, this lawsuit will founder on the same shoals — and it will give us a splendid opportunity to ask Plame under threat of perjury the following questions:

1. How did Joe Wilson get this assignment?
2. Why didn’t the CIA have him sign the standard agreement to keep his findings confidential?
3. Whjy didn’t the CIA correct the record when Wilson leaked and then wrote himself false information about his findings?

Let’s put Plame on the stand and really get to the heart of what she hoped to accomplish by promoting her husband for this task. I’d bet the lawsuit gets dropped in a New York minute — and if not, the record of Wilson’s prevarications should easily sink it.

Stay tuned……

Previous:

CIA Leak Case Watch: Robert Novak – “My Leak Case Testimony”

The CIA Leak Case Files

Technorati Tags: RobertNovak, ValeriePlame, JoeWilson, CIALeakCase

Karl Rove and Robert Novak

Human Events: My Leak Case Testimony

Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald has informed my attorneys that, after two and one-half years, his investigation of the CIA leak case concerning matters directly relating to me has been concluded. That frees me to reveal my role in the federal inquiry that, at the request of Fitzgerald, I have kept secret.

I have cooperated in the investigation while trying to protect journalistic privileges under the First Amendment and shield sources who have not revealed themselves. I have been subpoenaed by and testified to a federal grand jury. Published reports that I took the Fifth Amendment, made a plea bargain with the prosecutors or was a prosecutorial target were all untrue.

For nearly the entire time of his investigation, Fitzgerald knew — independent of me — the identity of the sources I used in my column of July 14, 2003. A federal investigation was triggered when I reported that former Ambassador Joseph Wilson’s wife, Valerie Plame Wilson, was employed by the CIA and helped initiate his 2002 mission to Niger. That Fitzgerald did not indict any of these sources may indicate his conclusion that none of them violated the Intelligence Identities Protection Act.

Some journalists have badgered me to disclose my role in the case, even demanding I reveal my sources — identified in the column as two senior Bush administration officials and an unspecified CIA source. I have promised to discuss my role in the investigation when permitted by the prosecution, and I do so now.

The news broke Sept. 26, 2003, that the Justice Department was investigating the CIA leak case. I contacted my longtime attorney, Lester Hyman, who brought his partner at Swidler Berlin, James Hamilton, into the case. Hamilton urged me not to comment publicly on the case, and I have followed that advice for the most part.

The FBI soon asked to interview me, prompting my first major decision. My attorneys advised me that I had no certain constitutional basis to refuse cooperation if subpoenaed by a grand jury. To do so would make me subject to imprisonment and inevitably result in court decisions that would diminish press freedom, all at heavy personal legal costs.

I was interrogated at the Swidler Berlin offices Oct. 7, 2003, by an FBI inspector and two agents. I had not identified my sources to my attorneys, and I told them I would not reveal them to the FBI. I did disclose how Valerie Wilson’s role was reported to me, but the FBI did not press me to disclose my sources.

On Dec. 30, 2003, the Justice Department named Fitzgerald as special prosecutor. An appointment was made for Fitzgerald to interview me at Swidler Berlin on Jan. 14, 2004. The problem facing me was that the special prosecutor had obtained signed waivers from every official who might have given me information about Wilson’s wife.

That created a dilemma. I did not believe blanket waivers in any way relieved me of my journalistic responsibility to protect a source. Hamilton told me that I was sure to lose a case in the courts at great expense. Nevertheless, I still felt I could not reveal their names.

However, on Jan. 12, two days before my meeting with Fitzgerald, the special prosecutor informed Hamilton that he would be bringing to the Swidler Berlin offices only two waivers. One was by my principal source in the Valerie Wilson column, a source whose name has not yet been revealed. The other was by presidential adviser Karl Rove, whom I interpret as confirming my primary source’s information. In other words, the special prosecutor knew the names of my sources.

When Fitzgerald arrived, he had a third waiver in hand — from Bill Harlow, the CIA public information officer who was my CIA source for the column confirming Mrs. Wilson’s identity. I answered questions using the names of Rove, Harlow and my primary source.

I had a second session with Fitzgerald at Swidler Berlin on Feb. 5, 2004, after which I was subpoenaed to appear before the grand jury. I testified there at the U.S. courthouse in Washington on Feb. 25.

In these four appearances with federal authorities, I declined to answer when the questioning touched on matters beyond the CIA leak case. Neither the FBI nor the special prosecutor pressed me.

I have revealed Rove’s name because his attorney has divulged the substance of our conversation, though in a form different from my recollection. I have revealed Harlow’s name because he has publicly disclosed his version of our conversation, which also differs from my recollection. My primary source has not come forward to identify himself.

When I testified before the grand jury, I was permitted to read a statement that I had written expressing my discomfort at disclosing confidential conversations with news sources. It should be remembered that the special prosecutor knew their identities and did not learn them from me.

In my sworn testimony, I said what I have contended in my columns and on television: Joe Wilson’s wife’s role in instituting her husband’s mission was revealed to me in the middle of a long interview with an official who I have previously said was not a political gunslinger. After the federal investigation was announced, he told me through a third party that the disclosure was inadvertent on his part.

Following my interview with the primary source, I sought out the second administration official and the CIA spokesman for confirmation. I learned Valerie Plame’s name from Joe Wilson’s entry in “Who’s Who in America.”

I considered his wife’s role in initiating Wilson’s mission, later confirmed by the Senate Intelligence Committee, to be a previously undisclosed part of an important news story. I reported it on that basis. (Emphasis Flap’s)

No leak, No conspiracy and a tempest in a tea for NOTHING.

Like Flap said the first time.

Now, what about Scooter Libby?

H/T Wizbang: Joseph Wilson’s “Who’s Who In America” Entry

Captain Ed has Novak: I Got Plame’s Name From Who’s Who 

Oddly, Kurtz never mentions the Who’s Who research, although the excerpts reported by Drudge make it clear that Novak found her name on his own. Neither does CNN, for that matter. The excerpt apparently has been taken down by Drudge, and Novak’s full column has not yet hit the website. Did Drudge get the story wrong? I guess we’ll find out tomorrow. Either he did, or Kurtz and CNN didn’t bother to include that detail.

Even without it, Novak claims that the CIA provided confirmation of Plame’s name and employment before he published the story — and just to be clear, neither Kurtz nor CNN actually describes how Novak got Plame’s name, just how he confirmed it. If Plame’s status was a secret, then Bill Harlow shouldn’t have confirmed anything for Novak. Just getting that part of the story out pretty much deflates the entire notion of a vendetta at the White House. It also begs the question of how this constitutes an illegal leak when the CIA’s own spokesman gave out the information. The fact that Patrick Fitzgerald never indicted Bill Harlow seems a pretty clear indication that the original reason for conducting the probe was nothing more than a trumped-up political attack on George Bush and Dick Cheney.

Yawn.

Yes, a failed attempt to tar and feather the President and Vice President.  Where is the indignation in the MSM?

Nowhere.

Previous:

The CIA Leak Case Files

Technorati Tags: RobertNovak, ValeriePlame, JoeWilson, CIALeakCase