Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Help needed with new "inaccurate info" LBN Plame story -- what the heck?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
DeepModem Mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-17-05 08:34 PM
Original message
Help needed with new "inaccurate info" LBN Plame story -- what the heck?
LAT/AP: Inaccurate Info (Plame working for WINPAC) May Help CIA Leak Probe
By JOHN SOLOMON and PETE YOST, Associated Press Writers


WASHINGTON -- Information attributed to Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff in New York Times reporter Judith Miller's interview notes is incorrect, offering prosecutors a potential lead to tracking the bad information to its original source.

Miller disclosed this weekend that her notes of a conversation she had with I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby on July 8, 2003 stated Cheney's top aide told her that the wife of Bush administration critic Joseph Wilson worked for the CIA's Weapons Intelligence, Non-Proliferation, and Arms Control (WINPAC) unit.

Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, never worked for WINPAC, an analysis unit in the overt side of the CIA, and instead worked in a position in the CIA's secret side, known as the directorate of operations, according to three people familiar with her work for the spy agency.

The three all spoke on condition of anonymity, citing the current secrecy requirements of Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald's grand jury investigation into the leak of Plame's identity in 2003 to the media....

***

Whether it came from Libby or Miller's notes, former federal prosecutors and investigators said the incorrect information provides a significant lead for Fitzgerald and FBI agents to follow. It could suggest Libby thought Plame was not an undercover spy, and therefore couldn't have knowingly revealed her occupation, or that he got his information from uninformed sources, they said....


http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/wire/ats-ap_top13oct17,0,7854310.story


Link to LBN discussion:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=1856833&mesg_id=1856833
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
thinkingwoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-17-05 08:39 PM
Response to Original message
1. Pay no attention the pre-indictment spin
All leaks are coming from defense attorneys. And they are designed to cloud the issue and spin future jurors.

Pay them no mind. Seriously.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EST Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-17-05 08:44 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Say it again, loudly.
All those "sources familiar with" bs fountains have been the lawyers for the potental defendants.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thinkingwoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-17-05 09:00 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. Preach on brother EST!
It's the oldest trick in the book.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
symbolman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-17-05 08:49 PM
Response to Original message
3. This must mean that
Libby is going down for sure.. preSpin..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Generator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-17-05 08:55 PM
Response to Original message
4. Yah know
It took me a bit but I got it. I noticed that extreme bit of detail in Judy's notes. Amazing on all the stuff she can't recall. But this she knows-Plame/Flame/Mrs. Wilson's EXACT job descrpition. Winpac. But it's false.

So if that's so important, clearly Libby wanted her to believe it or Miller wanted Fitzgerald to believe that's what Libby told her. (and all he told her about Plame's position) But it's got to be b.s. because if Libby knew about Plame being CIA then he must have know she was covert because otherwise what is the relevance? Judy said Libby never mentioned nepotism. It had a point. And the point was to derail Plame at the very least from doing her job. IF she wasn't covert-then it had to be the nepotism because there was nothing to lose by saying she worked for the CIA if "everybody knew."

If that makes any sense. Going bonkers here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spindrifter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-17-05 09:18 PM
Response to Original message
6. Please correct me if
I'm wrong, but didn't Miller "find" the "Flame" notebook sometime between her first and second appearances before the GJ? If this is correct, where was it and who had access to it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EST Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-18-05 12:39 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. Probably a bit of newly found conscience, sprung- fully
grown from her first testimony. Eleventh commandment: Thou shalt not attempt to lie to strong prosecutors-be sure thy sins shall pursue thee.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rumpel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-18-05 12:56 AM
Response to Reply #6
9. Exactly. The notebook she had "forgotten" about. It sound like part of
the cover-up. New evidence discovered after Libby gave her "pemission" to testify.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catrina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-18-05 12:49 AM
Response to Original message
8. So Judy made two attempts to get Libby
off the hook. One when she claimed she didn't remember if she still had security clearance when he told her about Plame. Maybe Rumsfeld is busy making that a reality. If that were the case, Libby would not have violated any law. However, he would have to have known she had clearance, and if she told him, then why doesn't she remember?

And now, she gives him another possible out!! She must really fear what they might do to her ~ that little love note must have said something she understood.

But didn't she say that she had another source, only she can't remember who it was? So what did she go to jail for? For Libby, or the other source, and why didn't Fitzgerald try to jog her memory on who that source might be? A little Abu Ghraib type treatment might work with these people. After all, they support torture for national security reasons, don't they?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 30th 2024, 08:39 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC