Cheney's Office: The Sound of Silence
[UPDATE below]
Raw Story makes the following explosive claim:
Meanwhile, more and more fingers are being pointed at the Vice President. The headline for the latest Washington Post story is "Cheney's Office is Focus in Leak Case". The Wall Street Journal leads with "Prosecutor in Leak Case May Be Looking Into Possible Misconduct by Cheney's Office". And the headline at Bloomberg is "Cheney May Be Entangled in CIA Leak Investigation".
In light of all this finger-pointing, I think the question I asked last week is even more relevant now: Where are the stories exculpating Cheney? Why does no one appear to be doing any damage control whatsoever on Cheney's behalf? How is it that we still have no idea what Cheney's defense is? Where are the anonymous quotes from "sources familiar with the investigation" indicating that Cheney never ordered Plame's identity leaked? Last week, we saw a number of stories that laid out what will surely be Bush's defense, i.e., that Rove was never fully candid with him. Where are the corresponding stories regarding Libby's conversations with Cheney? Isn't the silence almost deafening at this point?
UPDATE: Here's the article from the NY Daily News. Key passage:
This cooperating witness could be Rove. Then again, perhaps it's Novak's original source. Maybe the third leaker has been cooperating all along. Fleischer? Or consider this interesting passage from the Post article:
Doesn't that sound like it could be both our third leaker and the cooperating witness? Fleitz? Tenet? McLaughlin? All three would fit that description.
Raw Story makes the following explosive claim:
The case of outed CIA agent Valerie Plame isBased on the length of his most recent grand jury appearance, Jeralyn Merritt is guessing that the "flipper" is none other than Karl Rove. (If that turns out to be the case, I'd just like to point out that I wrote a post almost two weeks ago entitled "Is Fitzgerald Trying to Flip Rove.")
set to explode. The New York Daily News is
set to report in Tuesday editions that a
well-placed source interviewed by the
newspaper believes a senior White House
official has flipped and may be helping the
prosecutor in the case, RAW STORY has
learned.
The Daily News will reveal that a top source
believes that based on the questioning of
Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald and his
other contacts with the investigation, someone
in the White House has turned.
Meanwhile, more and more fingers are being pointed at the Vice President. The headline for the latest Washington Post story is "Cheney's Office is Focus in Leak Case". The Wall Street Journal leads with "Prosecutor in Leak Case May Be Looking Into Possible Misconduct by Cheney's Office". And the headline at Bloomberg is "Cheney May Be Entangled in CIA Leak Investigation".
In light of all this finger-pointing, I think the question I asked last week is even more relevant now: Where are the stories exculpating Cheney? Why does no one appear to be doing any damage control whatsoever on Cheney's behalf? How is it that we still have no idea what Cheney's defense is? Where are the anonymous quotes from "sources familiar with the investigation" indicating that Cheney never ordered Plame's identity leaked? Last week, we saw a number of stories that laid out what will surely be Bush's defense, i.e., that Rove was never fully candid with him. Where are the corresponding stories regarding Libby's conversations with Cheney? Isn't the silence almost deafening at this point?
UPDATE: Here's the article from the NY Daily News. Key passage:
Cheney's name has come up amid indications
Fitzgerald may be edging closer to a
blockbuster conspiracy charge - with help
from a secret snitch.
"They have got a senior cooperating witness
- someone who is giving them all of that," a
source who has been questioned in the leak
probe told the Daily News yesterday.
This cooperating witness could be Rove. Then again, perhaps it's Novak's original source. Maybe the third leaker has been cooperating all along. Fleischer? Or consider this interesting passage from the Post article:
One former CIA official told prosecutors early
in the probe about efforts by Cheney's office and
his allies at the National Security Council to
obtain information about Wilson's trip as long as
two months before Plame was unmasked in July
2003, according to a person familiar with the
account.
Doesn't that sound like it could be both our third leaker and the cooperating witness? Fleitz? Tenet? McLaughlin? All three would fit that description.



4 Comments:
The passage from the 10/18/05 WAPO you cite regarding "one former CIA official" doesn't seem as interesting to me.
I think this reference may be that the WH contacted the CIA shortly after the Kristoff column to find out who the former ambassador was.
I don't see this information about the former CIA official necessarily linked to the cooperating witness or the third source.
I think it more likely that the third source and the cooperating witness are two different people. Although it is quite possible that they are both CIA.
As I stated in the comments my latest theory is that Harlow is the third source, or other adminstration not WH source, for Novak.
Pollyusa
On a different subject.
The WAPO article does have what I think is new information regarding the INR memo.
WAPO puts the 6/10/03 INR memo in a meeting at the WH in June 03.
As a former State Department official involved in the process recalled it, Grossman wanted the letter as background for a meeting at the White House,
To clear up any questions as to why this quote says letter instead of memo, the WAPO also has this
The letter to Grossman....It had a paragraph near the beginning, marked "(S)," meaning it was classified secret, describing a meeting at the CIA in February 2002, attended by another INR analyst, where Plame introduced her husband as the person who was to go to Niger...
The article goes on to say that the INR anayist's meeting notes are attached. This describes the known contents of the INR memo.
Is this former intelligence official CIA? I wonder if he/she saw the memo at the Senate Hearings that summer?
according to a former intelligence official who reviewed the document in the summer of 2003
Pollyusa
On Cheney, this is the only reference I've seen regarding Cheney's possible involvement. A former Cheney aide calling Cheney's involvement implausible.
But a former Cheney aide, who requested anonymity, said it is "implausible" that Cheney himself was involved in the leaking of Plame's name because he rarely, if ever, involved himself in press strategy.
10/18/05 WAPO
Pollyusa
I still can't see Rove as flipping. He is a behind the scene guy who gains nothing by protecting himself. There is no political upside to it unless there is a deliberate strategy to get Cheney out of the office to make way for a new VP as a spring board for the 2008 campaign.
Rove doesn't do anything that is not calculated.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home