Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Valerie Plame leak case indictments.

laptop said:
And here's their take on the smokescreen:
so perjury and lying to Congress and the people is no more than "something she said"? Henceforth known as "the T.A.T.U. defense" :D
Heh, you might want to read back a couple of posts, something that'll amuse you.
 
Very useful summary here from a US blogger about what one can reasonably conclude from the public record regarding the Niger uranium fakes. It's pretty obvious the the UK government in particular was very dirty on this issue. A detailed comparison with the IAEA and US Senate inquiry reports seriously undermine what the Butler report had to say and make it clear just how blatantly Blair lied.

If indictments arising from the Valerie Plame case really do happen, and if they get the US media all excited about the Niger forgeries again, then it may well drag up the lies Blair and his crowd were telling pre-war and spread them all over the world media once again.
 
Ooh, how exciting. According to the Washington Note today's New York Times, perhaps in an attempt to recover some vestige of credibility as news rather than as a White House disinformation outlet, is leading with a story that says:
I. Lewis Libby Jr., Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff, first learned about the C.I.A. officer at the heart of the leak investigation in a conversation with Mr. Cheney weeks before her identity became public in 2003, lawyers involved in the case said Monday.

Notes of the previously undisclosed conversation between Mr. Libby and Mr. Cheney on June 12, 2003, appear to differ from Mr. Libby's testimony to a federal grand jury that he initially learned about the C.I.A. officer, Valerie Wilson, from journalists, the lawyers said [...]

Mr. Libby's notes indicate that Mr. Cheney had gotten his information about Ms. Wilson from George J. Tenet, the director of central intelligence, in response to questions from the vice president about Mr. Wilson.
 
"October 25, 2005
Indictments Coming Tomorrow; Targets Received Letters Today

An uber-insider source has just reported the following to TWN (since confirmed by another independent source):

1. 1-5 indictments are being issued. The source feels that it will be towards the higher end.
2. The targets of indictment have already received their letters.

3. The indictments will be sealed indictments and "filed" tomorrow.

4. A press conference is being scheduled for Thursday.


The shoe is dropping.

More soon."

well we'll see; but above one's got to be good, three or more would be a disaster for Bush.

Link
 
Bernie Gunther said:
...

Still, all of this is just premature specualtion, let's see what next week brings eh? I do hope that someone turns the light on these cockroaches though, because Blair and Aleister Campbell seem to have been up to their necks in the same pack of lies and the same kinds of campaigns to destroy their critics. Which means that if the investigations in the US get deep enough and the wall of lies and mafia style intimidation crumbles, then perhaps Dr David Kelly might get some sort of justice at last ...

You've just brought a ray of sunshine and a spark of hope back into my political world mate.

In recent weeks, it's been anything but that. I had succumbed to unusual pessimism about this insane human aspect of the world. There's nothing like seeing justice served, even though it's so unusual.

I shall now follow this story carefully; although i don't expect anything to happen, i at least can hope...
 
i see that around 40% of americans are said to believe the bush boys are either crooked or unethical...

A new USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup poll found the investigation was affecting Americans' view of the White House, with nearly four in 10 respondents saying they believed Bush aides broke the law.

Another four in 10 said administration officials had acted unethically. The poll was conducted Friday through Sunday.

:D

reuters
 
bristle-krs said:
i see that around 40% of americans are said to believe the bush boys are either crooked or unethical...

Tsk. What job were you looking for?

39% said "illegal" and 39% "unethical": so total 78% "either crooked or unethical". cnn

Of course we have to allow that the latter 39% will include those who get off on "their" administration being unethical in a hard, hard world full of alien liberal threats.

A mere 10% OK, and by arithmetic 12% answered "un-ethi-cal? wha--at?"
 
Oh this is rather fun to watch. SC nominations failing and Whitehouse staff committing the greatest sin: that of being caught.
 
Just heard on Bloomberg TV.

Libby has been charged, multiple counts.

Nobody else yet.

He's resigned. to "fight the charges" according to a statement by Cheney.

:)

Woof
 
I wonder if 'Dirty' Dick Cheney is sitting comfortably? :D The trial should be interesting or will Cheney try and nobble the proceedings?
 
Charges:

1 X Obstruction of justice.

2 X Perjury.

2 X Ummmmmmmm, I forgot.

:o

Edit: Sounds like nobody else is likely to be charged at this point unless any further evidence emerges (I mean unless Libby or someone else spills the beans).

Looks like it'll be ringfenced around Libby unless he turns.

Woof
 
Red Jezza said:
Fitzgerald's asked for more time to investigate Rove further

I didn't get that impression, but I'm only half listening, it's late.

If so, good.



The last two charges were 2 X making false statements.

:)

Woof
 
I think it's a real problem for the White House. Libby has been busted essentially for trying to cover up what the grand jury was trying to investigate, but the indictment and press release make it very clear that the investigation is still going on. See the Office of Special Counsel web site for details

Firstly, the leak he was meant to be investigating was the one to Robert Novak, not Libby's leaks to Judith Miller, who was beaten into print by Novak. Someone called "Official A" in the indictment seems to be responsible for that leak and Novak is rumoured to be cooperating. That's probably Rove, which means Rove's is still very much in jeopardy and the investigation continues.

Secondly, the indictment and press release talk about a conference Libby had with unnamed senior officials on Cheney's plane about what his story should be. That suggests that there is some possibility of a conspiracy charge against Libby and whoever he was discussing his story with. Now on Cheney's plane, that could perhaps include Cheney himself. Certainly he seems to have discussed Plame's covert status with Cheney at some point.

I'm now going to do a bit of speculating. It looks like he's got Libby completely nailed on 30 yrs worth of perjury and obstruction charges. Two ways that could go (short of Bush issuing a pre-emptive pardon, which he can but which he'd be pretty crazy to do in the year before the mid-term elections for control of congress) Either Libby tries to defend himself, and we potentially see Cheney in court on oath being asked about this stuff, and risking perjury charges himself, while the prosecutor digs up lots of dirt on the lies they told to start their idiotic war. Or Libby decides he's fucked and cuts a deal, potentially giving up both Rove on the charge of outing a covert agent and Cheney on stuff that would let the prosecutor indict him for some sort of conspiracy charge. Fitzgerald made his name doing pretty much exactly that kind of thing to people like the Gambino crime family. Nailing lower level thugs on whatever he could, then getting them to peach on their bosses.

Meanwhile, both the Official A thread and the potential for whatever the US equivalent of conspiracy to pervert the course of justice is called charges are left hanging for a frenzied world media to chew on while the White House tries to spin a disastrous occupation of Iraq and renewed speculation about who lied about what to get the US the war that led to their Iraq disaster.

As Donna F said over on the thread in General, "thank you for re-enacting Watergate for those of us too young to understand it first time around" :)
 
BG said:
Either Libby tries to defend himself, and we potentially see Cheney in court on oath being asked about this stuff, and risking perjury charges himself, while the prosecutor digs up lots of dirt on the lies they told to start their idiotic war. Or Libby decides he's fucked and cuts a deal, potentially giving up both Rove on the charge of outing a covert agent and Cheney on stuff that would let the prosecutor indict him for some sort of conspiracy charge.

Aye. Aye.

*rubs paws*

Nah, fuck that.....

*rubs lamp and makes a wish that Bernie's right*

That's better.

:)

Woof
 
from here

"Whence Novak?

Who was the State Dept. official who Libby set to the task of learning about Plame and Wilson? (Says Josh Marshall: "Hint: Look at the org chart at the State Department and whose purview the State Dept intel shop, INR, falls under."

We did -- it'd be the Sec/State and the Dep. Sec/State directly. "

Wasn't that Colin Powell and Richard Armitage?
Josh Marshall
 
Libby, Top Cheney Aide, Indicted in CIA Leak Probe:

Libby, 55, was charged with obstruction of justice, making a false statement and perjury in Washington after a two-year investigation by special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald.

http://tinyurl.com/d5c6d

===

Cheney adviser resigns after indictment: -

Vice presidential adviser I. Lewis "Scooter' Libby Jr. resigned Friday after being charged with obstruction of justice, making a false statement and perjury in the CIA leak investigation, a politically charged case that could throw a spotlight on President Bush's push to war.
http://tinyurl.com/8fbtz

===

Read the inditment in full: October 28, 2005 Libby Indictment

PDF Format

http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/iln/osc/documents/libby_indictment_28102005.pdf

===

F.B.I. Is Still Seeking Source of Forged Uranium Reports:

A counterespionage official said that the inquiry into the documents, had yielded some intriguing but unproved theories. One is the possibility that associates of Ahmad Chalabi, the former Iraqi exile who was a leading champion of the American campaign to topple Saddam Hussein, had a hand in the forgery.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article10802.htm
 
i wish i had a tiny bit of a clue what everyone's going on about. it all seems very exciting though so who are we rooting for and when's the kick off ?

:cool:
 
I put some helpful explanatory links up in the earlier part of the thread. Basically Bush & Blair lied to get us to war, then took revenge on anyone with the credibility to challenge their lies. Blair got away with Dr David Kelly, but one of Bush's key staffers just got nailed for his lies to the FBI and the Grand Jury about him and his mates outing a CIA agent in revenge for her husband saying some stuff Iraq and uranium they used to start a stupid war, was just bullshit.
 
Bernie Gunther said:
I put some helpful explanatory links up in the earlier part of the thread. Basically Bush & Blair lied to get us to war, then took revenge on anyone with the credibility to challenge their lies. Blair got away with Dr David Kelly, but one of Bush's key staffers just got nailed for outing a CIA agent in revenge for her husband saying some lies about Niger uranium were complete bullshit.


well i did try and read it honest, and i kinda got to your conclusion there, but even though we all know georgie and tony are lying fugging cahnts they still get away with hunnerds of shite and are immune. will this stuff in the near future rid us from either bush or bliar or is mr libby gonna take all the blame for everything hisself ?? sory for sounding completely ignorant .... i usually find that world politics is far to stressful leaving me sitting there with my fingers in my ears going rhubarb rhubarb la la la and anything that i really need to know about eventually i'll find on here.

i never did understand watergate either, i just knew nixon was a bad man and redford was hot.

:rolleyes:
 
mrskp said:
i never did understand watergate either, i just knew nixon was a bad man and redford was hot.

:rolleyes:

:D :D Yes Nixon was a bad man, but Dubya has the corner on the market IMO....stick with Bernie's info, the man knows his stuff!

And Redford's still hot!
 
the bit i'm confused with is how does dubya and phoney tony get away with it ?

are we all just too apathetic do anything or can't we ?

i'll keep an eye on this thread, i wanna know who wins now :D

la la la

:)
 
just read the account on the beeb. seems like they're a very nice bunch of people, and bush is the nicest of the lot. :mad: things get tricky and you dump one of your best worker bees like a tonne of hot potatoes. sweet.

how about Leslie Neilson or Jerry Springer playing "Scooter" (sorry that just does me in) in the movie ?

am grateful for your patience Bernie. Keep it coming.

:D
 
Digby
I just heard a Republican mouthpiece on Matthews' show pull out the old "how dare you compare these silly charges to the reprehensible behavior of Bill Clinton!" He went on to defend Rove and Libby by exclaiming that Clinton "wasn't indicted!" as if the second impeachment in history was a trivial matter and nothing compared to the persecution of poor powerless Karl and Scooter
Damn it we aren't talking about a serious matter like getting free blowjob just a little treachery intended to swindle the nation into war.
 
One thing I found interesting about the indictment is that it makes clear that Libby exchanged information about Plame's classified work at the CIA with about half a dozen other White House people and then with several reporters

It looks like Fitzgerald has very solid evidence to that effect, e.g. testimony of some of those officials, all of those reporters and probably a whole bunch of documentary stuff like building security and phone logs to back it up with.

What I'm thinking is that he's already got the bulk of what he'd need to make a much wider case for violation of espionage laws and conspiracy and is just getting the ball rolling with a nice uncomplicated perjury and obstruction charge that he knows he won't have any trouble proving.

His track record in mafia and state government corruption trials is one of methodically chewing his way up the food chain by absolutely nailing lower level people on stuff he knows he can prove, then getting them to rat out their bosses. Illinois Governor Ryan was the 66th indictment in such a chain.

This chain is probably a bit shorter though, because Libby worked for Cheney.
 
Going back to the Niger uranium forgeries at the heart of this affair, here's some interesting reporting:
-Italy's military intelligence agency, SISMI, and people close to it, repeatedly tried to shop the bogus Niger uranium story to governments in France, Britain and the United States. That created the illusion that multiple sources were confirming the story.

The CIA had begun receiving intelligence reports based on the same forgeries in October 2001, but they could not be confirmed. Copies of the fake documents suddenly surfaced at a critical point in the White House's fall 2002 campaign to take the country to war in Iraq.

The CIA eventually determined that the earlier reports were "based on the forged documents" and were "thus ... unreliable," a presidential commission on unconventional weapons proliferation said in March.

-State Department intelligence analysts and some in the CIA discounted the uranium story. But White House officials, working through a back channel to one CIA unit, seized on the tale, and it was included in Bush's case for war.
source

When the bogus stories about Niger uranium made it into Bush's state of the union address prior to the war though, they found a very neat solution to all of the questions being raised about the forgeries by their own analysts.
...A CIA analytical unit known as WINPAC (Weapons Intelligence, Nonproliferation, and Arms Control) said in a secret assessment that there was "fragmentary reporting" on Iraqi attempts to purchase uranium from "various countries in Africa."

Sometime in late January, Robert Joseph, a senior White House staffer, and Alan Foley, the head of WINPAC, agreed that Bush could refer to the uranium claim in his State of the Union speech, but he should cite a public British report.
Bush attributed the story to the "British".

This raises the interesting possibility that if they're really under pressure over this, and having to answer tricky questions under oath about why Bush made these statements when the CIA and DIA analysts, along with Ambassador Wilson were crying "bullshit", the White House's last ditch defence is to blame Tony Blair.

Wouldn't that be amusing? Blair was able to arrange the Hutton and Butler reports to exonerate everybody concerned and thought he had it all wrapped up, but now it looks at least slightly possible that's all going to come unglued in a foreign legal system where he has no control whatsover over the judges.
 
Philip Giraldi in AmConMag see's the outing of Plame as part of a larger scheme:
...Martino has since admitted to the Financial Times that both the Italian and American governments were behind the eventual forgery of the full Niger dossier as part of a disinformation operation. The authentic documents that were stolen were bunched with the Niger uranium forgeries, using authentic letterhead and Niger Embassy stamps. By mixing the papers, the stolen documents were intended to establish the authenticity of the forgeries.

At this point, any American connection to the actual forgeries remains unsubstantiated, though the OSP at a minimum connived to circumvent established procedures to present the information directly to receptive policy makers in the White House. But if the OSP is more deeply involved, Michael Ledeen, who denies any connection with the Niger documents, would have been a logical intermediary in co-ordinating the falsification of the documents and their surfacing, as he was both a Pentagon contractor and was frequently in Italy. He could have easily been assisted by ex-CIA friends from Iran-Contra days, including a former Chief of Station from Rome, who, like Ledeen, was also a consultant for the Pentagon and the Iraqi National Congress.

It would have been extremely convenient for the administration, struggling to explain why Iraq was a threat, to be able to produce information from an unimpeachable “foreign intelligence source” to confirm the Iraqi worst-case.

The possible forgery of the information by Defense Department employees would explain the viciousness of the attack on Valerie Plame and her husband. Wilson, when he denounced the forgeries in the New York Times in July 2003, turned an issue in which there was little public interest into something much bigger. The investigation continues, but the campaign against this lone detractor suggests that the administration was concerned about something far weightier than his critical op-ed.
 
I think for all the real stuff about the rush to war to come out, the scrutiny has got to go beyond the Libby indictment and any other indictments that Fitzgerald may make in the near term (which might be none or might still include one against Rove). I'm sure he knows all kinds of horrible shit about the process leading to war, but he seemed to be saying that it's not his job to indict on any of it unless it pertains to a crime he thinks he can and should try to prove. In any case it might take him years to get to Cheney even if he has the intention of proving conspiracy or anything on those lines.

So I'm really hoping that sane americans don't just sit there and wait for Fitzgerald to hand them Rove and Cheney's heads. I think what they actually need now is a congressional inquiry of some kind. To get that, the Democrats presumably have to take back at least one house in a year's time. To me then, the immediate value of the Libby indictment is that it leaves all kinds of really obvious questions about what the grand jury found out, hanging there for the world's press to chew on, plus any other stuff that comes out between now and then, all of which with any luck will be able to damage the Republicans enough for seats to change hands. I think, short of a very large surprise, that's what will eventually sink GW et al.
 
Interesting, a US blogger who I understand to be a prosecutor of some kind, makes the following observation: a lot of individuals and groups are referenced in the indictment as having talked with Libby and/or others on the list about Wilson/Plame over the course of the period in question. Here's her list
* Wurmser
* Hannah
* Fleischer
* Bolton
* Preparers of the Wilson work-up from State
* Presumably that would include Fleitz (? -- question mark because that's not dead-on certain)
* Senior Officer of CIA (p. 4, pp. 4)
* "Other persons" in VP's office (p. 4, pp. 8)
* Cheney
* "Others" talking about how to deal with the Pincus call (Are these people just in the VP's office? Or was this discussions with WHIG members?)
* Walter Pincus
* CIA briefer
* Judy Miller
* VP's legal counsel
* Catherine Martin
* "another government official" (p. 7, pp. 19)
* Official A (which, according to the WaPo is Rove)
* "Others" on Air Force II with the VP and Libby on 7/12/03 (p. 8, pp. 22)
* Matt Cooper
* Tim Russert
source

She makes two interesting points in relation to this list. The first is that it's going to be an interesting trial with all of those people traipsing through the courtroom to explain why they were so interested in digging dirt on Wilson, spreading information about his spook wife and discussing what story Libby should tell people about all of this. Will his defence lawyer attack all of them? Even Cheney? Which brings us to her second point. Why on earth would Libby continue to lie about this stuff after Ashcroft recused himself and after he'd got a good look at Fitzgerald? Rove appears to have gone back several times to "correct his story". Why did Libby persist in a bunch of stupid lies that he could easily be caught out on? Was it just hubris, or is he covering for some criminal shit from Cheney and/or Bush? If so will he continue to cover for whoever it is? Will he take the rap and wait for Bush's pardon, maybe having to wait until 2008, or will he rat them out?

(by the way, please excuse me if I'm a bit more incoherent than usual today, this is due to toothache, painkillers and perhaps some booze in a little while.)
 
Back
Top Bottom