CIA Leak Case Set To Explode

[Nbadan]

The case of outed CIA agent Valerie Plame is 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.

...

Two officials close to Fitzgerald told RAW STORY they have seen documents obtained from the White House Iraq Group which state that Cheney was present at several of the group's meetings. They say Cheney personally discussed with individuals in attendance at least two interviews in May and June of 2003 Wilson gave to New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof and Washington Post reporter Walter Pincus, in which he claimed the administration “twisted” prewar intelligence and what the response from the administration should be.

Raw Story (http://rawstory.com/news/2005/New_York_Daily_News_to_claim_1017.html)

Gee, I wonder who turned?

Libby told Miller to get back to life and work. He told her that the "Aspens turned...and that they turn in clusters."

A poster on another forum pointed out that at the end of Sept 05, a group of elite, powerful conservatives met in ASPEN. Robert Novak reported about this conference. Although everything was "off the record", Novak reported that the elite conservatives despised Bush. They pretty much wanted Bush to know that his "friends were displeased".

The Aspens that turned, were the conservatives in Aspen. The power brokers, who are the foundation of conservative politics, were done with Bush. After Katrina, they'd had it.

Libby was signaling to Miller that it was ok to roll over on BushCo and reveal what she knew--because the conservatives in Aspen had turned, and they turned collectively (in clusters) against Bush. Libby told Miller to return to work and life---signaling that she could talk and free herself. She no longer needed to protect those who were no longer supported by the elites.

Libby and Miller concocted a ridiculous story about Miller finally realizing that Libby wanted her to talk. Yeah, sure. It was all a misunderstanding. They made it appear as if Miller would testify against Libby. However, it's Libby and Miller who are testifying against BushCo. Maybe against Bush; maybe Cheney; maybe both.

Bet ya anything that other administration officials (Powell, Tenet, Ari, etc) are singing--to avoid prosecution and because they're sick of the pathology of BushCo. Combine all of this with phone records, emails and the communications on AF1--and Fitz most likely has overwhelming evidence against Cheney/Bush/both.

[Vashner]

Yea when they find out someone on the left is the leaker.

This is going to blow up on the neoliberals face just like everything else they have
tried in the last 5 years.

[Nbadan]

The likely-hood is that someone from the WH's Iraqi Group (Office of Special Plans) has turned, not a democrat. The prospect of spending life in prison can make people talk quicker than torture...

Senior White House Officials Face Prospect of Life in Prison


WASHINGTON, Oct. 17 /U.S. Newswire/ -- VelvetRevolution.us, a large coalition of organizations and citizens dedicated to honest government, has done an analysis of the Federal Sentencing Guidelines and its probable effect on the sentencing of any senior White House official convicted in the Valerie Plame affair. By going after Wilson and his wife, those officials apparently committed serious crimes which they then compounded by obstructing justice and committing and suborning perjury. As a result, they have virtually ensured that, if convicted, they could receive a sentence up to life in federal prison under the United States Sentencing Guidelines, which are used to compute sentences based on severity offense levels. The higher the level, the greater the sentence, and federal courts routinely follow the Guidelines in the vast majority of cases.

The best case scenario for those involved would be a conviction of only a single count of perjury or obstruction of justice, either of which carries a maximum sentence of five years in federal prison. Under the Guidelines, that would probably result in the maximum sentence because both charges have a base offense level of 14, and those convicted will most probably receive enhancements of 3 levels for substantial interference with the administration of justice, 6 levels for victimizing a government employee and family member, 2 levels for abuse of the public trust, and 4 levels for being a leader. These total 29 levels, which equals 87-108 months in federal prison under the Guidelines, far above the five-year statutory maximum, so the final sentence will be five years.

However, federal prosecutors rarely issue one-count indictments, but rather charge every possible violation. In the instant case, it is highly likely that Special Prosecutor Fitzgerald will throw the book at them, by charging conspiracy and violation of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of l982 ("IIPA") (50 U.S.C., section 421), each carrying a maximum sentence of ten years, conspiracy and violation of the Espionage Act (18 U.S.C. 793), each carrying ten years, and multiple counts of perjury and obstruction of justice, each carrying five years. Moreover, because there was an agreement among many people in this case, there will most probably also be an overarching conspiracy charge to violate multiple statutes. It is significant that the IIPA mandates that any sentence under the Act be imposed "consecutively" to any other sentence in the indictment. Id. at section 421(d)

US Newswire (http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=55142)

Will Justice finally be served?

http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a168/ichingcarpenter/new.jpg

[Marcus Bryant]

Whoa, did Alex Jones break this?

[boutons]

washingtonpost.com

Cheney's Office Is A Focus in Leak Case
Sources Cite Role Of Feud With CIA

By Jim VandeHei and Walter Pincus
Washington Post Staff Writers

Tuesday, October 18, 2005

As the investigation into the leak of a CIA agent's name hurtles to an apparent conclusion, special prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald has zeroed in on the role of Vice President Cheney's office, according to lawyers familiar with the case and government officials. The prosecutor has assembled evidence that suggests Cheney's long-standing tensions with the CIA contributed to the unmasking of operative Valerie Plame.

In grand jury sessions, including with New York Times reporter Judith Miller, Fitzgerald has pressed witnesses on what Cheney may have known about the effort to push back against ex-diplomat and Iraq war critic Joseph C. Wilson IV, including the leak of his wife's position at the CIA, Miller and others said. But Fitzgerald has focused more on the role of Cheney's top aides, including Chief of Staff I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, lawyers involved in the case said.

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.

It is not clear whether Fitzgerald plans to charge anyone inside the Bush administration with a crime. But with the case reaching a climax -- administration officials are braced for possible indictments as early as this week-- it is increasingly clear that Cheney and his aides have been deeply enmeshed in events surrounding the Plame affair from the outset.

It was a request by Cheney for more CIA information that, unknown to him, started a chain of events that led to Wilson's mission three years ago. His staff pressed the CIA for information about it one year later. And it was Libby who talked about Wilson's wife with at least two reporters before her identity became public, according to evidence Fitzgerald has amassed and which parties close to the case have acknowledged.

Lawyers in the case said Fitzgerald has focused extensively on whether behind-the-scenes efforts by the vice president's aides and other senior Bush aides were part of a criminal campaign to punish Wilson in part by unmasking his wife.

In a move people involved in the case read as a sign that the end is near, Fitzgerald's spokesman yesterday told the Associated Press that the prosecutor planned to announce his conclusions in Washington, where the grand jury has been meeting, instead of Chicago, where the prosecutor is based. Some lawyers close to the case cited courthouse talk that Fitzgerald might announce his findings as early as tomorrow, though hard evidence about his intentions and timing remained elusive.

In the course of the investigation, Fitzgerald has been exposed to the intense, behind-the-scenes fight between Cheney's office and the CIA over prewar intelligence and the vice president's central role in compiling and then defending the intelligence used to justify the war. Miller, in a first-person account Sunday in the Times, recalled that Libby complained in a June 23, 2003, meeting in his office that the CIA was engaged in "selective leaking" and a "hedging strategy" that would make the agency look equally prescient whether or not weapons of mass destruction were found in Iraq.

The special prosecutor has personally interviewed numerous officials from the CIA, White House and State Department. In the process, he and his investigative team have talked to a number of Cheney aides, including Mary Matalin, his former strategist; Catherine Martin, his former communications adviser; and Jennifer Millerwise, his former spokeswoman. In the case of Millerwise, she talked with the prosecutor more than two years ago but never appeared before the grand jury, according to a person familiar with her situation.

Starting in the days after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the vice president was at the forefront of a White House campaign to convince Congress and the American public that invading Iraq was central to defeating terrorists worldwide. Cheney, a longtime proponent of toppling Saddam Hussein, led the White House effort to build the case that Iraq was an imminent threat because it possessed a dangerous arsenal of weapons.

Before the war, he traveled to CIA headquarters for briefings, an unusual move that some critics interpreted as an effort to pressure intelligence officials into supporting his view of the evidence. After the war, when critics started questioning whether the White House relied on faulty information to justify war, Cheney and Libby were central to the effort to defend the intelligence and discredit the naysayers in Congress and elsewhere.

Administration officials acknowledge that Cheney was immersed in Iraq intelligence, and pressed aides repeatedly for information on weapons programs. He regularly requested follow-up information from the CIA and others when a piece of intelligence caught his eye. Wilson's trip, for example, was triggered by a question Cheney asked during a regular morning intelligence briefing. He had received a Defense Intelligence Agency report alleging Iraq had sought uranium from Niger and wanted to know what else the CIA may have known. Cheney's office was not told ahead of time about the Wilson mission to investigate the claim.

In the Bush White House, Cheney typically has operated secretly, relying on advice from a tight circle of longtime advisers, including Libby; David Addington, his counsel; and his wife, Lynne, and two children, including Liz, a top State Department official. 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.

One fact apparently critical to Fitzgerald's inquiry is when Libby learned about Plame and her CIA employment. Information that has emerged so far leaves this issue murky. A former CIA official told investigators that Cheney's office was seeking information about Wilson in May 2003, but it's not certain that officials with the vice president learned of the Plame connection then.

Miller, in her account, said Libby raised the issue of Plame in the June 23, 2003, meeting, describing her as a CIA employee and asserting that she had arranged the trip to Niger. Earlier that month, Libby discussed Wilson's trip with The Washington Post but never mentioned his wife.

Senior administration officials said there was a document circulated at the State Department -- before Libby talked to Miller -- that mentioned Plame. It was drafted in June as an administrative letter and addressed to then-Undersecretary of State Marc Grossman, who was acting secretary at the time since Secretary of State Colin L. Powell and Deputy Secretary Richard L. Armitage were out of the country.

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, where the discussion was focused on then growing criticism of Bush's inclusion in his January State of the Union speech of the allegation that Hussein had been seeking uranium from Niger.

The letter to Grossman discussed the reasons the Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR) did not believe the intelligence, which originated from foreign sources, was accurate. 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.

Attached to the letter were the notes from the INR analyst who had attended the session, but they were written well after the event occurred and contained mistakes about who was there and what was said, according to a former intelligence official who reviewed the document in the summer of 2003.

Grossman has refused to answer questions about the letter, and it is not clear whether he talked about it at the White House meeting he was said to have attended, according to the former State official.

Fitzgerald has questioned several witnesses from the CIA and State Department before the grand jury about the INR memo, according to lawyers familiar with the case.

© 2005 The Washington Post Company

=======================================

The fan is whirring up to speed, the Repub shit is flying through the air ...

Only a matter of time until Repub shit hits the fan.

[xrayzebra]

=======================================

The fan is whirring up to speed, the Repub shit is flying through the air ...

Only a matter of time until Repub shit hits the fan.


I hope this thing breaks soon, you and nbadan are going to be crazy if it doesn't. Just hope you don't have to much egg on your face.

[Yonivore]

I hope this thing breaks soon, you and nbadan are going to be crazy if it doesn't. Just hope you don't have to much egg on your face.
I wouldn't be surprised if Plame and Wilson are at the top of the indictment list.

[JoeChalupa]

Something is about to burst.

[boutons]

SOMETHING is up, or maybe not.

====================

The New York Times
October 19, 2005

No Final Report Seen in Inquiry on C.I.A. Leak
By DAVID JOHNSTON
and RICHARD W. STEVENSON

WASHINGTON, Oct. 18 - The special counsel in the C.I.A. leak case has told associates he has no plans to issue a final report about the results of the investigation, heightening the expectation that he intends to bring indictments, lawyers in the case and law enforcement officials said yesterday.

The prosecutor, Patrick J. Fitzgerald, is not expected to take any action in the case this week, government officials said. A spokesman for Mr. Fitzgerald, Randall Samborn, declined to comment.

A final report had long been considered an option for Mr. Fitzgerald if he decided not to accuse anyone of wrongdoing, although Justice Department officials have been dubious about his legal authority to issue such a report.

By signaling that he had no plans to issue the grand jury's findings in such detail, Mr. Fitzgerald appeared to narrow his options either to indictments or closing his investigation with no public disclosure of his findings, a choice that would set off a political firestorm.

With the term of the grand jury expiring Oct. 28, lawyers in the case said they assumed Mr. Fitzgerald was in the final stages of his inquiry.

The focus of Mr. Fitzgerald's inquiry has remained fixed on two senior White House aides, Karl Rove, who is President Bush's senior adviser and deputy chief of staff, and I. Lewis Libby Jr., who is Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff. Both had conversations with reporters about a C.I.A. officer whose name was later publicly disclosed.

It is not clear whether Mr. Fitzgerald has learned who first identified the C.I.A. officer, Valerie Wilson, to the syndicated columnist Robert D. Novak in July 2003.

Some of the lawyers in the case say Mr. Fitzgerald seems to be wrestling with decisions about how to proceed, leaning toward indictments but continuing to weigh thousands of pages of documents and testimony he has compiled during the nearly two-year inquiry.

In recent days, Mr. Fitzgerald has repeatedly told lawyers in the case that he has not made up his mind about criminal charges.

Mr. Fitzgerald has been investigating whether administration officials deliberately disclosed Ms. Wilson's identity - she is also known by her maiden name, Valerie Plame - in response to criticism by her husband, Joseph C. Wilson IV, of the administration's use of intelligence about Iraq's weapons programs before the invasion.

Some lawyers in the case had expressed hope that a final report would provide Mr. Fitzgerald with a vehicle to disclose his investigative findings even if he absolved everyone of wrongdoing. Democrats in Congress had also expressed a desire for such a report, apparently hoping it would offer fresh details about the administration's actions.

Any decision will be announced in Washington and not in Chicago, where Mr. Fitzgerald is the United States attorney, Justice Department officials said.

In his daily news briefing, Scott McClellan, the White House press secretary, said Tuesday that a successful completion to the inquiry would be one in which Mr. Fitzgerald would "determine the facts and then outline those facts for the American people."

Asked if that meant the White House would favor a public report if there were no indictments, Mr. McClellan said that the decision was Mr. Fitzgerald's, but that "we would all like to know what the facts are."

Such a report could not only show where evidence failed to result in criminal charges, but also make recommendations for changes in law, disciplinary actions or criticize the conduct of public officials whose actions did not rise to the level of criminal behavior.

Given the political ramifications attached to Mr. Fitzgerald's decisions, officials at the White House have begun discussing what would happen if Mr. Rove was indicted.

Among the names being discussed to take some of Mr. Rove's responsibilities should he have to step aside, an outside adviser to the White House said, are Dan Bartlett, currently Mr. Bush's counselor; Ken Mehlman, the chairman of the Republican National Committee; and Robert M. Kimmitt, the deputy Treasury secretary.

Under Justice Department regulations, it is not clear whether Mr. Fitzgerald has the authority to issue a final report, even if he wanted to, although he has operated under a broad delegation of authority, issued in a pair of letters by James B. Comey, the former deputy attorney general. Those directives gave Mr. Fitzgerald virtually the same power as the attorney general to conduct criminal inquiries.

But even the attorney general is restricted in what information he can release publicly or present to Congress when it has been obtained, as Mr. Fitzgerald has gathered it, through extensive use of a grand jury, whose proceedings are secret. Even so, some lawyers have argued that Mr. Fitzgerald could issue such a report and have said there is general authority to report his findings if they are requested by Congress.

Without a report, it seems likely that questions about the case may remain unanswered and that a complete account of the administration's activities may never be known, including the details of testimony by the scores of administration officials who were interviewed in the inquiry.

The likelihood that crucial details might be kept secret would be increased if Mr. Fitzgerald brought charges that were narrowly focused on perjury, false statement or obstruction of justice counts involving misstatements by officials in their testimony. But he has also examined broader potential violations, among them whether there was an illegal effort, directed by senior officials, to disclose Ms. Wilson's identity.

Officials who testified or were questioned by investigators also included John Hannah, Mr. Cheney's principal deputy national security adviser.

* Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company

[Nbadan]

More juicy gossip circulating about the CIA leak case...

Alternet.org
By Jan Frel


I just got this e-mail from a Democratic House member's staffer with tons of good dirt on the Plame investigation. I'm reprinting it whole cloth to share all, and show that while these Hill staffers are well-informed, they sure could use some capitalization classes.

Among the things I hadn't seen before:

-Fred Flights, an assistant to John Bolton, is a named name who could be indicted.

-Sens. John McCain and Lindsey Graham have been suggested as replacements for Dick Cheney.

-Colin Powell told John McCain he showed the infamous memo with Plame's identity on it two just two people; Dick Cheney and George Bush.

-Fitzgerald is looking at the precedent set from the indictment of Tricky Dick's veep Spiro Agnew to pursue against Cheney.

That's red meat folks.

afterdowningstreet (http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/3857)

[JoeChalupa]

Will we found out this week if all the hoopla is for naught?

[ChumpDumper]

I wouldn't be surprised if Plame and Wilson are at the top of the indictment list.Why?

[Marcus Bryant]

At what point did Wilson acknowledge publicly that his wife was a CIA officer?

I guess that's what the 'nore is getting at.

[Extra Stout]

Two years ago the news was that Karl Rove and Scooter Libby leaked Plame's identity to six journalists as part of a coordinated campaign to discredit Joe Wilson.

Nothing has happened in the past two years to change that impression.

[ChumpDumper]

At what point did Wilson acknowledge publicly that his wife was a CIA officer?

I guess that's what the 'nore is getting at.And Plame herself? Why her?

[Marcus Bryant]

Maybe she did too.

Also, I'm sure the 'nore would claim that the Wilsons divulged some classified intel along the way.

[Yonivore]

Why?
Wilson lied to Congress and Plame probably violated some laws in the manner in which she made sure her hubby got the assignment to go to Niger.

Yeah, I'm betting they're not out of the woods on this deal. But, only Fitzgerald knows for sure.

[ChumpDumper]

Wilson lied to CongressWhen?
Plame probably violated some laws in the manner in which she made sure her hubby got the assignment to go to Niger.Which ones?

[mookie2001]

LOL

you got dumped Chump

[Ocotillo]

Rather than going down in the annals of history being compared to Reagan, Shrub will find himself compared to another Republican........Harding.

[Marcus Bryant]

I think the most interesting outcome of this investigation will be the significance that the Demos will attach to a perjury charge and the worthlessness of the charge per the GOP.

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

[Yonivore]

When?
When he told Congress, under oath, that his wife played no role in him being assigned to the Niger junket.

Which ones?
I don't know, Fitzgerald hasn't leaked...contrary to all the media hype over who's going to be indicted, which is wishful speculation on the part of a biased media fueled by unsubstantiated rumors from the left and Nbadan-types. I merely point out that it's just as likely the Wilson/Plames will be indicted as it is Rove or anyone else.

[Extra Stout]

I think the most interesting outcome of this investigation will be the significance that the Demos will attach to a perjury charge and the worthlessness of the charge per the GOP.

The more things change, the more they stay the same.True... the exact reverse from 1998.

[Yonivore]

True... the exact reverse from 1998.
If they are indicted for perjury or obstruction, you won't hear me whining about it. But, I don't see that happening, particularly given the nature of Plame's "outing."

[ChumpDumper]

When he told Congress, under oath, that his wife played no role in him being assigned to the Niger junket.Was that before or after she was outed?
I don't know, Fitzgerald hasn't leaked...contrary to all the media hype over who's going to be indicted, which is wishful speculation on the part of a biased media fueled by unsubstantiated rumors from the left and Nbadan-types. I merely point out that it's just as likely the Wilson/Plames will be indicted as it is Rove or anyone else.So your wishful specualtion = theirs.

[Yonivore]

Was that before or after she was outed?
I have no idea...and it makes no difference.

So your wishful specualtion = theirs.
Not speculation, merely pointing out the fact that there is as much reason to believe Plame and Wilson would be indicted for a crime as there is to believe Rove or Libby.

[ChumpDumper]

I have no idea...and it makes no difference.Sure it does -- this whole thing revolves around outing his wife.
Not speculation, merely pointing out the fact that there is as much reason to believe Plame and Wilson would be indicted for a crime as there is to believe Rove or Libby.Not when you can't even make up a law Plame could have broken.

[Yonivore]

Sure it does -- this whole thing revolves around outing his wife.
If she was even outed. There's still the question of whether or not the law applied in her case.

Not when you can't even make up a law Plame could have broken.
Well, since neither your nor I have the details of the investigation, allegations of her violating ethics rules and nepotism laws in securing her husbands Niger trip are just as credible as allegations of Rove and/or Libby violating the law in revealing her identity.