NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/08/30/leak.armitage/index.html

Anyone here still want to say that Cheney or Rove were the leakers?

I'm actually surprised that the Nazz hasn't mentioned this story yet, either positively or negatively.

Can anyone say "scapegoat"?

Figures. Tries to lay the blame on someone who isn't even in the administration anymore. I hope no one will buy this.

It's plausible, I don't know for certain yet. Some circumstantial evidence does tend to lean in that direction. For example, the fact that Fitzgerald never filed charges against the original source. Given that Armitage didn't know the information was classified, and dropped the name unintentionally, that would make tha tmuch sense. Also the quote from the book seems more than a bit plausible.

Figures. Tries to lay the blame on someone who isn't even in the administration anymore. I hope no one will buy this.

Sounds like it's already done.

Fitz is left with nothing.

Hmm?

I wonder who will be the next "leaker" if people don't buy it?

Hmm?

I wonder who will be the next "leaker" if people don't buy it?

It's not a matter of "people don't buy it".

It's a matter of Fitz convincing a grand jury, and then later, after an indictment, proving beyond a "reasonable doubt" that Armitage wasn't the leaker.

Sorry, we're done here, legally.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/30/washington/30armitage.html?_r=1&ei=5094&en=8147a124a4926c40&hp=&ex=1156910400&partner=homepage&pagewanted=print&oref=login

WASHINGTON, Aug. 29 — Richard L. Armitage, a former deputy secretary of state, has acknowledged that he was the person whose conversation with a columnist in 2003 prompted a long, politically laden criminal investigation in what became known as the C.I.A. leak case, a lawyer involved in the case said on Tuesday.

Mr. Armitage did not return calls for comment. But the lawyer and other associates of Mr. Armitage have said he has confirmed that he was the initial and primary source for the columnist, Robert D. Novak, whose column of July 14, 2003, identified Valerie Wilson as a Central Intelligence Agency officer.

The identification of Mr. Armitage as the original leaker to Mr. Novak ends what has been a tantalizing mystery. In recent months, however, Mr. Armitage’s role had become clear to many, and it was recently reported by Newsweek magazine and The Washington Post.

In the accounts by the lawyer and associates, Mr. Armitage disclosed casually to Mr. Novak that Ms. Wilson worked for the C.I.A. at the end of an interview in his State Department office. Mr. Armitage knew that, the accounts continue, because he had seen a written memorandum by Under Secretary of State Marc Grossman.

That Armitage was the original source doesn't change the fact that Rove and Libby pushed the knowledge later, or that Novak was asked by CIA not to print it. And Libby is still going to trial, so to say that Fitzgerald has nothing is a bit of a stretch.

I don't have any proof, but my gut feeling is that Armitage is taking the fall for Karl Rove.

That Armitage was the original source doesn't change the fact that Rove and Libby pushed the knowledge later, or that Novak was asked by CIA not to print it. And Libby is still going to trial, so to say that Fitzgerald has nothing is a bit of a stretch.

Libby is in trouble for perjury, not revealing a name.

And there's no proof that Rove pushed anything.

I don't have any proof, but my gut feeling is that Armitage is taking the fall for Karl Rove.

I thought Fitzgerald already said that Rove was not the initial source.

And, by all I've seen, Fitzgerald is above reproach, from either the left or the right. He has a firm commitment to seeing that justice, not politics, is done.

i have no opinion on it one way or the other. i see no reason why it shouldnt be true.

i do, however, wonder why he didnt come forward before a special prosecutor was appointed so that this needless expenditure of time and money could have been avoided.

it makes me think that there must be something more to the story yet.

Libby is in trouble for perjury, not revealing a name.

And there's no proof that Rove pushed anything.

Ummm, Matthew Cooper? He testified to the grand jury that Rove was one of his sources.

Ummm, Matthew Cooper? He testified to the grand jury that Rove was one of his sources.

Doesn't matter. The question was, originally, who told Novak? Because he was the first to out her.

Once she's outed, she's outed. Outing her afterwards is not harmful at all, because arguably, the harm is already done.

And neither Armitage or Powell are friends of Rove, so they're not doing him a favor by waiting a couple of years to admit that they were the ones to out her.

Funny how that works, eh?

Doesn't matter. The question was, originally, who told Novak? Because he was the first to out her.

Once she's outed, she's outed. Outing her afterwards is not harmful at all, because arguably, the harm is already done.

And neither Armitage or Powell are friends of Rove, so they're not doing him a favor by waiting a couple of years to admit that they were the ones to out her.

Funny how that works, eh?

See, that's where you're wrong. The law specifically states that even if the agent has been outed, you can't confirm it or deny it without taking proactive steps to make sure the information has been declassified. That's why, in the early parts of this story, Joseph Wilson wouldn't answer press questions about his wife's status--he couldn't. It was against the law.

Figures. Tries to lay the blame on someone who isn't even in the administration anymore. I hope no one will buy this.Someone who coincidentally was critical of deposing Saddam...

Can anyone say "scapegoat"?

Duh

See, that's where you're wrong. The law specifically states that even if the agent has been outed, you can't confirm it or deny it without taking proactive steps to make sure the information has been declassified. That's why, in the early parts of this story, Joseph Wilson wouldn't answer press questions about his wife's status--he couldn't. It was against the law.

I'll bet 100 dollars that Rove will not be prosecuted.

I'll bet 100 dollars that Rove will not be prosecuted.

Bet 1000 he won't be fired. I should also point out that a source is not the same as a conviction, or confession.

Afterall, many "sources" have extremely dubious information and intentions. Hell the "Source" could be Cheney for all we know.

Bet 1000 he won't be fired. I should also point out that a source is not the same as a conviction, or confession.

Afterall, many "sources" have extremely dubious information and intentions. Hell the "Source" could be Cheney for all we know.

It's pretty clear from Armitage's lawyer's public admission, that Armitage is the first official who told anyone about Plame being a CIA agent.

It's also clear that Armitage is no friend of Rove - hence his resignation at the beginning of the second Bush term.

It's also clear that Armitage was happy to see Rove twist in the wind for a couple of years, saying nothing.

It's also clear that Fitzgerald's statement here, was a lie:

Valerie Wilson's cover was blown in July 2003. The first sign of her cover being blown was that Mr. Novak published a column on July 14th 2003. But Mr. Novak was not the first reporter to be told that Wilson's wife, Valerie Wilson, Ambassador Wilson's wife, Valerie, worked at the CIA. Several other reporters were told. In fact, Mr. Libby was the first official known to have told a reporter when he talked with Judith Miller in June of 2003 about Valerie Wilson.

It turns out that not only did Armitage tell Novak first, he also told Bob Woodward first.

It was Armitage first, all the way. And I bet Fitzgerald knew this. And lied.

I'll bet 100 dollars that Rove will not be prosecuted.
No bet. Rove's attorney has already said as much and Fitzgerald hasn't contradicted him to my knowledge. For now, it looks like Libby is the only one going down, though it'll be interesting to see if Fitzgerald calls Rove to testify against him. Maybe that's why Rove got a pass--he rolled.

No bet. Rove's attorney has already said as much and Fitzgerald hasn't contradicted him to my knowledge. For now, it looks like Libby is the only one going down, though it'll be interesting to see if Fitzgerald calls Rove to testify against him. Maybe that's why Rove got a pass--he rolled.

Since Armitage has already been interviewed by Fitzgerald, and obviously told the truth (that he outed Plame), we can only take Fitzgerald's statement that Libby was the first to out Plame as an outright lie.

Maybe that's why Rove isn't even involved. Makes you wonder why Fitz, knowing full well that Libby was not the first, went out and adamantly said so.