He Did Not Know – Moon of Alabama

April 6, 2006

He Did Not Know

Plamegate:

"If there’s a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is," Bush told reporters at an impromptu news conference during a fund-raising stop in Chicago, Illinois. "If the person has violated law, that person will be taken care of.

"I welcome the investigation. I am absolutely confident the Justice Department will do a good job.

"I want to know the truth," the president continued. "Leaks of classified information are bad things."

He added that he did not know of "anybody in my administration who leaked classified information."
Bush welcomes probe of CIA leak, CNN, February 11, 2004

—

Q Given — given recent developments in the CIA leak case, particularly Vice President Cheney’s discussions with the investigators, do you still stand by what you said several months ago, a suggestion that it might be difficult to identify anybody who leaked the agent’s name?
THE PRESIDENT: That’s up to —
Q And, and, do you stand by your pledge to fire anyone found to have done so?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes. And that’s up to the U.S. Attorney to find the facts.
Bush Press Conference, whitehouse.gov, June 10, 2004

—

A former White House aide under indictment for obstructing a leak probe, I. Lewis Libby, testified to a grand jury that he gave information from a closely-guarded "National Intelligence Estimate" on Iraq to a New York Times reporter in 2003 with the specific permission of President Bush, according to a new court filing from the special prosecutor in the case.
Bush Authorized Leak to Times, Libby Told Grand Jury, NY Sun, April 06, 2006

—

I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby testified to a federal grand jury that he had received "approval from the President through the Vice President" to divulge portions of a National Intelligence Estimate regarding Saddam Hussein’s purported efforts to develop nuclear weapons, according to the court papers. Libby was said to have testified that such presidential authorization to disclose classified information was "unique in his recollection," the court papers further said.
…
Although not reflected in the court papers, two senior government officials said in interviews with National Journal in recent days that Libby has also asserted that Cheney authorized him to leak classified information to a number of journalists during the run-up to war with Iraq.

…
In yet another instance, Libby had claimed that President Bush authorized Libby to speak to and provide classified information to Washington Post assistant managing editor Bob Woodward for "Plan of Attack," a book written by Woodward about the run-up to the Iraqi war.

Libby Says Bush Authorized Leaks, National Journal, Murray Waas, April 06, 2006

A fish rots from the head down …

Posted by b on April 6, 2006 at 15:51 UTC | Permalink

Comments

The official said that while the administration declassified portions of the NIE that would appear exculpatory to the White House, it insisted that a one-page summary of the NIE which would have suggested that the President mischaracterized other intelligence information to go to war remain classified.
from waas story. pretty damning. maybe they didn’t declassify parts of it only because bush hadn’t read those parts. ya think;)

Posted by: annie | Apr 6 2006 16:32 utc | 1

Not to sound despairing or anything, but somebody please convince me why this will make a difference when everything up until now hasn’t.

Posted by: mats | Apr 6 2006 17:30 utc | 2

mats,
it is down to faith. Those who beleve in Bush are going to continue to ignore these kinds of reports and the conclusions one must draw from them.
Those who already knew better need no further convincing.

Posted by: ralphieboy | Apr 6 2006 17:41 utc | 3

mats , fitz is spinning his web. it looks very insignificant now, but when he is finished it will be a site to behold, and when the light shines apon it , in all its glory, we will see many many nasty pests caught in the magnificent web!
yes, i am an optimist

Posted by: annie | Apr 6 2006 17:48 utc | 4

annie, I envy you that optimism, and hope for all our sakes you are someday proved an oracle.

Posted by: mats | Apr 6 2006 17:56 utc | 5

Not to sound despairing or anything, but somebody please convince me why this will make a difference when everything up until now hasn’t.
Some Bush followers are quite strict conservative on leaking national security stuff. Bush being involved personally in doing so will matter for them.
Bush defense is that he can declassify by virtue of his job. (Why then were parts of NIE officially declassified in the regular process ten days after the Plame leak to Judy Miller?)
That adds to the baragge of “rights” he claims to have in field of national security. Courts will decide on that and hopefully they will see their own existence endangered by it and rein him in. If not, a very dark age has started.
Next step – a leak of the damage assessment the CIA did after Plame’s cover and her operations were blown.

Posted by: b | Apr 6 2006 18:37 utc | 6

Bush goes down then what? Kerry, not to mention Hilary C. would be worse.
Fitz is a Gvmt lackey. Believe me. His independence is part of the US mythos. He may bring down people, probably will do. So what?
It will occupy the press, cause ‘Leftists’ to crow and cheer, increase internal strife in the US (carefully managed), and the Iraqis (to mention just them) will continue to die. As will US troops.

Posted by: Noisette | Apr 6 2006 19:02 utc | 7

Just added the second quote to the posting above.
@Noisette – maybe you are right, but chances are that it’s not going to be worse with a NOT-Bush-Cheney administration.

Posted by: b | Apr 6 2006 19:10 utc | 8

He may bring down people, probably will do. So what?
people want vindication. there is a terrible guilt pervading the country for our part in a. letting iraq happen b. not doing enough to stop it or feeling powerless to stop it c. supporting it based on lies
plamegate has the potential to wrap this whole fiasco into one very neat package, an alluring drama, captivting, w/promise to entrap all the way to the top. way more fascinating than watergate, w/more evil participants.
now, w/the culmination it provides a release for the guilt of the american population, i’m not saying a worthy excuse, but certainly a release. also, it will go down in history , bigtime.

Posted by: annie | Apr 6 2006 19:26 utc | 9

one more thing, to back up b’s explanation of leaking classified documents.one of the thugs response to the plame leak was to scream bloody m when the nsa stuff was released, comparing it and claiming ‘now this is a real leak’ and try to stifle the publics right to know. ensnaring and threatening reporters and their sources. when it comes out that the administration w/intent passed on classified info, or declassified it for their personal gain, it highlights the hypocrisy of their position.
leaking plames identity could very well have caused the death of agents, it could be considered treason. my guess is that fitz is onto some of the consequential damage from the shut down of the cia operations, a corner of the web. the best is yet to come.

Posted by: annie | Apr 6 2006 19:36 utc | 10

people want vindication. there is a terrible guilt pervading the country for our part in a. letting iraq happen b. not doing enough to stop it or feeling powerless to stop it c. supporting it based on lies
Interesting perspective – I have not thought about that yet. First question: If it is real, how long will it prevail?

Posted by: b | Apr 6 2006 19:51 utc | 11

It’ll be interesting to see how the wacko-media – Fox, Matthews, et al – portray this. Will it infuriate them, or are they too well-leashed trained now?
Pray that enough well placed people are enraged to derail further malevolence in Iran which would be Catastrophic for everyone everywhere.
He might have less problem w/it if it didn’t again show what an outright liar he is to everyone. No excuses possible here.
For myself, I’m far past numb.

Posted by: jj | Apr 6 2006 20:37 utc | 12

if the guilt is real?
if people wanting vindication is real?
do you mean how long will it take to prevail?
prevail as in triumph? as in justice will prevail, but when?

Posted by: annie | Apr 6 2006 20:38 utc | 13

It’ll keep simmering away until about the end 0f ’08 when Dubya will pardon himself and his cronies and leave office. He’ll have to keep his head down for a coupla years until the revisionists in the media have twisted, distorted and spun this whole saga into confusion, then the grinning chimp will be back as a revered senior statesmen.
No one will care because by that time everyone will be more worried about whatever shyster managed to get control of their country while they distracted themselves with this.
Oh it will be a demopublican, after all, it is their ‘turn’, and getting a republocrat up after this would be problematic.
However apart from allowing a few fools to think the sow’s ear is a silk purse, nothing will change.
The deals over who’s gonna get the gig will be being cut right now.
People might even get their wish of Al “the Whore” Gore. He’s got a proven track record of simpering to the gang. Look at how he folded in 2000, leaving only the congessional black caucus to point out the hi-jack.
Still what the hell, as long as the poor get murdered a little more quietly while they are being robbed of their resources, all us ‘lucky ones’ should manage a good nights sleep to prepare us for another day of consumption, pollution and waste.
I await the usual ‘strawman’ rebuttal with baited breath.

Posted by: Anonymous | Apr 6 2006 21:07 utc | 14

I hope that this news will stir some in Congress, including Republicans who are tired of having to defend all the crap from this Administration, to stand up to the Administration now on the issue of Iran, specifically, and on other so-called national security matters too, like the domestic spying issue.

Posted by: Maxcrat | Apr 6 2006 21:34 utc | 15

Henry Waxman has some questions for the POTUS about this.

Posted by: catlady | Apr 6 2006 23:42 utc | 16

first, a disclaimer – i have just been through a tough couple of weeks of projects and midterms in the graphic design program i am pursuing in my late forties. i just don’t have it in me tonight to write from scratch so i am directly quoting from hounddog’s diary at kos.
hounddog’s diary anounces that:

Jason Leopold has just published an article at TruthOut entitled, Bush at Center of Intelligence Leak, that says the US Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald will soon release proof that both President George Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney were at the center of the NIE Plamegate leaks. They authorized them, and were kept fully informed by emails that Fitzgerald has in his possession!
Attorneys and current and former White House officials close to the investigation into the leak of covert CIA operative Valerie Plame Wilson said Thursday that President Bush gave Vice President Dick Cheney the authorization in mid-June 2003 to disclose a portion of the highly sensitive National Intelligence Estimate to Washington Post reporter Bob Woodward and former New York Times reporter Judith Miller.
These current and former White House officials are among the 36 witnesses who have testified before a grand jury and have been cooperating with the special counsel’s probe since its inception.
Finally, the Fitzgerald investigation is picking up steam. But before becoming too excited, please remember folks, that Fitzgerald can not indict a sitting President. He can only name him as an unindicted coconspirator, and we do not have any indication that he intends to do this…yet. Fitzgerald can indict the VP. But a sitting President can only be tried and removed with an impeachment process. But the smoking gun evidence appears to be near.
Well, actually the Murray Waas’ evidence is sufficient to prove the President lied to the American people. But apparently these upcoming emails will establish a clear case of obstruction of justice, that in IMHO, should be a “slam dunk” for an impeachment process. And with evidence this clear, we should have no difficulty obtaining the few cross over Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee to start the process now. This can not wait until after November. And should not.

Thought at least Annie and Max would want to see this.

Posted by: conchita | Apr 7 2006 2:16 utc | 17

the wheels on the bus go ’round and ’round…

The bottom line is that there is now a severe rift between Bush and Cheney. Rove continues to protect Bush while Libby, who at first provided cover for Cheney, is now willing to let the chips fall where they may. As one source put it, Rove is more than willing to “throw Cheney under the bus to protect the president…Washington insiders who were involved in Watergate and maintain contacts with the current administration report that the situation within the Executive Mansion has never been so tense since Watergate.”
– from the wayne madsen report

Posted by: b real | Apr 7 2006 2:30 utc | 18

Cheney should’ve had the sense to duck out gracefully long ago citing “health problems”, but I guess he is too fixated by power.

Posted by: ralphieboy | Apr 7 2006 6:00 utc | 19

thanks conchita

Posted by: annie | Apr 7 2006 7:43 utc | 20

Ditto – thanks, Conchita. I will be interested to watch members of Congress react to this over the next few days.

Posted by: maxcrat | Apr 7 2006 8:05 utc | 21

Booman has an interesting timeline related to the Libby investigation.

Posted by: ww | Apr 7 2006 8:17 utc | 22

About everything I have read says Bush has the right to declassify secret information. He says “this is what’S in this secret paper” and it is unclassified. He says “Agent XY in Moscow proved it” and thereby the name XY as an agent in Moscow is unclassified.
This is wrong. Not only in a moral question or procedural question, but as a legal one too. The executive order covering classification/declassification does allow to immediately classify stuff. But it sets legal rule for declassification that Bush did break.
Why doesn´t that get any attention?

Posted by: b | Apr 7 2006 22:13 utc | 23

Back to Main