Cheney Plays Dumb
As a teaser for the post I keep promising, but never delivering (identifying the document from which I think Cheney learned of Plame’s identity), I’m going to make a quick point about Cheney’s request to the CIA on June 10, 2003 for information on Wilson’s trip. This email, written by Robert Grenier’s Executive Assistant (but not seen by Grenier, if we can believe his trial testimony), repeats the story that Cheney gave to John McLaughlin to verify. Here’s the story:
In February 2002, CIA received an initial report of a shipment of uranium from Niger to Chad. Former Ambassador to Cameroon Joe Wilson (an old friend of the Agency and former Charge d’Affaires in Baghdad) was supposedly sent by CIA to Niger to investigate this story. He did so, and he concluded that there was no truth to it. Wilson said that he was debriefed by a CIA case officer who flew in (to where is unclear) [redacted]
Now, I presume that the parenthetical information about Wilson–"an old friend of the Agency and former Charge d’Affaires in Baghdad"–comes from the author of this email or McLaughlin. But I presume the rest comes from Cheney–it’s the story that he told McLaughlin he had heard, and would like verified or refuted.
Notice the false details in the story? Joe Wilson was never Ambassador to Cameroon–he was Ambassador to Gabon and Sao Tome (and I’ve asked him–he was never otherwise stationed in Cameroon). And the February 2002 report, if it included any information about a shipment of uranium from Niger to Iraq, described that shipment as going through Benin, not Chad. The report described a contract being signed, not a shipment. The bit about the debriefing is weird too, with the ambiguity about where the debriefing took place. Cheney told McLaughlin a story that would lead him to find the real story on Wilson (the 2002 intelligence, the reference to Niger, and Wilson’s name should do that by itself), but that included some noise, some incorrect information.
Outing Valerie Plame aided our enemies
http://test.denverpost.com/opinion/ci_6316023
After 44 years in journalism, I don’t get angry very often about the dirty tricks that so often besmirch the American political process.
But I am angry about the Valerie Plame affair, a sordid tale that flared anew this week when President George Bush commuted the prison sentence of Lewis â€Scooter†Libby.
I am not angry at the commutation or the pettifogging partisan exchanges it spawned. I am angry at the underlying event – the fact that an American patriot whose only crime was to serve her country in a dangerous and honorable profession had her mission undercut for partisan political purposes.
I am even angrier that the vicious â€outing†of Valerie Plame put her sources at risk – the men and women in foreign countries who had risked their own lives to help America in our war on terror.
In the intelligence trade, such foreign sources are called â€assets.†I call them heroes. And they are the ones who were put most at risk after columnist Robert Novak revealed Plame’s CIA connection as part of a clumsy Bush administration effort to discredit her husband, former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, who had become a critic of the Iraq war.
To explain why this case angers me so deeply, let me give you a number: RA68031300. It identifies me as a Vietnam-era veteran of the United States Army. After enlisting, I took basic training at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri, where I received orders sending me to Fort Sill, Oklahoma, for training in artillery, after which I expected to be sent to Vietnam.
Because someone in the Pentagon noticed I had worked for United Press International, I was called out on my last day of basic and redirected to the US Military Academy at West Point. I ultimately became editor of the post newspaper, the Pointer View.
So in the end, my personal risk in my military career was limited to some really awful haircuts. But the names of 58,000 of my comrades engraved on a wall in Washington, D.C., prove that my story could have ended differently. Those names also explain why I will never forgive anyone who willfully puts the lives of America’s military or intelligence personnel or our friends abroad in danger.
And that’s exactly what former Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage did when he leaked Plame’s identity to Novak – and what Novak did when he published the name of a covert CIA agent.
Between Armitage’s dishonorable act and Novak’s dishonorable act were a string of other dishonorable acts, including an executive order by President Bush empowering Vice President Cheney to declassify classified information, which Cheney did, thus allowing Libby to shop Plame’s identity around in hopes of finding a journalist willing to smear Wilson through his wife. With Libby’s information confirming Armitage’s original tip, Novak willingly blew Plame’s cover.
In so doing, he didn’t put Plame at personal risk, because she was not overseas at the time. But he did irrevocably damage her mission – and put those human â€assets†at risk.
You see, al-Qaeda and its ilk rarely try to kill CIA agents – or anyone else who can fight back. What these cowards do is kill people who have worked with US agents.
You can imagine the conversation: â€Hmm, that Valerie Plame who visited here turns out to be a CIA agent. Didn’t she hang out at Hamid’s coffee shop a lot?â€
Next day, Hamid’s body turns up, along with the bodies of his wife and family, all of whom were tortured to death before his eyes.
That’s the way our enemies play the game. That’s why we train brave men and women like Valerie Plame so America can fight back.
The outing of Plame may have been technically legal, as the commutation of Libby’s sentence undoubtedly was. But our supreme law, the US Constitution, still defines treason as giving aid and comfort to our enemies in time of war.
And in this aging veteran’s eyes, that’s exactly what Armitage, Cheney, Libby and Novak did.
â€Joe Wilson was never Ambassador to Cameroon–he was Ambassador to Gabon and Sao Tome . . â€
IIRC from reading Wilson’s memoir months ago, he was also Ambassador to Niger wasn’t he?
No. He served in a low-level position in Niger much earlier in his career.
From Bob Ewegen’s OpEd/comment: â€You can imagine the conversation: â€Hmm, that Valerie Plame who visited here turns out to be a CIA agent. Didn’t she hang out at Hamid’s coffee shop a lot?â€
Next day, Hamid’s body turns up, along with the bodies of his wife and family, all of whom were tortured to death before his eyes. â€
As another Vietnam era Army enlisted type (in my case drafted, unlike Ewegen, who had a Regular Army serial number) I second his entire comment. It’s great to see someone in the mainstream media getting it.
Regarding the quoted part of his piece, the one thing that will almost certainly will give this story legs that will take it across the finish line of well-deserved impeachment would be if the identity of a real-dead (and once real-life) â€Hamid†emerges with the gory details of his/her demise. I hope that if anyone has those details and is sure they could put those details out without doing further damage to our interests or â€assetsâ€, he or she will be patriotic enough to do so.
Somewhat off-topic, there’s another insight that us old Army grunts can offer, this one pertaining to the whole despicable torture gate mess. (I hope Bob Ewegen will agree) For anyone who’s been at the bottom of the military discipline hierarchy for a couple of years, the idea that any soldier would pose for pics of the likes that came out of Abu Ghraib by the hundreds (or was it thousands?) if they did not know that what they were routinely doing was approved of, at least tacitly, as far up the chain of command as their eyes could see and way beyond is laughable. I believe it almost certainly went as high as the moral midget who could mock the prisoner condemned to execution who had almost certainly undergone a profound conversion experience within the framework of his own religion. And, of course, he didn’t commute her sentence.
PS to EW: I stand corrected, doffing my hat to the authority.
Plans within plans within plans – it seems to be the Beltway MO, yes? We’re arguing about the same things we argued about 30 years ago during Watergate and Vietnam, when strings were being pulled that no-one wanted to see where they led to nor did they want to pull on them very hard.
You only have to read a few science fiction novels, like Herbert’s Dune novels or Asimov’s Foundation Trilogy to see that this stuff MUST be going on in real life. Cheney’s misinformation gathering was intentional, no doubt. But I think there is no way he could NOT have known who Plame or Wilson was, considering who Plame was working for and who Wilson was working for in Gulf War I.
Cheney lies, and he lies with the best of them. He might be able to say he doesn’t know who Plame is, but Wilson? He practically shared office space with the guy during the Bush I administration, how could he NOT know him?
RE: Sharing office space, I was thinking of Rumsfeld saying he didn’t know Wilson, but hey, they’re all one big circle jerk and have been since the Nixon days haven’t they?
I think its a stretch to say that Cheney deliberately inserted false details in order to hide the extent of his knowledge. Details of any story are bound to get garbled in its fourth retelling (i.e. â€documents about contracts for a shipment of uranium†become â€documents about a shipment of uranium†quite easily), and irrelevant details (like which country Wilson was ambassador to) can easily be lost.
Wouldn’t Cheney know who Joe Wilson was from the very begining? When he was Defense Secretary and Bush 41 awarded Joe Wilson his Meritous Award(maybe that’s not the name)-wouldn’t Cheney have been at that ceremony?
Sorta like Cheney never met John Edwards — have always felt that the media would have footage and/or file photos of that White House event — which could disprove his lie on Meet the Press – that he didn’t know Joe Wilson.
Of course my suspicion has always veered toward Matalin’s involvement in this, somehow.
I disagree in part with the editorial. The commutation/pardon is despicable as an obstruction of justice and abuse of power. The president’s long track record on such matters make his his claimed motivation laughable. Frank Rich is spot on in today’s column; the commutation demonstrated two things: Bush is a raging coward and his sole motivation is to protect himself.
I agree in part about who was at risk in the outing of a US spy. Those most likely to be at risk are those who worked with Ms. Plame or her cover business(-es). Any spy agency not run by Inspector Clouseau would suspect those she worked with directly and those who worked with them. The degree of separation is directly proportional to the paranoia of the regime and inversely proportional to their hold on power. The more insecure and paranoid that regime or organization is, the more degrees of separation it is likely to punish.
These regimes don’t need proof, of course. Like Dick Cheney, all they need is suspicion and these people or their families, friends or people they met in a bar or talked to on the phone are off to a Gulag or at the bottom of the river.
Where I disagree is over the personal risk to Ms. Plame and her associates and contacts here. We have no information about who were the targets of her work. But as the assassination of Litvinenko in London shows, pay back can take place anywhere and come from the most unlikely places. Which makes the outing of a key asset in the fight to limit the spread of WMD’s heinous. If any crime or abuse justified impeachment, that was it, which is why Shrub and Big Dick are betting their administration to try and hide it.
I wholeheartedly agree with the premise that Cheney feels himself a monarch among bureaucrats, able to manipulate other bureaucrats with greater ease and sleight of hand than he can Timmeh at MTP. Learning how to do that has been a lifelong passion. He and Rumsfeld, after all, out maneuvered and forced the resignation of Henry Kissinger, himself a master bureaucrat. That was thirty years ago, and Big Dick has learned a lot since then.
The behavior EW posits is fully consistent with Cheney’s passion for secrecy, his ability to act before his target knows that he or she is a target, and his ability to hide his tracks. Simple tradecraft, but in the hands of a master bureaucrat, it becomes a work of art – and destruction.
I wholeheartedly agree with the premise that Cheney feels himself a monarch among bureaucrats, able to manipulate other bureaucrats with greater ease and sleight of hand than he can Timmeh at MTP. Learning how to do that has been a lifelong passion. He and Rumsfeld, after all, out maneuvered and forced the resignation of Henry Kissinger, himself a master bureaucrat. That was thirty years ago, and Big Dick has learned a lot since then.
The behavior EW posits is fully consistent with Cheney’s passion for secrecy, his ability to act before his target knows that he or she is a target, and his ability to hide his tracks. Simple tradecraft, but in the hands of a master bureaucrat, it becomes a work of art – and destruction.
Might not be out and out lies, but a way of indicating to those who know some specific bit of information without making it apparent outright.
Reminds me of JFK assassination researchers who kept coming across declassified documents about one Lee Henry Oswald.
It looks like a simple mistake, but chances are good that the mis-naming pointed to one set of documents kept seperate from others.
Hard to believe, but it’s the third anniversary of Libby’s leak to Miller!
more coffee! more coffee!
The fourth anniversary!
wonder if the st. regis would take a reservation for an anniversary lunch today for judy & scooter?
Y’know, when Marcy and whoever are in town for the next Congressional hearing, we really SHOULD honor the St. Regis with our group presence. [I wonder what the cheapest thing on their menu is?]
February 19, 2002- Wilson met with CIA and Deputy Chief of Mission to Gambion, Douglas C Rohn (along with another INR anaylst) Rohn later became the US Counsil General to Pakistan, appointed April 2004- July 5 2006 (as a side note, he spoke at Daniel Pearls funeral)
link: http://wid.ap.org/documents/li…..3/DX71.pdf
this document is dated June 10th and talks about Valerie at the meeting.
emptywheel,
kudos!
Now you begin to understand Cheney. With more work, you may start to get Bush as well.
Next heed Tom Maquire’s thought that proof that something happened isn’t strictly dependent on an email existing. There are phones for example. I know that a real blogger doesn’t want to think along those lines, but at least keep the possibility in the back recesses of your mind.
EW – Is this the memo you are referring to that may contain an explicit declaration of Valerie’s Covert Status?
http://wid.ap.org/documents/li…..3/DX71.pdf
Are you analyzing the redacted advisement visible as Top Secret to be the likely information in question?
I thought I read somewhere, that John Hannah and David Wurmser told Fitz that John Bolton is who told Darth Cheney about Valerie Plame’s CIA work?
Also h
I thought I read somewhere, that John Hannah and David Wurmser told Fitz that John Bolton is who told Darth Cheney about Valerie Plame’s CIA work?
Also h
There are at least three possible motivations for the errors.
– EW’s proposal, that Cheney was hiding how much he knew. Supported by his â€leave no fingerprints†history.
– PLukasiak’s simple errors theory. Also plausible; sometimes a mistake is just a mistake.
– My proposal, supported by nothing except that it leapt to mind and is a time-tested bureaucratic infighter’s technique against leaks: Sometimes an executive inserts false details into a message in order to assess who is passing it on, and to whom.
This possibility may have no relationship to the situation with Cheney and the Wilson trip and African uranium. I just throw it out there because it’s such an old trick involving false details.
It seems to me Cheney got everything mixed up- â€Wilson†and â€British report†should not even be in the same sentence as they are in his June 10th email.
the (very consdensed) chronology:
Jan 02-letterhead stolen
Feb 02- Wilson meets and goes to Niger to check out a proported July 2000 AGREEMENT already deemed unfulfilled9 was discounted by Niger’s president to the Us Ambassador and again to Wilson)
Oct 02-Italian journalist-US Embassy-documents- these became the â€British documentsâ€
Jan 03-INR states in the June 10th memo (see link above) -documents forgeries
Cheney memo:
June 9 03- CIA memo-summary report
June 10 03- INR memo-summary report
June 10,@5:00 pm – Cheney email -questions
Doesn’t look like Cheney had the INR memo when he wrote his email, since he is asking about Wilson and the British report in the same sentence, when as we know, that could not have happened,and Wilson has said as much.
Grossman gave his memo of June 10th to Libby – but not in time for Cheney to see it before he wrote his email later that day?
Also, my guess is that the redacted paragraph in the CIA June 9th 2003 chronology is the Joe Wilson meeting and trip on FEB 19 and 26th 2002.
EW,
I’m with p. luk, the errors sound more like the â€telephone†game of info being passed from McLaughlin to his assistant to Grenier’s assistant than any intentional misdirection by Cheney.
But I am glad that you brought up the subject of the June 9th memos, since I stumbled across something about them the other day (in the course of a far more important task) that underscores your speculation about Libby leaking the trip report to Novak. Early in Libby’s second GJ appearance, he’s asked about marked-up versions of the CIA memo on which apparently either he or Cheney has written Wilson’s name. Libby admits he and Cheney discussed the document multiple times, and he checked it often before talking to the press.
As Libby notes — and is seen on the Schmall PDF linked in this post — the passage about the 1999 commercial delegation is underlined. (In fact, given the varying versions of the document, it may have been underlined more than once.) So that is obviously a key OVP talking point… one that, like the â€State and DoD asked about Niger, too†talking point, winds up in Novak’s column.
There are at least three possible motivations for the errors.
I’ve just thought of a fourth: Judith Miller (of Valerie Flame/Victoria Wilson/WINPAC fame) was moonlighting as Grenier’s executive assistant.
Swopa
Um, yeah, I’ve been saying that for about a year.
As I pointed out in this post, whether or not Rove leaked the contents of the trip report (which is what you’re talking about and shows up repeatedly during leak week discussions) is one of the things Tatel presented as evidence that perjury had been committed. So we know that’s central. And we also know that, at least according to Novak, Rove told him the trip report was going to be declassified. Which means either ROve leaked it to him, telling him it was declassified, or Libby did so on the 9th.
Also note, there’s a note about Tenet/Wilson memo on Libby’s sonnet, getting Cheney to exonerate him.
eyes
You’re confusing some INR emails and the INR memo in your chronology. The British reference does make sense in this email–CIA was trying to figure out what info they used where.
I don’t think Cheney saw the INR memo–he may never have seen it, unless Bolton and Fleitz sent it to him. But I also don’t think that’s where he got Plame’s identity from, so it is possible he knew Plame’s identity by the time when he talked to McLaughlin. I’m not arguing that he does know her identity yet–I’m only arguing he knows a great deal about Wilson’s trip (not surprising since he started researching it in May), but that he is hiding that fact when he speaks to CIA. We know they went after Grenier for info they already had, playing dumb–that’s why I still think these errors are intentional, not accidental.
Um, yeah, I’ve been saying that for about a year.
Sheesh, sue me for trying to be helpful. I didn’t see it in your recent posts, so I thought it was worth mentioning. Sorry for not consulting the entire TNH archives.
EW- no confusion here. the email is a list of cheney questions not INC- State Dept.
British forgery is not the same as July 2000 AGREEMENT.
It was the July 2000 AGREEMENT that instigated Wilson’s trip in Feb 2002. Read over my link of the INR memo, it is a different, less unredacted copy than you have used in past posts (NY POST copies).
Wilson didn’t verify forgeries because they didn’t even start to circulate until later that year. So why mention them as related to Wilson in this cheney-question email?
As an aside, here is SY Hirsh on this misinformation issue:
â€In interviews, former C.I.A. officers and analysts described the agency as increasingly demoralized. “George knows he’s being beaten up,†one former officer said of George Tenet, the C.I.A. director. “And his analysts are terrified. George used to protect his people, but he’s been forced to do things their way.†Because the C.I.A.’s analysts are now on the defensive, “they write reports justifying their intelligence rather than saying what’s going on. The Defense Department and the Office of the Vice-President write their own pieces, based on their own ideology. We collect so much stuff that you can find anything you want.â€
http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0506-06.htm
written May 6th, 2003
what a mess.
oops: Hersh
Sorry Swopa, I didn’t mean to be short. It was something folks used to tease me for, for my singleminded attention on it, so I figured you would know.
eyes
Two points. First, you’re missing the larger context of this Cheney inquiry, which includes whether or not BushCo was right to use the British WHITE PAPER (not forgeries) for their SOTU claim, which is why they mention the Brits.
But in fact, the eventual forgeries and the 2/5/02 intell were the same info–an alleged signed contract.
Also, the INR email from January 12-13 2003 is different than the INR memo. The email (and there is an earlier one from October 2002) may have been available via other routes, so Cheney wouldn’t have had to see the INR memo to know about the email (tough I’m not saying he did). I don’t thnk he got either, finally. I think he learned of Plame’s ID via another, much more damning, route.
forgot:
â€don’t think Cheney saw the INR memo–he may never have seen it, unless Bolton and Fleitz sent it to him.â€
My understanding is that Libby asked both Grossman of State-INR and CIA to prepare summaries, the results being the June 9th and 10th memos:
â€May 29
* Scooter Libby asks Undersecretary of State Marc Grossman for information about the unnamed ambassador’s trip. Grossman does not know about it and sets to find out. He first asks Richard Armitage, who has not heard either. Grossman then emails Carl Ford and Walter H. Kansteiner, both of whom know about Wilson and who inform Grossman of details of the trip. Grossman informs Armitage. Grossman calls Joe Wilson, who he knows from the foreign service. Grossman calls Libby and tells him that Wilson is the unnamed ambassador. (Grossman testimony; Hearing transcript, pdf p. 6; Libby indictment)
* Grossman directs INR head Carl Ford to prepare a report concerning the ambassador and his trip. Ford tasks Neil Silver with the preparation. (Ford testimony; Grossman testimony; Hearing transcript, pdf p. 6; Libby indictment, p. 4). (Grossman leaves on a trip June 1, and returns to the office June 9. It it possible the report is requested after Grossman’s return, not before.)
June 9
* Scooter Libby asks CIA briefer Craig Schmall to look into whether the Office of the Vice President had made a request concerning Iraq-Niger uranium procurement. (Libby testimony, p. 36 ff.; Libby notes, p. 6 of pdf)
* Libby learns that President George Bush is interested in the State of the Union speech and the Kristof article. (Libby testimony, p. 45; Libby notes, p. 8 of pdf)
* The CIA faxes documents to the attention of Libby and John Hannah in the OVP. The faxed documents do not give Wilson’s name: Libby and others add â€Wilson†and â€Joe Wilson†by hand (Libby indictment, p. 4; ). Libby will testify that he frequently refered back to these documents before talking to reporters about the Wilson trip (Libby filing, p. 8).
1:19 p.m. – a copy of the WINPAC report sent to Donald Rumsfeld on March 11.
2:42 p.m. – Irag-Niger Part II: a February 14, 2002 memo to Dick Cheney.
3:47 p.m. – Congressional notification: an April 3, 2003 CIA report.
* Hannah sends Vice President Dick Cheney a memo passing on and highlighting the April 3 CIA report. (memo, p. 3 of pdf])
* Marc Grossman talks with Joe Wilson. Wilson complains of Condoleeza Rice’s comments the day before on Meet the Press. Wilson says he is considering going public. (Grossman testimony)
[edit]
June 10
* A classified State Department memorandum, â€Niger/Iraq Uranium Storyâ€, generally called â€the INR memoâ€, is sent by Carl Ford to Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs Marc Grossman. In a paragraph marked â€(SNF)†for secret, non-foreign, the memo refers to â€Valerie Wilson, a CIA WMD manager and the wife of Joe Wilsonâ€. (memo as exhibit at trial; NYT,Time, WaPo).
* 4:30 p.m. – Robert Grenier’s executive assistant sends out an email within the CIA, seeking information on the Wilson trip. (emptywheel)
* 5:25 and 6:21 p.m. – CIA public affairs officer Bill Harlow calls the OVP Office of Public Affairs. One possible time when Harlow tells Catherine Martin of Wilson’s wife. (phone log)
from DKosopedia timeline
unless this timeline is not true, or that Libby failed to pass on the INR memo he received from Grossman to Cheney, then Cheney would not have learned it from the INR memo.
Libby asked both Grossman of State-INR and CIA to prepare summaries
No. Libby asked for information from CIA, in response to which he got two pre-existing summaries and Cheney’s briefing notes from 2002. Hannah (OVP employee) did his own summary of the CIA info. But the CIA summaries were from much earlier and weren’t tied specifically to Wilson (which is another reason why the British question is fair in this context, because those longer summaries included the whole range of Niger intell).
And Libby asked Grossman for information, he didn’t ask for a written summary and Grossman never gave him the written summary. Grossman, instead, passed on the information about Plame verbally. Grossman almost went to the trouble of a document because State was being implicated in the questions, and the summary provided them with self-assurance that they hadn’t propagated the bad Niger intell (aside from John Bolton, which they couldn’t do much about).
But the underlying point is that Libby and Cheney appear to have kept asking to receive information they already knew (particularly Plame’s ID) after they had received it from one or another source. I’m arguing, here and in other posts, that that suggests they weren’t looking for information, per se, they were looking to get certain people to say certain things. And in the case of CIA, they wanted CIA to say certain things on the record so the information would come from CIA and not OVP.
EW
What you say here about the way Cheney operates may or may not be correct.
It is possible that Cheney is just sloppy in conveying the amount of information that he has when he requests more.
Given Cheney’s intelligence and acknowledged skill as a bureaucratic maneuverer, you make a reasonable argument that he has salted his communications with inaccuracies and half-truths to mislead and perhaps manipulate the recipient (and potentially future readers of the communication) to mask both his knowledge and his state of mind.
That explanation requires believing that Cheney is devious, decietful, willing to lie to others to obtain his ends, and willing to create a false record in case anyone made future inquiries into his actions.
(So, yeah, I think you have really got something here)
EW-
your live blog:
â€Got both of these emails back.
[Grossman seems almost sheepish, his shoulders raised, soft-spoken]â€
He’s sheepish because he is about to lie, as Armitage has asked him to. Libby asks Grossman in person on May 29th to find out about Wilson, he goes to Armitage, then he also directs Ford of INR to look into it. Ford(or whomever, if he was sick) produces the INR memo of June 9th (the one later doctored by the nuclear analyst the next day). Grossman returns and says he gets it June 10 or 11th.
(from your liveblog):
â€Grossman says he believes he relayed that to Libby.
INR memo
Wanted more info, just felt like it needed to be fullerâ€
Only you would remember, Did Grossman say who wanted? My impression is it was Libby, since the sentence before was his conversation with Libby.
Wouldn’t â€fuller†explain him asking Ford the same day and the resulting INR memo?
The last time ew teased us with this story, I was late to the party and I don’t think anybody saw my question. I wanted to know if the email really said Chad. Obviously, it does. I will throw out another possibility for the variances between the Cheney story and what we might have expected him to say. Perhaps Cheney had another source for the story that we don’t know about. Take a look at the INR analysts notes (attached to the INR memo, DX71.PDF) from the 02/19/2002 meeting with some CIA analysts and Joe Wilson. There are a couple of interesting points. First, notice how the CIA WMD analysts ticked off the INR analysts by dissing the State Department. Then the CIA guys bring up the idea of shipping the stuff across the desert to Sudan (the INR analyst puts �??†after Sudan). The INR analysts explain what they see as the OBVIOUS problems with that. If you look at a map of Africa, you’ll notice that to get to Sudan, you would have to travel through Chad.
As far as I can tell (and I have read all of eRiposte’s stuff and The Italian Letter), this is the only time shipping the yellowcake across the desert comes up. The forged documents say the stuff would be shipped through Benin. I’m not going to say that the CIA analysts made it up on the spot to get around the fact that shipping the stuff through Benin would have been noticed, but it does seem that the â€trucking across the desert†idea was introduced by these analysts.
I suspect that these two CIA WMD analysts (who were â€leading the chargeâ€) are from WINPAC and were a back channel into the CIA for Cheney.
EW- I am not talking about anything past the time of the Feb 19, 26 and June 9-11th 2002 timeline. The emails Grossman mentions must be the July 2000 AGREEMENT.
All of the forgery, British stuff, is all much later, starting in Oct 02. This part just overshadows the earlier part of the actual reason for Wilson going to Niger in the first place.
oops, forgot to link the liveblog, not intended for EW but anyone whoever wants to see where I got the above, becaue I am sure EW knows most of it by heart:
http://www.firedoglake.com/200…..er-issues/
going back to being a member of my family, will check back later.
and as always, thanks, EW, you are a national treasure, I mean that sincerely.
WO
The â€Sudan†story also showed up in an INR document in early March 2002–but with the same skepticism.
So yes, your suggestion may be right on.
aargh,
meant Feb 19, 26 â€2002â€
and June 9-11th â€2003â€
timeline.
ew,
Do you have a link to that document?
Did the Wilson’s (both) make a trip to Niger in 1999 to investigate a wmd/uranium claim? Or a similiar trip in 1999?
I’m really sure I’ve never seen that before, but I don’t get as deep as you all have…but I’m sure I would have remembered seeing that before. I haven’t a source except reading at Dkos or a link from there…so I can go back a few bays a try to find it. So save me the three hours that might take, unless you’ve never seen it before. Then I will.
Thanks, good stuff here.
WO
Here.
eyes
The emails Grossman is talking about are two emails he said he sent to Walt Kansteiner and Carl Ford asking them to look into the Wilson trip, which were deleted in State’s 90-day purge policy. He was sheepish because he didn’t have the emails.
The British White Paper used all the same sources as US intell used–but both consisted of the content of the forgeries, cleaned up a bit, but otherwise sent onto Western intell agencies. So in fact, the intell behind the British White Paper was precisely the same intell as the forgeries.
KenBee,
Joe Wilson, alone, went to Niger to investigate a claim that AQ Khan was looking for uranium in Niger.
ew,
I don’t see a mention of Sudan or Chad in that document. All I see is a line that says â€the convoy would have to travel at least 1000 miles and cross at least one international borderâ€. That description would fit the route through Benin and maybe a route through Libya (1000 miles across the Sahara sounds like fun…), but not would not specifically fit a route through Chad and Sudan (2 international borders and 1500 miles).
Hmm. I’ve always read that as the Sudan, since that was the big complaint from INR. But you’re right…
so Grossman sends emails asking Ford and K-guy. the result is still the same- a report or what is now referred to as the INR memo. Grossman admits in his Wells questining phase that it was Libby who asked for this. This is the â€fuller†stuff Libby wanted.
No one ever asks Grossman in his testimony if, besides telling Libby, if he also sent a copy of the INR memo to him-no one asks, so how do you know he never did?
I contend the reason the Cheney-question email (This email-above) is so full of mistakes is that it was written late in the day on June 10th. Grossman did not, except for verbally telling Libby briefly that it was Wilson to Niger, get the detailed part of the INR/State Dept story to Libby until â€night of June 10th or June 11th†or later. If Cheney had had the detailed INR part of the story-the INR memo- especially the INR analyst meeting minutes attached, he would have known the whole sequence of events re:Wilson. It doesn’t mean he or Libby never got INR memo, they just got it too late to head off the mistaken questions that Cheney had had in Grenier’s EA include in the email you quote from in your post.
The CIA â€longer†memo, on page 3, item 3, talks about the July 2000 AGREEMENT. It talks about a DO report dated Feb 5, 2002. Item 4 talks about Feb 14th report by SPWR. Then in March 2002, the report of meeting btw. â€ambassador to Niger†in â€late Februaryâ€= Joe Wilson.
This all Cheney had from the CIA, one little line. Has he had Grossman’s INR memo, had Grossman gotten it to him in time, Cheney would have had a fuller picture.
liveblog Grossman testimony:
â€Wells: One other thing happened on May 29. You asked Mr. Ford and Mr. Kansteiner to do a memo setting forth what they knew about Joe Wilson’s trip. You told Mr. Ford and Mr. Kansteiner that the memo was being prepared in response to an inquiry from Scooter Libby. You told them, I want a memo prepared because Mr. Libby has asked me a question.
June 9, report’s not ready. Then, you said you got the report on June 11 or 12. I think it came either the night of the 10th or 11th.â€
As for the British documents, forgeries, all that was after Wilson was sent, the only document to initiate Joes trip was the July 2000 Agreement and prior. That is why the line in the Cheney email makes NO sense, no matter how you dice it.
Here it is in black and white:
from â€Questions from VP Cheney on Niger/iraq, 4:30 pm, June 10th, 2003
third Paragraph:
â€VP Questions: Is this story true? Do we have chronological account of the above events? (Yes, as a matter of fact, Grossman has a chronological summary that your assistant Libby asked him to put together to make our knowledge-fuller) ……Was it in a reporting cable***redacted***? If it was can somebody send me a copy of it? (Well, not exactly a cable, sir, but just as soon as Grossman returns and looks over the INR memo himself, it will be right to you)
didn’t the Brits come out with a similar report detailing the Niger-Iraq Iranian connection?(Yes they did sir, but it was later in the year of 2002, in October and is also shown in the Grossman INR memo, if in fact you had that memo, sir, you would already know this chronology)
More questions: For WINPAC, when did your analyst conclude that the information was bogus?(Well, sir, again, had you had that Grossman INR memo you would know that answer- it spells it all out)
http://www.dkosopedia.com/wiki…..988_-_2002
February 19 [2002]
â€The CIA Counterproliferation Division (CPD) holds a meeting at CIA headquarters with Joe Wilson. In attendance are intelligence analysts from both the CIA and the State Department’s INR. At the beginning of the meeting Valerie Plame introduces Wilson, then leaves after three minutes.â€
Did the INR Analysts file report(s) of this meeting, including listing attendees, within the State Department system – that could have been queried by someone like Bolton?
eyes
The reason no one asks Libby if anyone sent the INR memo to him is because he was already asked in his GJ testimony–as, I’m sure, was Grossman.
And you’re wrong about the emails to Kansteiner (who had nothing to do with the INR memo–he’s not INR) and Ford. Carl Ford testified (in contradiction to Grossman) that he wasn’t asked to do a memo until the week of June 9.
Furthermore, you seem to be ignoring the Cheney briefing documents.
There is no reason to be sure that Libby had the INR memo. And more importantly, there is no reason to believe Cheney had that document–rather than some other documents that there is more reason to believe he did have.
The INR memo was NOT the sole source of info on this. It is a red herring to treat it as such. It’s possible Cheney got it. But it’s not important that he did in any case, because that’s not the information he had which was damning.
radio- uh, you show this link after mine above , look at the last page- meeting minutes, but the attendees requires research and the only person for certain is Douglas C Rohn, see my post above for more detail.
EW will have to fill us in on the Bolton story.
EW- then the DailyKos timeline is wrong and should be updated. And it means Grossman lied.
So he asked Ford on June 9th, and Ford was able to put that together, even though both of his analyst where no longer around, through electronic means, in 24 hours? Sorry, I don’t believe it.
And it (INR memo) somehow mysteriously answers just about every question Cheney asked?
from liveblog-
â€Describe what INR is. State Department’s research and intelligence.
Kansteiner in charge of Africa bureau. â€
http://www.firedoglake.com/200…..er-issues/
No.
Kansteiner was Assistant Sec State for Africa.
eyes – Thanks! I couldn’t believe how long that memo was – I didn’t make it to the end.
What if it turns out that Bush via Cheney outed not only a Covert operative, but the same person, due to her expertise, had direct knowlege of the forgeries being used to ’create’ the intelligence used by both Bush and the British to ’sell’ the War?
How tragic would it be if Bush outed someone who could have told him – with certainty on the Niger claim – that Iraq had not reconstituted it’s nuclear program, and in so doing, could have saved us an invasion and world-wide humiliation?
Marcy,
Cheney is reading everybody’s(*) emails, getting super-double-secret copies, unknown to the senders or the recipients. Direct parallel pipeline.
Is there anybody he wouldn’t spy upon, at any level of the bureaucracies or agencies, if he thought their communications might reveal 1) threats to his hold on power, 2) blackmail material (people are scared to death of him), 3) opportunities to insert his own tentacles… anybody?
(*) everybody who is in a position of interest to him. Interior, DoJ, Congress, and he is perhaps the only person who knows how many spying agencies we have. A couple of times someone has been shocked to realize that he’d read a private communication.
If he got the Wilson/Plame information from reading the CIA’s emails, that would be rather damning.
And, yes, I do believe that he deliberately seeds falsehoods so that he can follow the trails.
All of this is totally out of control. For more on the influence and effect of Cheney and his cronies on whistleblowers and more please see http://whistleblowersupporter.typepad.com
Denver Post OPED guy, Bob Ewegen, has done a number of opeds on West Point, Viet Nam and service; his (2007)latest on the Outing of Val Plame(CIA) by the Cheney gang. He says he is angry and mad, given he is a Viet Nam era vet, with 44 years in the biz of journalism. Strange, none of his so called anger came out when John Kerry was being swiftboated, during the dirt fest of the Bush reelection charade. Do any of you long time press watches recall Ewegen’s oped on McNamara’s band… Again, Ewegen laid down his Viet Nam era numbers…
When George Bush—W–left his National Guard unit in Texas, and stood down, and would not fly, that was not service that was the avoidance of Service. Where was the big Nam numbers guy Ewegen on that…?
CBS screwed it up, over some fonts type script in letters. Fact is, Bush refused to take a flight physical, despite the fact it cost about $ 1 million bucks to train him to fly National Guard jets. Again, where was Ewegen on that… AWOL in the Denver Post pages ! Fact is Cheney and Bush have made mince meat of federal service, have denigrated federal service, they have made a mockery of service to America, and real sacrifice. McNamara’s Band was about the Nam era DOD Secretary by Ewegen in the 1990’s.. When history is written, it will be recorded that Rummy–Rumsfeld is the worst(bottom of the barrel) Secretary of Defense in USA history, and he trained some young punk. You know is name— draft evader Dick Cheney, who seems to have conned America, and America’s citizens don’t like getting conned, while so many in the PRESS were asleep..
Cheney is insane and mad with power—that should greatly concern most in America
vaolphc mspdwrcgj iurepvl xnib mkgoldtve biomsnyed fmdxhjwp