Reporter finds earlier notes in CIA leak case

[NVMojo]

New York Times reporter Judith Miller discovered notes from an earlier conversation she had with Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff and turned them over the prosecutor investigating the leak of a covert CIA operative's identity, legal sources said on Friday.


more...

http://tinyurl.com/c8sty

[merwin]

1. Here's the original link (not tinyurl)

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051007/pl_nm/bush_leak_dc

[NVMojo]

88. important info in revised story, reread it! But it says in May 03:

snip...

A column by Nicholas Kristof in the New York Times on May 6, 2003 may have been the trigger for the interest by Cheney's office, the sources said.

Kristof's column contained the first public mention of Wilson's mission in Niger, though Wilson was not identified by name. It also mentioned for the first time the alleged role of Cheney's office in seeking an investigation of the uranium deal, prompting the CIA to dispatch Wilson.

...snip


I've always wondered how long Valerie Plame was working on WMD, etc as a CIA agent and if that's what worried them way before this cuz PNAC was probably planning this invasion pre-2000 ....

[Dem2theMax]

2. Oooooh,

I hope the notes say

BUSH AND CHENEY DID IT! :evilgrin:

[damntexdem]

65. Oh, my, she just happened to find them now!

Why, had she not been in prison, she might have encountered them earlier. ;) Of course, had she not been in prison, she might also have burned them.

[Carolab]

98. Really, who believes this SH*T?

"But after she testified, Miller discovered that she had additional notes from the June 2003 conversation with Libby.

That was well before Wilson on July 6, 2003 published an opinion piece in The New York Times accusing the White House of twisting intelligence on Iraq, but after reports of his mission had begun to surface."

Give me a break. She just happened to find MORE notes, AFTER she testified? I smell a RAT.

[NVMojo]

109. It's hard not to be cynical about this woman who also lied about WMD ...

[applegrove]

3. Ding ding ding!

[leveymg]

4. She FOUND them? Had they slipped behind her desk at work?

Did the dog that ate them finally pass them? Did she locate them on ClassMates Finder?:eyes:

Anyone want to guess at the contents?

[NVMojo]

7. will it exonerate her pals in the WH???

[back2basics909]

8. Prior to THE memo.

.. she is covering for them. If the notes relayed a conversation, prior to the memo on airforce 1.. one in which she brought up the subject, then their is no conspiracy charge.

[leveymg]

18. It's still a violation of the Espionage Act (conversion of a classified

document) and conspiracy to do the same, even if she was an earlier source. A gov't official may not confirm or deny classified information until it has been officially declassified.

Nice try. But, I don't think that would let them off the hook for subsequent actions they took to spread word around about Plame's identity.

[back2basics909]

25. Hope you are right.

.. what if;

In these notes Plames identity came up in passing, not brought up by Libby. And Miller was Novaks source, thats the first airing of the information, and thats when it was in the public domain.

Seems to me that would put nobody but Miller on a charge.

[leveymg]

29. Then, who told Plame?

Fact remains - it's not in the public domain until it's in the public domain. Miller hadn't written about Plame's identity before Novak did, and Novak talked to Rove and Scooter about it before he published his article.

After Novak published, it was in the public domain, but not before that. See? It doesn't change a thing, even if Judy was the original source. It was just as much a crime for Karl and Scooter to repeat classified information as it would be to be the initial source - until the info gets published.

[NVMojo]

30. Brain is scratchy, when did Wilson's article first come out?

The one about the yellow cake story??

[leveymg]

33. 07-07-03, NYT op-ed, if memory is correct. Significance?

[NVMojo]

35. These notes she found are allegedly from June '03 ...

was just wondering when the smear actually began ...against Wilson and then Plame???

[H2O Man]

71. March 8, 2003

After Wilson told CNN that the administration had "more" information on the yellow cake documents being forged, there was a meeting in VP Cheney's office. Libby and Newt Gingrich and others, possibly including Cheney, attended. They secided to do "a work-up" on Wilson.

[back2basics909]

34. It's all here...

http://thenexthurrah.typepad.com/the_next_hurrah/2005/07/is_this_judy_mi.html

[NVMojo]

37. Now ain't that just some weird timing ..."late June" ....here ....

"There's an additional detail that Wilson includes at the beginning of his book.

In late June, the story began to spin out of control as journalists started to report speculation as fact. At this point I was warned by a reporter that I was about to be named in an article as the U.S. official in question. (3; emphasis mine)

And then a few more details in the back."

[MidwestTransplant]

41. That's interesting. Presumably the WH was preparing for damage

control at that point. I wonder when the State Dept. memo that was read aboard AF1 was released? Was it on the way to Africa or on the way back? Anybody know the dates?

[leveymg]

52. What was the date of the Africa trip? July 7-12, 2003

That's important because, Judy apparently was told about Plame some weeks before Rove and Libby, if the State Dept. Intelligence Branch report was indeed their first source of knowledge about Plame.

Memory tells me the classified document in question is a State Dept. Intelligence Branch briefing that discussed the circumstances of Wilson's trip to Niger, and how Wilson's wife, a NOC at CIA was said to have pulled strings to get him assigned to the junket. I recall reading that Powell brought the briefing with him to read on AF1 during the trip.

The story is that the briefing was sitting in Powell's seat and was picked up by Ari Fleisher, before it was handed around. It is claimed that classified document was the source of Rove and Libby's first knowledge of Plame. Is that recollection correct?

[back2basics909]

107. Thats pretty much as i know it.

Some speculate Powel was the person who told Fitzgerald who had read the document on Air Force 1. But it looks like somebody did, which I why conspiracy has been the dominant theory. Until now IMHO.

[sunnystarr]

111. Regarding your last question ...

That hasn't been proven and it's what Fitzgerald obviously was investigating ergo supoenaing the phone records from AF1. Bolton had something to do with the creation of that memo and Feith the CIA guy was working for Bolton and was also in the position to know Plame. Bolton was also a regular source for Miller. It will be interesting to see if Fitzgerald gets them all.

[NVMojo]

66. looks like it started with a subpoena for AF1 records for July 03

Published on Friday, March 5, 2004 by the Long Island, NY Newsday
Air Force One Phone Records Subpoenaed
Grand jury to review call logs from Bush’s jet in probe of how a CIA agent’s cover was blown

by Tom Brune

WASHINGTON -- The federal grand jury probing the leak of a covert CIA officer's identity has subpoenaed records of Air Force One telephone calls in the week before the officer's name was published in a column in July, according to documents obtained by Newsday.

snip...

It requested records of telephone calls to and from Air Force One from July 7 to 12, while Bush was visting several nations in Africa. The White House declined Thursday to release a list of those on the trip.

That subpoena also sought a complete transcript of a July 12 press "gaggle," or informal briefing, by then-White House press secretary Ari Fleischer while at the National Hospital in Abuja, Nigeria.

That transcript is missing from the White House Web site containing transcripts of other press briefings. In a transcript the White House released at the time to Federal News Service, Fleischer discusses Wilson and his CIA report.

Finally, the subpoena requested a list of those in attendance at the White House reception on July 16 for former President Gerald Ford's 90th birthday.


more...

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0305-02.htm

[leveymg]

51. emptywheel: Judy was a cut-out for Bolton(?)

From "The Last Hurrah":

There are just a few things that make Judy Miller a more likely candidate than all the others. First, if it's true that Bolton was involved in the preparation of the INR memo and that he was a frequent source for Judy Miller, then Judy has an obvious source. Bolton had presumably already seen the INR memo by June 10, which would make it easily possible for him to leak Wilson's identity to Judy in time for an article around June 22.

Also, if Judy were writing the story, it would explain how Journalist A might have found out about it. Kristof might have found out about it in conversations with Judy. Shipley might have found out about it as a courtesy from other NYT editors, since he had already planned on an op-ed relating to the same topic.

Finally, there's the question of what happened to this article. I'm not aware that an article identifying Joe Wilson ever appeared (he certainly doesn't talk about it). The article was "about" to appear around June 22. Wilson doesn't publish his op-ed until July 6. Something convinces Journalist B not to publish the story even though the competing story wouldn't appear for almost two weeks. It seems likely that Shipley would have called Judy Miller's editor (does she have an editor? Who does vouch for her facts?) to ask them to hold the story. Kristof to Judy to Wilson. It could easily be that all three of these critical articles would be associated with the NYT.

How this works with the rest of the story
Again, this is speculation. But if Judy Miller was tipped to Wilson's identity around June 22, it would jive closely with the story as we know it. If Bolton was leaking Wilson's identity in late June (based on the INR memo), it would explain why Clifford May and JimmyJeff Gannon would later claim the identity was known before Novak revealed Plame's identity. Note that May and Gannon claimed that Plame's identity was known before Novak leaked it; so it's possible Bolton was leaking--and Judy planned to write about--Plame's identity too. Although, at this point, the leak would have only named Plame as Valerie Wilson, not as Plame, based on the information in the INR memo. And if Judy Miller was asked to write a story in June, it would explain why Libby and Rove felt so confident claiming a journalist told them of Plame's identity. Judy was a cut-out, of course. But she certainly would have had knowledge of Plame well before the period when Libby and Rove started calling journalists in earnest. And it would explain why Judy never wrote her story on Plame.

[back2basics909]

104. This is where i am so far...

.. i think Bolton and Miller will go down. If that happens, the whole leak appears to come down to just two people, and it's seperated form teh rest of the Whitehouse, the important part; the brains (Rove, Cheney et al), the image (Bush). SOme minor players go down, a ruined reported... who found she was still anobody when she came out of prison has a second chance, after spending some more time in jail (but not much).

[back2basics909]

38. hmm..

.. just trying to think this through.

First they have to identify somebody who they know is undercover.

So lets just say Miller, in June prior to memo, prior to Novak talks to Libby and brings up the fact that Wilson was thinking about writting an article in the NY Times about the Yellow cake. As it's before the memo Libby can claim he did not know she was undercover, but he does link Wilson and his wife.

She then speaks with Novak and tells him this information. Novak has said he knew her identity before speaking to the whitehouse. So he prints the article based on what Miller told him. Novak also said his source was another reporter. It hits the public domain and any leaks after that do not count.

Everybody gets off. Am i missing something? Because if i am not, if this is not their story, it should be.

[NVMojo]

39. look at this timeline from Wilson in June 03:

snip...

"So here's the basic chronology. Sometime not long after June 8, after a suggestion from an Administration official, Wilson contacts David Shipley of the NYT to arrange to write an op-ed. He doesn't write it right away though; he's still not ready. Wilson testifies before congressional intelligence committees in mid-June. Then, around June 22 (two weeks after Rice's appearance, a week after mid-June), Wilson is warned that a journalist is "about" to publish his name "soon." Perahps the most important point is Wilson decided to write his op-ed so he could tell his story before this other article did it for him. Update: The House and Senate Intelligence Committees met on June 18, 19, and 25, which would make the window for the appearance of this article June 22 through July 2.

Wilson doesn't say who the journalists in this story are--neither the journalist who gave him the warning nor the journalist who was going to write the story. But here are some possibilities:

...snip

(from link above ...#34)

[back2basics909]

42. And he...

. Wilson, had contacted the NY Times to ask them to print a story, they offered him the op-ed. If Miller found out about this, it could have been her who was going to name him (not his wife at this stage). The NY Times could have killed that article, because she found out from a source internal to the NY Times, which would not look good.

I don't know i am just brainstorming here.

[NVMojo]

46. sort of what I was wondering about ...

[back2basics909]

49. Check this out..

http://thenexthurrah.typepad.com/the_next_hurrah/2005/07/is_this_judy_mi.html

"Why it might be Judy
There are just a few things that make Judy Miller a more likely candidate than all the others.

First, if it's true that Bolton was involved in the preparation of the INR memo and that he was a frequent source for Judy Miller, then Judy has an obvious source. Bolton had presumably already seen the INR memo by June 10, which would make it easily possible for him to leak Wilson's identity to Judy in time for an article around June 22.

Also, if Judy were writing the story, it would explain how Journalist A might have found out about it. Kristof might have found out about it in conversations with Judy. Shipley might have found out about it as a courtesy from other NYT editors, since he had already planned on an op-ed relating to the same topic.

Finally, there's the question of what happened to this article. I'm not aware that an article identifying Joe Wilson ever appeared (he certainly doesn't talk about it). The article was "about" to appear around June 22. Wilson doesn't publish his op-ed until July 6. Something convinces Journalist B not to publish the story even though the competing story wouldn't appear for almost two weeks. It seems likely that Shipley would have called Judy Miller's editor (does she have an editor? Who does vouch for her facts?) to ask them to hold the story. Kristof to Judy to Wilson. It could easily be that all three of these critical articles would be associated with the NYT.

How this works with the rest of the story
Again, this is speculation. But if Judy Miller was tipped to Wilson's identity around June 22, it would jive closely with the story as we know it. If Bolton was leaking Wilson's identity in late June (based on the INR memo), it would explain why Clifford May and JimmyJeff Gannon would later claim the identity was known before Novak revealed Plame's identity. Note that May and Gannon claimed that Plame's identity was known before Novak leaked it; so it's possible Bolton was leaking--and Judy planned to write about--Plame's identity too. Although, at this point, the leak would have only named Plame as Valerie Wilson, not as Plame, based on the information in the INR memo.

And if Judy Miller was asked to write a story in June, it would explain why Libby and Rove felt so confident claiming a journalist told them of Plame's identity. Judy was a cut-out, of course. But she certainly would have had knowledge of Plame well before the period when Libby and Rove started calling journalists in earnest.

And it would explain why Judy never wrote her story on Plame.

Now the one confusion I have is that Judy Miller's subpoena was ,

seeking documents and testimony related to conversations between her and a specified government official “occurring from on or about July 6, 2003,to on or about July 13, 2003, . . . concerning Valerie Plame Wilson (whether referred to by name or by description as the wife of Ambassador Wilson) or concerning Iraqi efforts to obtain uranium.”

Which would mean the subpoena wouldn't even cover any leaking Bolton (or one of his associates) was doing before June 22. But Michael Isikoff gives us a bit of answer in his latest article on the Plame outing. Isikoff's article explans the deal Russert made to avoid a contempt charge in the case.

The deal was not, as many assumed, for Russert's testimony about what Libby told him: it focused on what Russert told Libby.

So it appears that Fitzgerald is working harder to disprove Libby's and Rove's claims that they heard about this from a reporter than he is trying to find who might have leaked to a journalist. I wonder if Fitzgerald ought to be pursuing Judy for conversations with Administration officials the week leading up to June 22, rather than the week of July 7."

This article was written prior to us finding out about June. Look at the last few lines.

I have a sinking feeling... i really hope this is wrong.

[NVMojo]

50. oh, crap!!! So this is what Bolton talked to her about in prison???

so this exonerates the rat bastards in some way??? Shit!!!

[back2basics909]

53. And remember...

.. Novak has always said we would be suprised who the source is.

I hope the low down scum sucker is wrong on this... or i hope Fitz has something else. We know so little about this, it could be BS.

What is for sure is that Miller only agreed to talk about the conversation with Libby. So anything prior to that cannot be brought to the GJ.. which means that this conversation may not ever make it to court.

[H2O Man]

74. Novak has always

and only said that his source was two senior administration officials.

[NVMojo]

77. oh, that's right!!!! so will Judy's new notes conflict with Novak???

[H2O Man]

78. Yes.

It does.

On edit: please read post # 71. Keep in mind that Wilson had been speaking to the media "off the record" between his March comment (after the IAEA had revealed on 3-7 the documents were forged, a State Dept official told CNN "We fell for it." Wilson told CNN on record the WH had much more info.) Also, between May & June, Wilson talked to congressional leaders and Rice's people, to expose the lie. They were fuming.

[goforit]

76. And all those NYT journalist have offices right next to each other!!!

[snippy]

82. I see no reason to have a sinking feeling.

The last few lines speculate that someone in the administration leaked to Miller in June rather than July. If that is true, it was still a crime. And the timing of the first illegal leak would have no effect on the illegality of subsequent leaks. Nor would it have any effect on conspiracy charges related to what the Court of Appeals referred to as "the plot against Wilson." And the timing of the first leak is completely irrelevant to perjury, obstruction of justice, and conspiracy to obstruct justice charges.

[back2basics909]

102. Why?

Not sure why it would be still a crime in June? It's intent that’s seems to be the issue here, not timing. The memo would prove a conspiracy, and go some way to proving intent. If the first identification was pre memo, only Miller and possibly somebody else (unknown) at the Whitehouse are guilty of anything. That’s a whole lot better than Rove and others..

[snippy]

118. Several different people can commit the same crime over a period of time.

Or they can commit different crimes. Fitzgerald told the District Court long ago that the focus of his investigation had shifted from only the identity of the sources of the leak to other areas. And he obviously convinced the Court of Appeals that a serious crime has been committed and that there was a "plot against Wilson." Of all the people who have written about this case, only the District Court and Court of Appeals judges have seen Fitzgerald's evidence and legal argument. Based on the written opinions of those judges, especially Judge Tatel's opinion, I see no reason to have a sinking feeling.

[NVMojo]

48. it may be what they've suddenly concocted under the irate orders of Rove

[leveymg]

63. Novak didn't publish until 7/14/03 - a week after Wilson's NYT op-ed

So, Plame's identity was still classified until 7/14 - any prior disclosure or confirmation of that by a gov't official was a violation of the Espionage Act.

An account in WikiNews I just saw gives this timeline:http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/A_timeline:_Novak,_Rove,_Cooper

Novak called Rove on a Tuesday, 6 days before he broke the story. During the Novak-Rove conversation, Novak asked whether Rove heard Plame was an agent. At that time, Rove said he believed that he might have heard the same… he wasn’t sure if he did, and if he did, he couldn’t remember who it was.
Novak’s story containing the Plame "leak" breaks 6 days after the Rove conversation. Two anonymous White House officials are its sources.
Rove’s conversation with Cooper took place 5 days after Wilson’s Op-Ed piece in The New York Times ran on July 6, 2003. So Rove spoke with Cooper on July 11, 2003.
Rove's conversation with Cooper takes place 4 days after talking to Novak. So Rove spoke to Novak on July 7, 2003.

SNIP

If the above tomelime is correct, Rove would have talked to Novak on July 8, which was the the second day of the Africa trip.

While the memo may have been looked at by Fleisher and others before the date Rove talked to Novak, it isn't certain that memo is actually the source. Others have speculated there is another draft of the same document that Bolton may have earlier shared with Rove and Scooter. This from the discussion chain at TalkLeft a couple months ago in chain titled: "Who was on Air Force 1?": http://talkleft.com/new_archives/011612.html

SNIP

A week ago, I tried to connect some dots about who was on Air Force One from July 7 - 12, 2003 (Bush's trip to Africa) by checking some African news reports. Condi Rice, Colin Powell, Ari Fleisher, Deputy Foreign Secretary for Africa Walter Kansteiner, and Andrew Card were for sure on the trip. Karl Rove and Lewis Libby for sure weren't.

SNIP

Posted by pepsigold at July 23, 2005 12:29 PM
I think that the State Dept. memo on AF1 is a red herring. There is no question that the WH wants this memo to e the focal point. Therefore we should not fall for it. How do we know that the WH wants us to focus on it? It was leaked to the WSJ over a year ago, then to Talin/Ganon. These are friends of the WH they publish what the WH wants them to. Now the same memo was leaked again to NYT then to WAPO, WSJ, Bloomberg, an WAPO again. All within days from each other WHY?? Someone really wants us to focus on a document that is in AF1 when the two leak sources are tucked away in the US. How convenient.

Posted by empty wheel at July 23, 2005 03:02 PM
Pepsigold,

Here are two posts where I explore that question.

Short version is that 1) there are actually several other documents involved, including the CIA report on Wilson's trip, so it is likely that the circulation of the memo ON AF1 isn't the actual source of the leak (I suspect the real source is a NSC or OSP memo that we don't know about). And now that Bolton is involved, we may know why. Because that would suggest he'd have a copy of the memo on June 10 (and he and Fred Fleitz would likely have some input into it, which could explain the misrepresentations CIA felt were in it).

One more suggestion pollyusa at DKos made is that, if Bolton had one copy of the memo, then there may have been two versions on AF1, one without the analyst notes (and circulated by Bolton before July 6) and one with the notes (and circulated by Armitage on July 6).

[lovuian]

85. Its the coverup that gets them and thats what this is about!!!

:nuke:

[leveymg]

116. Perjury is a free-standing crime, while conspiracy requires an

underlying criminal intent OR a crime that's being aided, abetted or covered-up.

Perjury will be easy to establish - Anyone who hasn't been telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but to the GJ is going to be socked with a perjury charge (that could be most of the WH and VP office biggies who were called to testify early on) . . .

and with a Conspiracy charge - Only one person in the Plamegate network has to be charged with a separate (underlying) crime -- violation of the Espionage Act, or IIPA, or misappropriation of documents -- for all the others who had an whiff of it and any role in spreading the word about Plame or covering-up the conspiracy to go down (that's almost everyone who has testified).

With these legal basics in mind, one can see how its possible that as many as 21 people might be indicted for crimes. It's not just Bolton and Miller, who now appear to be the original sources of the leak, all the others are going to get conspiracy, and all the liars are also going to get slammed for perjury.

[sunnystarr]

100. I'm happy to say you're wrong about that

That was well before Wilson on July 6, 2003 published an opinion piece in The New York Times accusing the White House of twisting intelligence on Iraq, but after reports of his mission had begun to surface.

A column by Nicholas Kristof in the New York Times on May 6, 2003 may have been the trigger for the interest by Cheney's office, the sources said.

Kristof's column contained the first public mention of Wilson's mission in Niger, though Wilson was not identified by name. It also mentioned for the first time the alleged role of Cheney's office in seeking an investigation of the uranium deal, prompting the CIA to dispatch Wilson.

Top Cheney aides were eager to dispel Wilson's assertion that he was sent to Niger at the urging of the vice president, sources involved in the case said.

This information would help Fitzgerald pinpoint the beginning of the conspiracy.

[back2basics909]

101. Thats very interesting..

.. where is the article from? We still do not know all the journalists involved. Thanks for that info!

[sunnystarr]

103. So sorry I didn't post the link cause it was in original thread ... so

here it is :)

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051007/pl_nm/bush_leak_dc

[back2basics909]

105. Thanks for taking the time!

:) This is driving me mad!

[sunnystarr]

112. Go to this link

I found it real interesting - and make sure to check out the links on that page. I've also followed all the material I could find on this and it's driving me nuts too lol.

http://thenexthurrah.typepad.com/the_next_hurrah/2005/07/why_bolton_woul.html#more

[IndianaGreen]

68. How convenient......

The bitch is saving her ass from jail after all the bad things she has done. Judy has been flipped!

[NVMojo]

69. ...I'll bet Karl flipped her!!! Or Papa Bush did!

[jazzjunkysue]

70. Them aspens turning faster than a pig on a texas bbq spit!

I think she cut a deal to save her own hide by implicating Libby. I think she gave them the evidence they need to put him away. That big smile on her face on liberation day wasn't mugging for the camera: It was relief that she was gonna walk if she implicated Libby.

This entire thing is a chess game to turn one conspirator against another. That's why she sat in prison.

I think this is great news.

[NVMojo]

73. in other words ...the long knives are still out!!

[goforit]

81. yikes

[jazzjunkysue]

90. Oh, goody!!!!

:bounce:

[goforit]

80. ...And the TRUTH SHALL SET YOU FREE!!!!

[shockingelk]

5. And Fitz extends for another half year

Indict now!

[shavedape]

6. in all the hubbub it musta slipped her mind

whoopsie! i call do-over!

[joemurphy]

9. What took her so damned long? I'm real suspicious.

Look at it this way. You get a subpoena ordering you to produce to a federal grand jury any and all documents in your possessions of whatever sort or fashion dealing or treating in any way with interviews had by you with any person bearing on or related to the wife of Joseph Wilson. (which is how these subpoenas read)

And you comply after deleting any references to other sources...

But you refuse to testify and spend 83 days in jail..

And you finally relent and testify....

And a few days before indictments are to issue, shortly before the grand jury's term is about to expire, you "find" some more notes that you didn't give to the grand jury before...

Sound plausible to you?

[NVMojo]

12. could this be considered a violation of some sort if it can be proven

she withheld info until now???

[joemurphy]

16. Sure...obstruction of justice comes to mind. Contempt is another.

Abuse of the discover process by withholding or destroying evidence is the commonest cause for imposition of sanctions in the trial process. I'm sure it happens a lot in the grand jury context.

[Tight_rope]

84. Fitz should throw her ass (Miller) in jail again for this stunt!

:spank:

[NVMojo]

86. One could only hope!!!

[0007]

55. The morality and reliance of Judith Miller is highly questionable.

to say the least.

It sounds like story changing time to get everyone on the same tract.

[snippy]

83. The subpoena was limited to a narrow time frame of about one week. n/t

[Garbo 2004]

10. "Discovered?" Like she'd lost them? Forgot about them? Or had them all

along and turned them over as part of her deal to cooperate with Fitz? Strange language for such an article.

[MADem]

11. Yeah, something smells a bit fishy here n/t

[Fridays Child]

13. What's that smell? Desperation?

Karl and Judy are making stuff up, now.

[mod mom]

22. exactly what came to my mind. How do we know they weren't recently

fabricated to exonerate key people. suspicious!

[KansDem]

62. And when did Judy have time to "discover" them?

After all, she's been in prison. I'm at a loss for finding last month's gas bill, at home at my desk, let alone trying to do it from a prison cell.

[Tight_rope]

89. I say throw Miller in jail again..this time dont let her out until after..

the trial... The lying bitch! Just found the papers my ass. :spank:

[VegasWolf]

14. This has to be bad for Miller, probably a result of her conservation

with Fitzgerald. He undoubtably had some proof of something. If Miller had ANYTHING that would exonerate her or her sources, she would have had that first and foremost months ago.

[NVMojo]

15. maybe this sheds some light??

Prosecutor 'Not Finished' With Judith Miller Yet
Oct. 6, 2005

NEW YORK At the end of a day when news emerged that Karl Rove would be appearing again before the grand jury probing Plamegate, The New York Times confirmed a Reuters account that the prosecutor wasn't done with its reporter Judith Miller either.

It also appears that the Times' promised full accounting of the Miller role in this drama may be delayed due to the new development.

more...

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001262430

[SpiralHawk]

17. "Oh, I am like so sorry 'n stuff." - Judith Miller

Can her neocon propagandist butt today.

[underpants]

19. HAhahahaha boy RW radio must be all over this *familiar* story

Sure sounds like a story that was much ridiculed a few years ago huh?*

*turned out to be true in the original.

[msanthrope]

27. You mean when Sen. Clinton found where she packed her

billing records from the Rose law firm?

Oh--that's an interesting Google.....

[underpants]

47. Yes exactly

that one checked out (regardless of what the google search says) I am guessing that this one won't even be questioned.

[msanthrope]

99. No---of course it won't, but I am glad that someone out there in the

Internets remembers.......

'Cause I do......

[Halliburton]

20. JUNE 03???

very intersting

[librechik]

21. oh, puhleeze!

the dog ate my homework???


lame...

[LiberalEsto]

23. Bet she found them in a hollow pumpkin

in some pumpkin patch, the same way Dick Nixon "found" documents on Alger Hiss several decades ago.

[VegasWolf]

24. Bet she found the it only after Fitzgerald showed her a copy of it. nt

[NVMojo]

26. now that would be funny!!!

[IndianaGreen]

92. You might be right there, VegasWolf.

Judy Miller was shown a copy of document and she had no choice but to produce original and turn the name or names of her friends, else she was facing obstruction of justice and perjury charges.

Judy lied to us (again!) when she said that she spoke to grand jury after getting "iron clad" release from her source.

Why is the NY Times still supporting this despicable woman?

[daleo]

28. It's a miracle! n/t

[VegasWolf]

31. Funny, note was typed on prison stationary using an ink that was not

available in 2003!!! Sure, uh huh!!!!

[Laura PourMeADrink]

32. Maybe this explains the coded message from Libby

"You went into jail in the summer. It is fall now. You will have stories to cover--Iraqi elections and suicide bombers, biological threats and the Iranian nuclear program. Out West, where you vacation, the aspens will already be turning. They turn in clusters, because their roots connect them. Come back to work---and life. Until then, you will remain in my thoughts and prayers."


Maybe, she had to come up with dummy notes to exonerate him, Rove, Cheney, whomever?

To get her old life back?

You have to admit, this message does have a "come on, give up, you can't win" tone to it

[NVMojo]

36. hmmmm...maybe ....

wonder where she vacations out west?? Just before the US invaded Iraq, that prior Thanksgiving, we ran into Rumsfeld vacationing with family in Big Sky (?), Montana ...

[katinmn]

40. Judy Miller. What a JOKE.

:eyes:

[DemsUnited]

43. Hmm. So Judy had a conversation with Scooter in June sometime. Why

didn't Libby 'fess up to it? I mean, we got leaks from his lawyer about the July conversations, so am assuming that Libby never bothered to tell Grand Jury about the June conversation. Why?

Am also sure Miller disclosed this June conversation during her testimony last Friday. Fitzgerald asked her then for any notes, and Miller went and found them. Fitzgerald will review & chat with Miller again on Tuesday.

Also interesting is the Rove angle. Mr. Fitz tells Rove "I'll get back to you" two months ago when Rove offered to "clarify" any questions that might have arisen from Matt Coopers testimony. But he waits until he has Miller's testimony to take Rove up on the offer. Coinkydink? I don't think so.

One last point. Joe Wilson has always claimed that the White House Iraq Group started a dossier on him after he became vocal over the use of the Niger connection in the Jan 2003 State of the Union Address. This was well before the State Department memo was prepared in June and taken aboard Air Force I in July. How complete was this dossier? I would bet very complete, down to the name, rank and covert status of Mrs. Valerie Plame Wilson.

[snippy]

87. All good points. And probably accurate. n/t

[OKthatsIT]

44. DONT BE SCHTUPID!

<rolls eyes>

[iconoclastNYC]

45. Oh my god.....

Hopefully for the WH these are better forgeries than the Yellowcake documents.

[DrZeeLit]

54. She went to JAIL...and just NOW... found some NOTES? Helllooooooo....

something is ROTTEN in the stateofdenmark...er.... ROTTEN IN THE GOOD OL' US of A.

What the hell is she playing?
I hope she fires her cleaning lady, huh?

This cannot be anything but BULLSHIT.

It's like telling a joke and getting to the punchline and going... oh, but I forgot the part about the elephant under the rug...duh.

And what, pray tell, will the NYT do with her now?
She has certainly fallen off her journalistic pedestal ... (and I'm being sarcastic here).

Why can't anyone have the DECENCY to just tell the truth and quit trying to cover their asses?

[Gronk Groks]

64. They are not decent people....

....they are power-hungry kleptomaniacs as well as compulsive liars.

I mean the mis-administration. The NYT is just controlled through the corporations. They are just following marching orders.

The revolution draws nigh...

[janx]

56. Prosecutor 'Not Finished' With Judith Miller

NEW YORK After news emerged that Karl Rove would be appearing again before the grand jury probing Plamegate, The New York Times confirmed late Thursday that a Reuters account that the prosecutor wasn't done with its reporter Judith Miller either.

It also appears that the Times' promised full accounting of the Miller role in this drama may be delayed due to the new development.

Then, on Friday afternoon, Reuters carried news that Miller had "discovered notes from an earlier conversation she had with Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff and turned them over the prosecutor investigating the leak of a covert CIA operative's identity, legal sources said on Friday.

"Miller's notes about a June 2003 conversation with Cheney's chief of staff, Lewis 'Scooter' Libby, could be important to prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald's case by establishing exactly when Libby and other administration officials first started talking to reporters about CIA operative Valerie Plame and her diplomat husband, Joseph Wilson."

More at link:

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001262430

(I hope this hasn't been posted yet. I did a search and didn't see it.)

By the way, I've been gone all day. Did Rove testify this morning?

[texpatriot2004]

57. He won't testify until next week apparantely. n/t

[janx]

58. Thanks for the info.

I wonder what happened...?

[goodhue]

59. cool

[NVMojo]

60. sort of a dupe ...this is a revision that first ran yesterday ...

they are trying to scoop Reuters with their blended version of this:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x1835331

15. maybe this sheds some light??
Prosecutor 'Not Finished' With Judith Miller Yet
Oct. 6, 2005

NEW YORK At the end of a day when news emerged that Karl Rove would be appearing again before the grand jury probing Plamegate, The New York Times confirmed a Reuters account that the prosecutor wasn't done with its reporter Judith Miller either.

It also appears that the Times' promised full accounting of the Miller role in this drama may be delayed due to the new development.

more...

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_di...

[rodeodance]

61. now its 'Judy's turn to cry" (but the book deal will make it all better).

[NVMojo]

67. ...reporters generally keep "story" notes together in files or piles ...

unless, of course, this was some note to herself she jotted down on the back of her checkbook register when she picked up info while at lunch, dinner or some other excuse event ....

I used to be a reporter ....kept all story notes together, ordered by editor, in case of subpoena's ...

[redacted]

79. True. And it's prob seems strange that she "just found them" but . . .

maybe not.

Prob she was in talking to Libby about something else, and so they were filed under story X. So maybe they didn't get handed over in the first place because you just didn't look there when your lawyers (or the prosecutor) asked you to hand everything over to them.

I've testified before -- when it's been 2 plus years -- you forget details sometimes, things that didn't seem very important to you at the time become extremely important to the case - and you try to piece your memories together with your notes, etc . . .. And then you go in and they ask you very specific questions, and you are a good honest person (well with Judy this might be questionable, but in my case), so you think hard -- and you vaguely remember some things -- and you agree to give all your old notes from that time period a look-over or some such -- and to let them know if you remember anything else.

And damn if you didn't find something.

I have some issues with Judy, but having been there I bet that this isn't some kind of conspiracy on her part (not to say that NVMojo necessarily said this, but others above did.)

[NVMojo]

91. understood, thanks

[goforit]

72. ROFLMAO!!!!.....I love all the DUrs!!!....Great comments!!!

We are all so giddy.

[NVMojo]

75. LOL! I guess we are! Here's an interesting blog analysis on the timeline .

http://www.needlenose.com/node/view/1659

[tom22]

97. Libby lied to the grand jury

about when he talked to Miller. It's as easy as that for indictment number one.

[DemsUnited]

93. Reuters: Reporter turns over new notes in CIA leak case (expanded article)

By Adam Entous 39 minutes ago

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A New York Times reporter has given investigators notes from a conversation she had with a top aide to Vice President Dick Cheney weeks earlier than was previously known, suggesting early White House involvement before the outing of a CIA operative, legal sources said.

Times reporter Judith Miller discovered the notes -- from a June 2003 conversation she had with Cheney's chief of staff, Lewis "Scooter" Libby -- after her testimony before the grand jury last week, the sources said on Friday. She turned the notes over to federal prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald and is expected to meet him again next Tuesday, the sources said.

Miller's notes could help Fitzgerald establish that Libby had started talking to reporters about CIA operative Valerie Plame and her diplomat husband, Joseph Wilson, weeks before Wilson publicly criticized the administration's Iraq policy in a Times opinion piece, the sources said.

One source involved in the investigation said the new information could help Fitzgerald show a long-running and orchestrated campaign to discredit Wilson, which could help form the basis for a conspiracy charge.

<snip>

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051007/pl_nm/bush_leak_dc

[NVMojo]

94. Dupe, it's the same link, maybe these posts can be combined??

the speculation in this version is quite interesting ...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x1835331

[Burried News]

95. More notes from Judy - singing like a bird.

Do re mi fa so - who all is going to jail.

[snippy]

96. "a long-running and orchestrated campaign to discredit Wilson"

Judge Tatel referred to this as "the plot against Wilson." Sounds like a conspiracy to me.

[Roland99]

106. Oh is next week going to be interesting or what??

These fake terror alerts aren't going to matter once the shit starts hitting the fan.

[savemefromdumbya]

108. trick up his sleeve

we will all know 'who dunnit' it if there is a terror attack?

[lovuian]

110. Its Magical!!!

:nuke: Poof goes Scooter!!!

[alcibiades_mystery]

114. These notes probably say the following

"Libby advised: Wilson's wife CIA."

Then the ball goes back to Libby: how the hell did he find this out? He either gives it up, and spills on the conspiracy, or he goes down alone for espionage act.

[alcibiades_mystery]

113. This is why Rove's attorney is now emphasizing "not to PUNISH Joe Wilson"

See this thread:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=5005262&mesg_id=5007388

It also means super bad news for Rove, because it indicates that his legal squad is now planting seeds for pre-trial motions and trial defense on the issue of intent. They know Fitzy's got him dead to rights on the espionage act, conspiracy (entered into with Libby and probably other parties) to violate the espionage act, and probably perjury and probably obstruction of justice.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

115. Ruh-roh, Unca Scooter!!

[OregonBlue]

117. What does this code mean? I guess I'm not following very well

but,it seems he's telling her that someone she talked with when she was on vacation has already turned and that there are others that have already talked?

Out West, where you vacation, the aspens will already be turning. They turn in clusters, because their roots connect them.

[Lilith Velkor]

119. I say she LOOTED 'em.

Oh wait...she's white. Nevamind.