Rove's upcoming indictment and PlameGate, the file

[skip fox]

How many calls, how many callers, what does that mean? (It means Rove coordinated it, conspired, etc., and was perhaps a primary source himself. It also means there will be more than one indictment of the administration's top officials. Read on.)


The situation strongly implies that there were at least 2 different primary sources (since Matt Cooper's specifically released him, but Judith Miller's apparently did not do the same for her) and reason maintains there were at least 6 initial calls (the 6 reporters contacted: Robert Novak, Cooper, Miller, and 3 others), and 3 follow-up calls (Novak, Miller, Cooper). This is the minimum.

In order to make sure the story leaked properly, discrediting Wilson's Niger yellow-cake findings by implying he and his wife, Valerie Plame, had an agenda against the president from the beginning one person would have to coordinate the calling. (Of course he could have made calls as well.) Neither of the 2 or more should call the other's initial contact (that would seem too eager, perhaps a dirty trick). In addition, 4-5 others would have to know the story was true in order to confirm it, and they had to be encouraged to do so.

Who better than the master of such odious activity, Karl Rove? Perhaps Cheney (who would have felt responsibility in such a matter since it was the behest of his office that the CIA sent Wilson to Niger) used his clearance to discover this information and brought it to Rove at a meeting of the White House Iraq Group (see snippy's beautiful post in DU, link at bottom of this post). Then Rove would go into high gear, doing what he does best (I mean worst). He coordinated the callings, made sure there were the requisite secondary sources ready and willing to confirm (perhaps each having different details or a different slant).

Therefore, Rove may well be both a conspirator (a little RICO, anybody?), and the leaker of illegal information, AND we may have at least one other indictment handed down. Think of the possibilities! Rice, Cheney, Libby, Hughes (why the hell did she retire before?), Matalin, etc. Maybe even W. (But the more I think about it, I wonder how many real reporters wouldn't be suspicious of a call from Rove? He might be the primary source for the likes of Novak, but few others.)

But think about the above and then read snippy's lovely item backed up by a Washington Post article:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=142863&mesg_id=142952

[montanacowboy]

1. Fitzgerald wants to see whats on the phone tapes

of AF One when they were all traveling to Africa - *, Cheney, Rove, Rice, Matalin, Hughes - the WHIG (White House Iraq Group)

these tapes from July 7-15 could have all the information recorded on them - the outing and the conspiracy to commit

[skip fox]

3. Wow.

I've gotten exicted before, but this time I think there's ore!

[Roland99]

6. Odds on those tapes seeing the light of day?

[seemslikeadream]

2. Little known smear of Jack Shaw, did it come from the WHIG also?

A reminder of the smear of Jack Shaw LOOK AT THE DATES

August 10, 2004

DoD Statement on Jack Shaw and the Iraq Telecommunications Contract
For several months there have been allegations in the press that activities of John A. Shaw, Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for International Technology Security, were under investigation by the Inspector General of the Department of Defense (DoD IG). The allegations were examined by DoD IG criminal investigators in Baghdad and a criminal investigation was never opened.

Furthermore, attempts to discredit Shaw and his report on Iraqi telecommunications contracting matters were brought to the attention of the DoD IG and were accordingly referred to the FBI.

Shaw carried out his duties in the investigation of Iraqi telecommunications matters pursuant to the authorities spelled out in the Memorandum of Understanding between the DoD IG and the Acting Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics. Shaw provided a copy of his report to the DOD IG and, at the request of the Coalition Provisional Authority, to the Iraqi National Communications and Media Commission.

Shaw is not now, nor has he ever been, under investigation by the DoD IG. Any questions concerning FBI activities should be addressed to the FBI.
http://www.dod.mil/releases/2004/nr20040810-1103.html

Winds of Change:Troubled Waters Ahead For the Neo Cons
by
Wayne Madsen

The neo-con attack on Shaw was predictable considering their previous attacks on Ambassador Joe Wilson, his wife Valerie Plame, former U.S. Central Command chief General Anthony Zinni, former counter-terrorism coordinator Richard Clarke, former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill, CIA counter-terrorism agent Michael Scheuer (the "anonymous" author of Imperial Hubris who has recently been gagged by the Bush administration), fired FBI translator Sibel Edmonds (who likely discovered a penetration by Israeli and other intelligence assets using the false flag of the Turkish American Council and who also has been gagged by the Bush administration), and all those who took on the global domination cabal. But Shaw showed incredible moxie. When he decided to investigate Pentagon Inspector General Reports that firms tied to Perle and Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz were benefiting from windfall profit contracts in Iraq, Shaw decided to go to Iraq himself to find out what was going on. When Shaw was denied entry into Iraq by U.S. military officers (yes, a top level official of the Defense Department was denied access to Iraq by U.S. military personnel!), he decided to sneak into the country disguised as a Halliburton contractor. Using the cover of Cheney's old company to get the goods on Cheney's friends' illegal activities was yet another masterful stroke of genius by Shaw. But it also earned him the wrath of the neo-cons. They soon leaked a story to the Los Angeles Times claiming that Shaw actually snuck into Iraq to ensure that Qualcomm (on whose board sat a friend of Shaw's) was awarded a lucrative cell network contract.

But nothing could be further from the truth. Shaw, who worked for Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush, represented the Old Guard Republican entity that in August 2003 set up shop in the Pentagon right under the noses of Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, and Feith to investigate the neo-con cabal and their illegal contract deals. The entity, known as the International Armament and Technology Trade Directorate, was soon shut down as a result of neo-con pressure. Not to be deterred, Shaw continued his investigation of the neo-cons. Although the neo-cons told the Los Angeles Times that the FBI was investigating Shaw, the reverse was the case: the FBI was investigating the neo-cons, particularly Perle and Wolfowitz, for fraudulent activities involving Iraqi contracts. And in worse news for the neo-cons: Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld was giving the Inspector General's and Shaw's investigations a "wink and a nod" of approval.

The financial stakes for the Pentagon are high - the Iraqi CPA's Inspector General recently revealed that over $1 billion of Iraqi money was missing from the audit books on Iraqi contracts. For Shaw and the FBI, it was a matter of what they suspected for many years - that Perle, Wolfowitz, and their comrades were running entities that ensured favorable treatment for Israeli activities - whether they were business opportunities in a U.S.-occupied Arab country or protecting Israeli spies operating within the U.S. defense and intelligence establishments.

Shaw certainly must have recalled how, during the Reagan administration, an Israeli spy named Jonathan Pollard was able to steal massive amounts of sensitive U.S. intelligence over a long period of time and hand it over to his Israeli control officer, a dangerous and deadly agent provocateur named Rafael "Rafi" Eitan. That had disastrous effects on U.S. intelligence operations throughout the world because some of the documents were handed by the Israelis to the Soviets in return for letting more Soviet Jews emigrate to Israel.

more

http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/081104_winds_...


This the false "leaked story" that "someone" gave to the press about Jack Shaw

Defense Official Probed on Contracts
Los Angeles Times
July 07, 2004
T. Christian Miller

Washington -- A senior Defense Department official conducted unauthorized investigations of Iraq reconstruction efforts and used their results to push for lucrative contracts for friends and their business clients, according to current and former Pentagon officials and documents.
John "Jack" Shaw, deputy undersecretary for international technology security, represented himself as an agent of the Pentagon's inspector general in conducting the investigations this year, sources said.

In one case, Shaw disguised himself as an employee of Halliburton Co. and gained access to a port in southern Iraq after he was denied entry by the U.S. military, the sources said.

In that investigation, Shaw found problems with operations at the port of Umm al Qasr, Pentagon sources said. In another, he criticized a competition sponsored by the U.S.-led Coalition Provisional Authority to award cell phone licenses in Iraq.

In both cases, Shaw urged government officials to fix the alleged problems by directing multimillion-dollar contracts to companies linked to his friends, without competitive bidding, according to the Pentagon sources and documents. In the case of the port, the clients of a lobbyist friend won a no- bid contract for dredging.

http://www.globalexchange.org/countries/unitedstates/de ...
Pentagon urges repeal of Iraq phone contracts


By Bill Gertz
THE WASHINGTON TIMES


The Pentagon has asked the Coalition Provisional Authority in Baghdad to cancel three contracts for Iraqi cell phone networks worth about $500 million annually, citing fraud and the companies' links to an Iraqi-born Briton with ties to Saddam Hussein.
A June 14 memorandum from John A. Shaw, deputy undersecretary of defense for international technology security, says an investigation uncovered "fraud on the Ministry of Communications by Orascom, Atheer and AsiaCell."

The companies are suspected of rigging the bids for the cell phone contracts in favor of Nadhmi Auchi, who owns part of Orascom and a controlling interest in the bank BNP Paribas, which "is the French bank selected by Saddam Hussein to run the Oil for Food program."
"His role in assisting the Saddam regime, to his own immense profit, makes all three firms ineligible under Section 6.1.4 in that all the evidence strongly indicates Auchi had a direct or indirect ownership interest in all three firms at the time of signature, and his role continues today," the memorandum said.


http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20040621-115845...

working links
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=4032530&mesg_id=4032716

[skip fox]

4. Useful but long: PlameGate

Best on useful developments from last week until yesterday.

PLAMEGATE: WHO LEAKED PLAME AS CIA OPERATIVE? July 6, 2005

Even Jeff Gannon had a role. Novak and National Review Online contended that Plame's name was well known, but their motives were (and are) suspect. Thus Gannon as a "reporter" comes on the scene also claiming Plame was common knowledge. If someone this obscure knows of her, the common wisdom went, it must be so. Interestingly no one else has made that claim.

BACKGROUND

On July 13, 2003 Robert Novak's column exposed Valerie Plame (known outside the "Company" as Valerie Wilson) as a CIA operative. Since Plame was instrumental in getting her husband, Joseph Wilson, assigned to check the "Nigerian yellow-cake" story, Novak implied that Plame and her husband had ulterior motives for his assignment, especially since Wilson had published an op-ed in the New York Times on July 6, 2003, reporting back that the Nigerian-Iraqi connection was a hoax (since the facts went unacknowledged by the administration for months after the President's State of the Union Message which contained the famous 16 words to the effect that Iraq tried to purchase the uranium for a bomb from Niger, months after the beginning of the war based on false information.)

Novak publishes his column in The Chicago Sun-Times in which Novak writes: "Wilson never worked for the CIA, but his wife, Valerie Plame, is an agency operative on weapons of mass destruction. Two senior administration officials told me his wife suggested sending Wilson to Niger to investigate the Italian report. The CIA says its counter proliferation officials selected Wilson and asked his wife to contact him"


RECENT DEVELOPMENTS, REPORTERS

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/reporters_contempt




RECENT DEVELOPMENTS: ROVE NAMED AS SOURCE

---Newseeek: Michael Isikoff: "The Rove Factor?: Time Magazine talked to Bush's guru for Plame story," July 11, 2005 issue :


<snip>

The e-mails surrendered by Time Inc., which are largely between Cooper and his editors, show that one of Cooper's sources was White House deputy chief of staff Karl Rove, according to two lawyers who asked not to be identified because they are representing witnesses sympathetic to the White House. . . . in an interview with Newsweek, Rove's lawyer, Robert Luskin, confirmed that Rove had been interviewed by Cooper for the article. It is unclear, however, what passed between Cooper and Rove.

. . .

Luskin told Newsweek that Rove "never knowingly disclosed classified information" and that "he did not tell any reporter that Valerie Plame worked for the CIA." Luskin declined, however, to discuss any other details. He did say that Rove himself had testified before the grand jury "two or three times" and signed a waiver authorizing reporters to testify about their conversations with him.

<snip>


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8445696/site/newsweek/


---The Huffington Post: Lawrence O'Donnell: "Rove's 'I Did Not Inhale' Defense," July 4, 2005::


<snip>

Luskin confessed that, well, yes, Rove did talk to Cooper. It is a huge admission in a case where Rove and Luskin have never, before Friday, felt compelled to say a word about Rove's contact with Cooper or anyone else involved in the case.

. . .

To violate the law, Rove had to tell Cooper about a covert agent "knowing that the information disclosed so identifies such covert agent and that the United States is taking affirmative measures to conceal such covert agent's intelligence relationship to the United States."
So, Rove's defense now hangs on one word—he "never knowingly disclosed classified information."
<snip>


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/theblog/archive/lawrence-odonnell/roves-i-did-not-inhale_3637.html

also at Yahoo:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/theblog/archive/lawrence-odonnell/roves-i-did-not-inhale_3637.html





---LA Times: Richard B Schmitt: "Rove Talked but Did Not Tattle, Attorney Says," July 3, 2005:


<snip>

Luskin, Rove's attorney, acknowledged in an interview Saturday that Cooper and Rove had spoken days before Novak's column, in a conversation that was initiated by Cooper.

"What I can tell you is that Cooper called Rove during that week between the Wilson article and the Novak article, but that Karl absolutely did not identify Valerie Plame," Luskin said. "He did not disclose any confidential information about anybody to Cooper or to anybody else."

Luskin said he would not "characterize the substance of the conversation," which was covered in the testimony Rove provided to the grand jury investigating the leak. "The folks in Fitzgerald's office have asked us not to talk about what Karl has had to say," Luskin said.

<snip>


http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-rove3jul03,1,2388418.story?coll=la-home-food&track=mostemailedlink



---Editor and Publisher, E&P staff, "Rove 'Knowingly' Refusing Interviews on Plame Leak," July 4, 2005:


<snip>

Two days after his lawyer confirmed that his name turned up as a source in Matthew Cooper's notes on the Valerie Plame/CIA case, top White House adviser Karl Rove refused to answer questions about the development today.

<snip>


http://www.mediainfo.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000972931

or

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000972931


Tim Grieve and David Corn both urge caution on those who believe recent developments clearly indicate the smoking gun is in Rove's tight little fist:




---Salon, Tim Grieve: "The Question of Karl Rove," 5 July, 2005:

Grieve urges caution. Mentions multiple sources and notes that in the LA Times article Rove's attorney goes far beyond claiming his client did not "knowingly disclose," since he did "not disclose any confidential information" (see below). He implies that Rove may have a strong case or, at least, that seems to be the way his attorneys will pitch it.

<snip>

What Newsweek actually reported Sunday is a little less than that : Newsweek says that the e-mail messages Time turned over to the federal prosecutor . . . reveal that Rove was one of Matthew Cooper's sources . . . but it's unclear what Rove told Cooper.

<snip>


http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/index.html?blog=/politics/war_room/2005/07/05/rove/index.html

---The Nation, David Corn, "Is It Rove?, July 5, 2005:

Includes a list of valuable questions about the multiple officials alluded to, etc.

<snip>

Who told Time about Plame? Were these "government officials" the same as Novak's "two administrative officials? And when did these government officials tell Time about Plame?

. . .

Fitzgerald has a difficult mission. He has to determine (a) who in the administration spoke to Novak and Time--and perhaps other media outlets, like The New York Times--about Wilson, (b) what precisely was said in these conversations, and (c) whether the get-Wilson leakers knew they were slipping classified information to the journalists .

<snip>


http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/thenation/20050705/cm_thenation/34581_1




Such questions may be very valuable in determining what happened, as well as what the Republican strategy might be and how we might counter it. Could Rove say, for instance, "I just told Novak that Wilson's wife at the CIA helped get Wilson the assignment, indicating their impure motives. I never told him she was a CIA operative. Hell, she could have been a faceless administrator. But since hundreds in the Beltway know she's an operative, he probably added that himself. Or . . . maybe his other source." (Which sounds good until we consider that every other reporter contacted would have to agree that Rove leaked her role in this manner.)




---Raw Story, unattributed, "Democrat's Letter: Rove Must Explain Role in CIA Outing or Resign," July 5, 2005

Provides letter on Rove and his probable role in PlameGate from Rep. John Conyers of Michigan to the President. Letter circulated among Democrats in House for signature. To be delivered on Thurs., July 7, 2005. From letter:


<snip>

Notwithstanding whether Mr. Rove intentionally violated the law in leaking information concerning former CIA operative Valerie Plame, we believe it is not tenable to maintain Mr. Rove as one of your most important advisors unless he is willing to explain his central role in using the power and authority of your Administration to disseminate information regarding Ms. Plame and to undermine her husband, Ambassador Joseph Wilson.

. . .

Regardless of whether these actions violate the law – including specific laws against the disclosure of classified information as well as broader laws against obstruction of justice, the negligent distribution of defense information, and obligating reporting of press leaks to proper authorities – they seem to reveal a course of conduct designed to threaten and intimidate those who provide information critical of your Administration, such as Ambassador Wilson.

<snip>


Some speculate that Rove is on the threshold of an indictment:
Dissident Voice: Joshua Frank: "Rove to be Indicted?," July 6, 2005:


<snip>
If it turns out that Rove did leak Plame’s identity to Cooper, it still does not necessarily mean that he was also Robert Novak's inside guy, although it surely raises suspicion. The indictment, as I am told, will most likely be of felony weight. In fact, Karl Rove may be accused of perjury, as Bush's top strategist told a grand jury that he was not responsible for leaking Plame's identity to Time.
So the charge may not be for leaking top-secret information to the press, but for perjuring himself.
Sources also all say that this indictment is likely to come down either late this week or early next week. Of course Rove's lawyer denies that his client ever “knowingly” handed over classified information to the media, or is the “target” of any investigation. Perhaps Rove “unknowingly” leaked the information, and he's the “subject” rather than a “target” of an investigation. Time will tell.
<snip>

http://www.dissidentvoice.org/July05/Frank0705.htm








OTHER

REPORTERS' PLIGHT:

---Yahoo: Pete Yost: "Prosecutor Demands Time Reporter Testimony," July 5, 2005:

<snip>

A federal prosecutor on Tuesday demanded
the grand jury testimony of Time magazine reporter Matthew Cooper, even though
Time Inc. has surrendered e-mails and other documents to the investigation into the
leak of a CIA officer's identity.


Hogan has found the reporters in contempt of court for refusing to
divulge their sources.

<snip>


http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050705/ap_on_re_us/reporters_contempt_7



And in an unattributed story form the same source, "Prosecutor: Jail for Journalists in Leak Case," July 5, 2005:


<snip>

Although Time magazine on Friday handed over Cooper's notebooks, Fitzgerald and Cooper's testimony still remain necessary for his investigation.

<snip>


http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20050705/ts_nm/media_leak_dc_2






CHENEY'S OFFICE AS LEAK (or Cheney himself)

An elaborate pdf file by Robert Paulsen, "American Judas," on why Cheney's office exposed Plame, August 8, 2004:

http://s93118771.onlinehome.us/DU/AMERICANJUDAS.pdf







TIMELINE:

ca. 2001

Wilson: "I was invited out to meet with a group of people at the CIA who were interested in this subject. None I knew more than casually. They asked me about my understanding of the uranium business and my familiarity with the people in the Niger government at the time. And they asked, 'what would you do?' We gamed it out what I would be looking for. Nothing was concluded at that time. I told them if they wanted me to go to Niger I would clear my schedule. Then they got back to me and said, 'yes, we want you to go=@:

http://www.thenation.com/capitalgames/index.mhtml?bid=3&pid=823



2002

February: Joseph C. Wilson is sent to Niger to investigate rumors of sales of yellow-cake uranium to Iraq. His trip lasts eight days: Adrinking sweet mint tea and meeting with dozens of people: current government officials, former government officials, people associated with the country's uranium business. It did not take long to conclude that it was highly doubtful that any such transaction had ever taken place@ (from NY Times, 6 July 2003).

March 9: ACIA reportedly sends cable that does not name Wilson but says Nigerien officials denied the allegations,@ according to ABC News's timeline.



2003

January 28: George W. Bush=s State of the Union Address.

June 12: Walter Pincus reports in the _The Washington Post_ that an unnamed retired diplomat had given the CIA a negative report concerning uranium sales from Niger to Iraq.

July 6: Joseph Wilson publishes his Op-Ed in _The New York Times_ , criticizing the administration for allowing Bush to make the Niger-uranium claim in the State of the Union Address. (Link #4 for the Op-Ed.) Richard Leiby and Walter Pincus write an article discussing Wilson=s work in Niger and quoting his unfavorable administration comments.

ca. July 10: Rove speaks to Cooper of Time Magazine. Plame's identity and role are published in two sentences in Cooper's subsequent story. Notes made of meeting released to prosecutors in July 2005.

July 13: Robert Novak publishes his column in _The Chicago Sun-Times_ in which Valerie Plame is identified as a CIA agent. Novak writes: AWilson never worked for the CIA, but his wife, Valerie Plame, is an agency operative on weapons of mass destruction. Two senior administration officials told me his wife suggested sending Wilson to Niger to investigate the Italian report. The CIA says its counter proliferation officials selected Wilson and asked his wife to contact him."

July 17: Time magazine publishes the same basic story, also attributing it to "government officials."

July 22, Newsday also confirms "that Valerie Plame ... works at the agency on weapons of mass destruction issues in an undercover capacity." Link:

Sept. 14: Dick Cheney on Meet the Press denies knowing Wilson and seemingly goes out of his way to say AI don't know Mr. Wilson. I probably shouldn't judge him. I have no idea wh hired him and it never came...@ Russert interposes: AThe CIA did.@ And Cheney responds, AWho in the CIA, I don't know.@ (Why is Cheney going out of his way to volunteer this information? Wilson seems similarly perplexed; in an interview with Ann Goodman, after Goodman says AHe also said that he didn't know who had sent you, raising questions about the whole legitimacy of your mission to Niger,@ Wilson says, AI heard that. I don't know what the Vice President was trying to get at in that. )

Sept. 28: A source inside the administration tells the Washington Post that at least 6 other journalists were contacted with the leak and claims: "Clearly, it was meant purely and simply for revenge." He stated that he was sharing the information because the disclosure was "wrong and a huge miscalculation, because they were irrelevant and did nothing to diminish Wilson's credibility." (Daily Kos.)


Oct. 1: Robert Novak publishes his column in _The Chicago Sun-Times_ recounting the entire story from his vantage.

Oct. 2: The White House begins to change its tone and push the idea that nothing illegal occurred because Plame's name was `common knowledge'. And this is where Gannon becomes extremely useful. Novak and N R O are well known "conservative" mouthpieces and therefore their claims to have known all about Plame can be questioned. But if a new, fresh off the boat journalist at an unknown news organization knew about her too... well, then it was common knowledge and therefore no crime was committed by leaking her identity. (Daily Kos.)


* * * * * * Laws * * * * *

1917: Espionage Act (thrice amended since).

1982: The Intelligence Identities and Protection Act

Both are discussed by John Dean at http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20030815.html

[skip fox]

5. still relevant and useful. Nothing to add more except expectations are up.

Here's Newsweek's July 18 story by Isikoff:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8525978/site/newsweek/

and a good DU thread discussing it:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=1615757&mesg_id=1615757

and here's Huffington's post on the matter on Sat.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/theblog/archive/david-corn/explosive-new-rove-revela_3933.html

and a good DU thread discussing it:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=1916771&mesg_id=1916771



:toast: