Archive for category: Press and Media

I’ve been meaning to go back to compare the chronology laid out by Dan Rather in his complaint as it pertains to Abu Ghraib with the chronology of the Taguba investigation and the Hamdi case. Two things stick out. First, Myers pretended to be ignorant of the details of the abuse on May 6, several weeks after he called Dan Rather personally to spike–or delay–the story. Second, it appears the news of the abuse leaked to 60 Minutes and others at about the time the military put Major General Geoffrey Miller in charge of responding to the abuse–suggesting the leak may well have been a response to the military’s attempt to cover up the abuse and investigation. And finally, as lysias noted, the attempts to postpone the story would have delayed the Abu Ghraib revelation after the time when Paul Clement assured SCOTUS there was no torture.

Scribe noted in his comment that Rummy probably also called CBS to get them to spike the story. If Rather gets Rummy under oath, he may well have to reveal who in the Administration knew of the torture–and either didn’t tell Ted Olson and Paul Clement. Or did.

August 31 to September 9, 2003: Read more →

There’s a fascinating detail in Novak’s self-hagiography about his break-up with his BFF Karl Rove during the CIA Leak investigation. In the middle of a longish description of their relationship, Novak describes missing Rove’s company–as well as his leaks–during the three years when he and Rove didn’t talk.

Indeed, in fourty-four years as a Washington reporter, I never had better access to a White House as I did to start the George W. Bush administration. Karl Rove was a grade A-plus source. While he did not dispense state secrets, confidential political plans, or salacious gossip, Rove always returned my phone calls. He knew everything, and while he did not tell me all that he knew, he never lied or misled me and often steered me away from a bad tip.

Geraldine and I were guests of the Roves at a small dinner party in his Washington home, and he came to breakfast at my apartment. He was a regular speaker at the Evans-Novak Political Forum, and always attended my annual dinner party at the Army and Navy Club the night before the spring Gridiron dinner. We shared an interest in American political history, agreeing on a preference for William McKinley over Theodore Roosevelt.

When our relationship ended abruptly and completely for three years because of the CIA leak case, I missed him as a fascinating conversationalist as well as my best Bush administration source.

At least according to Novak, this warm relationship ended one day, presumably after September 29, 2003, and Novak and Rove didn’t speak for three years.

You’d think the reason would be legal–as two key witnesses to the case, it might be considered obstruction for the two to talk (putting their September 29, 2003 conversation aside). So, they put their relationship on a hiatus for the entire time Rove was under investigation. Right?

No.

Thank Jeebus for public libraries, where you can get propaganda written by conservative writers without putting any incremental money in their pocket. Yesterday I exchanged Hayes for Novak. While the Novak book has clearly been vetted more closely than Novak’s blabber-fest last year, I’m just on page 6 and already Novak has a big problem. Here’s how Novak describes his potty-mouthed encounter with Joe Wilson’s friend:

The man then goaded me with the criticism that I was soft on Bush, and argued that Ambassador Wilson "really had nailed the president on Meet the Press." He then asked what I thought of Wilson. "I think he’s an asshole," I said, using the same inelegant description that had crossed my mind when I saw him lecturing in the NBC green room two days earlier. The man responded that Wilson had gone to Africa on a CIA mission and discovered intelligence that the president ignored. I blurted out the information I had just learned, telling him Wilson was no intelligence expert but had been sent on the mission to Niger by his wife, who worked on counterproliferation at the CIA. (6)

Poor little Novak got goaded into swearing…

This version is important because it differs from what Wilson’s friend reported–to Wilson at least.

"Wilson’s an asshole. The CIA sent him. His wife, Valerie,works for the CIA. She’s a weapons of mass destruction specialist. Shesent him."

But if, in fact, Novak told Wilson’s friend that Plame worked in counterproliferation and the friend testified accordingly, then Novak would have to explain where he learned that from. Novak claims Armitage told him that Plame worked in counterproliferation:

Why would the CIA send Joseph Wilson, not an expert in nuclear proliferation and with no intelligence experience, on the mission to Niger? "Well," Armitage replied, "you know his wife works at CIA, and she suggested that he be sent to Niger." "His wife works at CIA?" I asked. "Yeah, in counterproliferation."

So if we were to go by Novak’s story alone, the fact that Novak told Wilson’s friend that Plame worked in counterproliferation would be no problem. Armitage told Novak and then Novak told Wilson’s friend. Just like DC is supposed to work.

…Covering the story…

Not surprisingly, when David Gregory had Karl Rove on Meet the Press this morning, he never called Rove on any of Rove’s misrepresentations. That’s par for the course, on NBC. When Russert had Bob Novak on, he didn’t call him on any of the misrepresentations, either. (Though to NBC’s credit, they had Matt Cooper on to smack Karl around after Karl was gone.) Of course, both Russert (as Libby’s fictional source for Plame’s identity) and Gregory (as one of the people whom Ari Fleischer leaked Plame’s identity to) are key players in this story. They’re not exactly reporting from a position of comfort or clarity.

So it falls to me to do what Gregory ought to have done while he had Karl in front of him. Here’s the transcript, with my annotations:

MR. GREGORY:  Let me talk about the CIA leakcase, of which you were obviously a, a central part.  This is what thepresident said in 2003 after the identity of Valerie Plame was divulgedin a Robert Novak column.  Watch.

(Videotape, September 30, 2003)

PRES. GEORGE W.BUSH:  If there’s a leak out of my administration, I want to know whoit is.  And if the person has violated laws, that person will be takencare of.

(End videotape)

MR. GREGORY: Robert Novak, who divulged Valerie Plame’s name in his column, appearedon this program with Tim Russert back in July, and Tim asked about hisbook.  Watch.

(Videotape, July 15, 2007)

MR. RUSSERT: Then you go on to say, in the book, “Senior White House adviser KarlRove returned my call late that afternoon [July 8^th, 2003],”the same day.  “I mentioned I had heard that Wilson’s wife worked atthe CIA in the counterproliferation section and that she had suggestedWilson be sent to Niger.  I distinctly remember Rove’s reply, ‘Oh, youknow that, too.’ Rove and I also discussed other aspects of Wilson’smission, but since he never has disclosed them publicly, neither haveI.” So you considered Rove’s comments, “Oh, you know that, too,” as aconfirmation?

MR. ROBERT NOVAK:  Yes.

(End videotape)

MR. GREGORY:  Were you a confirming source for Robert Novak?

Note, Gregory didn’t focus on the Administration’s earlier claims that Karl was not involved in the leak. Rather, he sets the bar higher, with Bush’s quote that he would "take care of" (and how–can you say commutation?) anyone who "violated laws."

MR. ROVE:  No. And I, I remember it slightly differently.  I remember saying, “I’veheard that, too.” Let, let me say this.  There is a civil lawsuit filedby Mr. Wilson and Ms. Plame.  It has been tossed out at the districtcourt level.  They’ve announced their intention to appeal.  I think itis better that I not add anything beyond what is already in the publicrecord until that suit is resolved.  But, as I’m—my recollection isthat I said, “I heard that, too.” We—I would point you to…

MR. GREGORY:  Where, where had you heard that?

Ah, the ongoing legal proceedings dodge. You’d think, at a minimum, Gregory would have pushed Rove for a commitment to come clean after the dismissal is held up on appeal.

But the more important question would be, "Karl, that line, ‘I’ve heard that too,’ exactly parallels the line that Scooter Libby claims to have used with journalists, that he had simply ‘heard this news from journalists.’ Is it just a freakish coincidence that your story about your involvement in this leak so perfectly resembles Libby’s story–a story that a jury has already determined to be a deliberate lie?"

MR. ROVE:  You’ll have to wait.

MR. GREGORY:  Butthat’s an important distinction, because the—you—“I heard that, too,”suggests that you heard it from somebody else rather than knowing ityourself.

MR. ROVE:  That’s correct.

MR. GREGORY:  But he, he took those notes down just as you said them.

Notes? Novak has notes? In spite of the fact he has in the past Novak said he didn’t have notes?

MR. ROVE:  Well,but I—my recollection is, “I’ve heard that, too.” So—but the point is,if, if, if a journalist had said to me, “I’d like you to confirm this,”my answer would have been, “I can’t.  I don’t know.  I’ve heard that,too.”

Again, the appropriate follow-up would be, "There you are again, Karl, a story that perfectly mirrors Libby’s felonious perjury." And this–not later, after Karl has safely hidden in his dark little world–would be the appropriate time to raise the fact that Rove leaked this information to Cooper with no caveats.