My Ari as Mr. X Scenario

by emptywheel

After convincing myself the other day that none of my favorite candidates to be Mr. X could be Mr. X, I wanted to figure out how the remaining candidates could be. I'm beginning to really doubt Rumsfeld could be Mr. X, mostly because all of the redacted court filings talk only about OVP, EOP, State, and CIA. At least according to the story Fitzgerald is telling, DOD didn't really get involved in this particular smear. So I'm going to leave aside Rummy for the moment.

I'm going to start with Ari. Even though Armitage's name appears to fit better in the redaction spaces of Fitzgerald's recent affidavit (though, there is some distortion related to the scanning process), I'm going to start with Ari because he's an easier case to make than Armitage. So here goes: a complete scenario for how Ari came to be Mr. X. What follows is a collection of the known facts from the July 7, June leak, and indictment weeks, interspersed with my speculations about how those known facts were orchestrated. I've marked direct known quotes with quotation marks (or blockquotes). All unmarked dialogue is speculative. As a bonus, this post also contains some more reflection on the whole NIE-declassification question.

Ari and Libby in DC

July 2003. The Joe Wilson column hits. Early on the morning of July 7 (the day after the column) Libby asks Ari to say that OVP did not request Wilson's trip, did not know about it. At a press gaggle that morning, Ari repeats this claim, as well as saying the 16 words in the SOTU were incorrect.

Q  Can you give us the White House account of Ambassador Wilson's account of what happened when he went to Niger and investigated the suggestions that Niger was passing yellow cake to Iraq?  I'm sure you saw the piece yesterday in The New York Times.

MR. FLEISCHER:  Well, there is zero, nada, nothing new here.[ed.- I'm reminded of Katharine Armstrong claiming Dick had had no, zero, zippo beer to drink before shooting his friend in the face; these Republicans seem to revert to the same false denial strategies a lot, huh?] Ambassador Wilson, other than the fact that now people know his name, has said all this before.  But the fact of the matter is in his statements about the Vice President -- the Vice President's office did not request the mission to Niger.  The Vice President's office was not informed of his mission and he was not aware of Mr. Wilson's mission until recent press accounts -- press reports accounted for it.

[snip]

The President's statement was based on the predicate of the yellow cake from Niger.  The President made a broad statement.  So given the fact that the report on the yellow cake did not turn out to be accurate, that is reflective of the President's broader statement, David.  So, yes, the President' broader statement was based and predicated on the yellow cake from Niger.

Q  So it was wrong?

MR. FLEISCHER:  That's what we've acknowledged with the information on --

Q  The President's statement at the State of the Union was incorrect?

MR. FLEISCHER:  Because it was based on the yellow cake from Niger.

Not long after the gaggle, Libby and Ari meet for lunch. Libby thanks Ari for stating that OVP did not send Wilson. Then, Libby gets a little smarmy and buddy buddy with Ari, which is weird, because Ari is not considered a trusted insider, certainly not by Libby. Libby tells Ari that “[T]he Vice-President did not send Ambassador Wilson to Niger . . . the CIA sent Ambassador Wilson to Niger. . . . [H]e was sent by his wife. . . . [S]he works in . . . the Counterproliferation area of the CIA.” Oh, Ari said, I'd heard that she was an analyst in WMD. Is that right? No, Libby corrects. She's in CPD, she's an operative.  But be careful with this information, Libby said, it's "hush hush," "its on the QT."

While Libby and Ari are at lunch, Novak calls Ari and leaves a message. Ari doesn't get a chance to return Novak's call right away. He has to issue a statement, after all, explaining what he said during the gaggle, that the White House did not stand by the uranium claims in the SOTU anymore. Later, once he's on Air Force One on the way to Africa, Ari calls Novak back. Novak asks very pointed questions. Why did the CIA send Joe Wilson? Novak asked. He's a Democrat. A very pointed question: Do you know who at CIA sent Wilson? Do you know why he got sent? Ari responds somewhat vaguely, balancing Novak's excellent reputation at the White House against Libby's admonitions that this is "hush hush." His wife Valerie sent him, Ari said. She's a WMD specialist at the CIA.

Note, here, that Ari does not say Plame is covert. In fact, in my scenario he only has to say as much as Novak would have had to have heard to blab to Joe Wilson's friend on July 8, before Novak spoke to Rove on July 9. In that encounter, Novak said “Wilson’s an asshole. The CIA sent him. His wife, Valerie, works for the CIA. She’s a weapons of mass destruction specialist. She sent him.”

Also note that in my scenario Novak is primed to ask these questions of Ari, just after Libby has told Ari of Plame's identity. Like magic, wouldn't you think? Only it's not magic. You see, I speculate that Libby had lunch with Novak sometime the week before Wilson's column. During lunch, Libby made two requests of Novak. First, Novak should try to smear Frances Fragos Townsend, who Libby suspected would put the kibosh on the extraordinary rendition and domestic surveillance programs OVP had set up for the fight the war on terror. Second, Novak should be prepared to take out Joe Wilson, who Libby had heard was going to be on MTP with Novak the following Sunday, the same Sunday, Libby explained, that Wilson would publish an editorial in the NYT. We're still figuring out how we're going to go after Wilson, Libby explained, but call Ari on Monday. I'll make sure he's ready to give you some dirt sometime on Monday.

One more thing. I've suggested that Libby and Rove tried to frame Ari last summer, by suggesting he was reviewing the INR memo on Air Force One. Ari, of course, denied he had ever seen the memo, which we now know is a moot question anyway, if Libby told Ari of Plame's covert status (more than was in the INR memo, mind you) before Ari got on the plane. But by suggesting Ari found out about Plame via the memo, Libby could deny Ari's claims that Libby had revealed Plame's identity at lunch, where Libby got all smarmy in an attempt to get Ari to leak this information. So if I'm right about any of this, then the attempt to smear Ari was an attempt to hide Libby's involvement in directing Ari's leaks--and with it, the conspiracy to out Plame. This smear, btw, no matter if I'm reading it right or not, is one significant piece of evidence that Ari is Mr. X. After all, why spend time smearing Ari, unless you knew that he was one of the leakers?

Ari in Africa

Anyway, back to my Ari scenario. During the rest of that week in Africa, Ari continues to conference with Libby, Rove, and Dan Bartlett on how to respond to the questions about Wilson. They decide they're going to try to back off of Ari's renunciation of the uranium claim from July 7. On the night of the 8th, Rove secure faxes Ari a copy of the CIA report on Wilson's trip. Rove tells Ari to focus on the report the next day. Tell them, Rove said, he didn't refute the Niger uranium claim, he only reported back that Niger denied making the deal with Iraq. We're trying to get Tenet to declassify the trip report, Rove told Ari. Try to get journalists asking for this trip report. Obediently, on July 9, Ari emphasizes just that point in the gaggle:

Q: Ambassador Wilson said he made a case months before that there was no basis to the belief --

MR. FLEISCHER: No, he reported that Niger denied the allegation. That's what Ambassador Wilson reported.

Q: Was that report weighed against other --

MR. FLEISCHER: And of course they would deny the allegation. That doesn't make it untrue. It was only later -- you can ask Ambassador Wilson if he reported that the yellow cake documents were forged. He did not. His report did not address whether the documents were forged or not. His report stated that Niger denied the accusation. He spent eight days in Niger and concluded that Niger denied the allegation. Well, typically, nations don't admit to going around nuclear nonproliferation.

Q: But he said there was a basis to believe their denials.

MR. FLEISCHER: That's different from what he reported. The issue here is whether the documents on yellow cake were forged. He didn't address that issue. That's the information that subsequently came to light, not prior to the speech.

I think Rove got more involved in the Wilson response after the July 7 Ari statement. And I strongly suspect he was the one who told Ari to push the trip report, because on the same day Ari would push journalists to pursue it in the gaggle, Rove would tell Novak they wanted to declassify the trip report (and two days later, Rove would say they wanted to declassify some things to Matt Cooper).

On the night of the 10th, Rove, Libby, Ari, Condi, Hadley, and Bartlett have a conference call. They've got Tenet ready with his statement about Wilson. So Condi and Ari should prime reporters for it by announcing during the gaggle that the CIA is to blame for the 16 words in the SOTU. At the same time, the entire group is directed to push reporters to look into who sent Wilson on the trip. Don't tell anyone about Plame. But walk them up to it. Get them asking the question.

Condi doesn't do so well with these instructions, though, because she basically reveals that the early drafts of the SOTU include a reference to Niger and to an amount of uranium.

Q  If I could just follow up.  On that sentence, you said that the CIA changed the -- that things were done to accommodate the CIA. What was done?

DR. RICE:  Some specifics about amount and place were taken out.

Q   -- taken out then?

DR. RICE:  Some specifics about amount and place were taken out.

Q    Was "place" Niger?

Ah, well, she did a better job with the primary purpose of the gaggle, to blame George Tenet for the words in the SOTU.

Now, I can tell you, if the CIA, the Director of Central Intelligence, had said, take this out of the speech, it would have been gone, without question.  What we've said subsequently is, knowing what we now know, that some of the Niger documents were apparently forged, we wouldn't have put this in the President's speech -- but that's knowing what we know now.

The President of the United States, we have a higher standard for what we put in presidential speeches.  The British continue to stand by their report.  The CIA's NIE continues to talk about efforts to acquire yellow cake in various African countries.  But we have a high standard for the President's speeches.  We don't make the President his own fact witness, we have a high standard for them.  That's why we send them out for clearance.  And had we heard from the DCI or the Agency that they didn't want that sentence in the speech, it would not have been in the speech.  The President was not going to get up and say something that the CIA --

And she did manage to set up another planned leak, details from the NIE.

Q  But it's in the Estimate?

DR. RICE:  It's in the Estimate.  It's, by the way, in another section, but it is in the Estimate.  But the DCI is responsible for delivering a judgment, a consensus judgment of the intelligence community, which is called the National Intelligence Estimate.  And that's what the President --

Q  Is there a chance that that particular citation could be declassified, so we could see it?

DR. RICE:  You know, we don't want to try to get into kind of selective declassification, but we're looking at what can be made available.

Meanwhile, that same day, John Dickerson corners Ari and starts asking about the shoddy job Bush's people were doing of responding to Wilson, particularly this latest move of blaming Tenet. But Ari hangs tough, retreating to attacks on Wilson's credibility, and telling Dickerson to look into who sent Wilson.

The senior administration official spoke to me on background about Wilson and the president's amazing decision to blame the CIA. Other reporters wandered in and out of the conversation, but there were stretches where it was just the two of us (my tedious newsmagazine questions always had a tendency to drive other deadline-oriented reporters away). The official walked me through all the many problems with Wilson's report: His work was sloppy, contradictory, and hadn't been sanctioned by Tenet or any senior person. Some low-level person at the CIA was responsible for the mission. I was told I should go ask the CIA who sent Wilson.

Dickerson goes on to describe a similar conversation with Dan Bartlett. Since Bartlett and Ari were using the same language, "low-level person at the CIA" and "go ask the CIA," it's fairly clear this was a formal strategy and may have even been enshrined in a talking points memo. That memo would be pretty damning evidence of a conspiracy to out Plame. What do you think the chances are that Ari kept the memo, if one existed?

Now, a brief diversion to Tenet.

That night, Tenet makes his mea culpa, endorsing the OVP story about Wilson, elaborating on it even, to tell about Wilson's report of his conversation with a Nigerien associate who was approached by an Iraqi businessman.

In an effort to inquire about certain reports involving Niger, CIA's counter-proliferation experts, on their own initiative, asked an individual with ties to the region to make a visit to see what he could learn. He reported back to us that one of the former Nigerien (sic) officials he met stated that he was unaware of any contract being signed between Niger and rogue states for the sale of uranium during his tenure in office. The same former official also said that in June 1999 a businessman approached him and insisted that the former official meet with an Iraqi delegation to discuss "expanding commercial relations" between Iraq and Niger. The former official interpreted the overture as an attempt to discuss uranium sales. The former officials also offered details regarding Niger's processes for monitoring and transporting uranium that suggested it would be very unlikely that material could be illicitly diverted. There was no mention in the report of forged documents -- or any suggestion of the existence of documents at all.

But Tenet provides some detailed clarifications to the claims Condi made about the NIE. The uranium claim was in the NIE, sure. But not as one of the six pieces of evidence that Iraq was reconstituting its nuclear program.

In October, the Intelligence Community (IC) produced a classified, 90 page National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Iraq's WMD programs. There is a lengthy section in which most agencies of the Intelligence Community judged that Iraq was reconstituting its nuclear weapons program. Let me emphasize, the NIE's Key Judgments cited six reasons for this assessment; the African uranium issue was not one of them.

But in the interest of completeness, the report contained three paragraphs that discuss Iraq's significant 550-metric ton uranium stockpile and how it could be diverted while under IAEA safeguard. These paragraphs also cited reports that Iraq began "vigorously trying to procure" more uranium from Niger and two other African countries, which would shorten the time Baghdad needed to produce nuclear weapons. The NIE states: "A foreign government service reported that as of early 2001, Niger planned to send several tons of pure "uranium" (probably yellowcake) to Iraq. As of early 2001, Niger and Iraq reportedly were still working out the arrangements for this deal, which could be for up to 500 tons of yellowcake." The Estimate also states: "We do not know the status of this arrangement." With regard to reports that Iraq had sought uranium from two other countries, the Estimate says: "We cannot confirm whether Iraq succeeded in acquiring uranium ore and/or yellowcake from these sources." Much later in the NIE text, in presenting an alternate view on another matter, the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research included a sentence that states: "Finally, the claims of Iraqi pursuit of natural uranium in Africa are, in INR's assessment, highly dubious."

A couple of words about the NIE here. First, Tenet quotes verbatim in this passage almost the entirety of the section of the NIE relating to Iraqi acquisition of uranium, at least according to the SSCI report. With two significant differences. Tenet, in his statement, claims the NIE also discussed, "how [uranium] could be diverted while under IAEA safeguard." Yet the passage of the NIE quoted in the SSCI report states, "Iraq has about 550 metric tons of yellowcake and low enriched uranium at Tuwaitha, which is inspected annually by the IAEA." That is, at least as the SSCI reports it, the NIE makes no mention of Iraq being able to divert its existing yellowcake. Also, Tenet claims that the statement, "We cannot confirm whether Iraq succeeded in acquiring uranium ore and/or yellowcake from these sources" related specifically to the two other countries, Somalia and Congo. But the SSCI shows that statement as a comment relating to both preceding bullets. Meaning that, when the NIE referred to being unable to confirm whether Iraq got uranium, it referred to both the Niger allegations and the Somalia/Congo ones.

Tenet's and Condi's reference to the NIE also probably relates to the recent revelation that Libby claims he was ordered to leak the NIE. Not only did Libby leak the contents of the NIE to Judy (on July 8, we are told by Judy) and at least one other reporter. But he also "caused at least one other government official to discuss the NIE with the media in July 2003." Did he "cause" Tenet to include these extensive passages from the NIE in his speech? Well, there's some dispute about it. In a Libby-Rove leak last summer, it was claimed that Libby was involved in drafting Tenet's mea culpa.

Back at the White House, Mr. Rove and Mr. Libby had been at work all week, along with Ms. Rice's deputy, Stephen Hadley, helping to craft a statement that was issued on Friday by George Tenet, the C.I.A. director. Mr. Tenet did precisely what the White House needed: he took responsibility for the inclusion of the 16 words on uranium in the president's speech, and he made clear that Mr. Cheney had neither dispatched Mr. Wilson to Niger nor been briefed on what he found there.

But less than a week later, in an article sourced to the several people at the CIA, the CIA disputed that claim.

A former senior CIA official said yesterday that Tenet's statement was drafted within the agency and was shown only to Hadley on July 10 to get White House input. Only a few minor changes were accepted before it was released on July 11, this former official said. He took issue with a New York Times report last week that said Rove and Vice President Cheney's chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, had a role in Tenet's statement.

In any case, it appears that the CIA was effectively claiming the passages from the NIE were Tenet's doing. But Libby may be trying to claim it was his doing (he could of course just be claiming significant involvement in the rest of the statement). It may well be that Tenet did include the NIE on his own (it seems like Tenet would have the authority to declassify this passage, so if Judy is incorrect in saying she talked about the NIE with Libby on July 8 instead of July 12, then the whole NIE declassification question may be moot). Then who was the other government official Libby "caused" to talk about the NIE with the media? Can a VP's Chief of Staff "cause" a National Security Adviser to leak information? Can a VP's Chief of Staff "cause" the DCI to leak information? Or is there someone else--perhaps Ari, perhaps someone else again--that Libby "caused" to leak information from the NIE?

Again, back to poor Ari. That night (July 11), Ari receives instructions to focus on Tenet's statement in the next day's briefing. But the next bit is confusing. When he refers back to Tenet's speech the next day, July 12, does Ari just misunderstand what Tenet reported, about Wilson's visit with a Nigerien official? Or does he deliberately misrepresent it to make it look more ominous than it is?

In fact, in one of the least known parts of this story, which is now, for the first time, public -- and you find this in Director Tenet's statement last night -- the official that -- lower-level official sent from the CIA to Niger to look into whether or not Saddam Hussein had sought yellow cake from Niger, Wilson, he -- and Director Tenet's statement last night states the same former official, Wilson, also said that in June 1999 a businessman approached him and insisted that the former official, Wilson, meet an Iraqi delegation to discuss expanding commercial relations between Iraq and Niger. The former official interpreted the overture as an attempt to discuss uranium sales.

This is in Wilson's report back to the CIA.  Wilson's own report, the very man who was on television saying Niger denies it, who never said anything about forged documents, reports himself that officials in Niger said that Iraq was seeking to contact officials in Niger about sales.

At the very least, Ari flips the Wilson trip on its head, alleging that Wilson's trip actually raised new concerns that Niger was dealing uranium to Iraq, rather than calming the earlier concerns.

Ari uttered this strange passage on July 12. But recall that, on July 8, Libby told Judy that Wilson had reported Iraqi attempts to establish trade relations with Niger.

One report dated from February 2002. The other indicated that Iraq was seeking a broad trade relationship with Niger in 1999, a relationship that he said Niger officials had interpreted as an effort by Iraq to obtain uranium.

My notes indicate that Mr. Libby told me the report on the 1999 delegation had been attributed to Joe Wilson.

Judy also explains,

I said I had told Mr. Libby that if The Times was going to do an article, the newspaper needed more than a recap of the administration's weapons arguments.

It's unclear whether it was a response to this goad for "more than a recap" or not, but directly after that meeting, Libby asked David Addington, "what paperwork there would be at the CIA if an employee's spouse undertook an overseas trip." By the time of their July 12 conversation, Libby was backing off his allegations about Wilson's involvement with the 1999 deal.

My notes of this phone call show that Mr. Libby quickly turned to criticizing Mr. Wilson's report on his mission to Niger. He said it was unclear whether Mr. Wilson had spoken with any Niger officials who had dealt with Iraq's trade representatives.

This is a detail that has always stumped me. On the same day that Dick and Libby and Cathie Martin have decided to refer reporters to Ari's press briefing, in which Ari at the very least highlights this report on the 1999 interchange (and may insinuate much more), Libby backs off of that same claim in a conversation with Judy. It's got to be the first time that Judy had less incendiary leaks from this administration than the rest of the press corps.

Summary of Leak Week

So let me summarize Ari's involvement in the smear against Wilson from that week of July 7. Over the course of the week, Ari claims Wilson did not discredit the Niger allegations at all; he claims it's all the CIA's fault; he (and Dan Bartlett) strongly suggest that reporters should find out who sent Wilson; he effectively reveals the identity of the still-classified CIA report on Wilson's trip; he may have tried to insinuate that Wilson was a go-between between Niger and Iraq.

Ari almost certainly did these things at the direction of or in collaboration with others--Condi, Rove, Libby, Hadley, Bartlett. The events just coincide too nicely for there not to have been significant coordination (though, as Dickerson points out, the net effect of it was quite Bush League, since it appears they couldn't resolve on one strategy to follow). You've got Rove (presumably) talking of leaking the CIA trip report. And the same day you've got Ari, almost quoting from it verbatim. You've got Libby leaking the contents of the NIE. And a few days later, you've got Tenet quoting the same passages verbatim. You've got Libby claiming Wilson reported on a 1999 meeting between Niger and Iraq. And then Tenet, then Ari, make the same claim (and Ari may elaborate on it). And, on the same day that Rove tells Cooper that Plame worked on WMDs at the CIA, you've got Ari and Bartlett directing journalists to sniff out precisely that fact. In other words, Ari is an integral part of the smear campaign that week, and he must have been receiving ongoing direction on the latest spin strategy. He was, almost certainly, getting feedback from Libby and Rove while they were leaking Plame's identity to Novak and Cooper in DC.

But does that mean Ari told Novak that "[Wilson's] wife, Valerie, works for the CIA. She’s a weapons of mass destruction specialist. She sent him"? I have no idea. but it would not be out of the realm of possibility, given the other things he was spinning that week. And we know that Novak called Ari on July 7.

Well, as luck would have it, July 14 was Ari's last day. He still had a little bit of spinning to do in his last press conference--he had to try to repair the damage Condi had done the the previous Friday, when she mentioned early drafts of the SOTU. But on July 14, 2003, I suspect Ari walked out of the White House pleased with his accomplishments and looking forward to a life where he didn't have to spin so furiously all the time.

Only it didn't work out that way. Within a few days, David Corn surmises that the leak of Plame's identity was probably a violation of IIPA. The CIA launches an internal investigation into things. Ari begins to sweat badly at about this time, realizing that he is probably one of Novak's sources. And that he may go to jail. Worse, he feels really exposed, since he's no longer in the White House and was always treated as a bit of an outsider anyway. He thinks back to that weird conversation, and realizes that Libby was setting him up, playing all buddy buddy just so he could feed him this information. Ari's dreams of settling down with his new wife start to fade.

So, when the FBI interviews Ari that Fall, he comes clean. Or, more likely, when Fitzgerald comes to town in January 2004 offering deals, Ari jumps at the chance. Immunity (or the loss of your security clearance?) in exchange for Ari's admission he was the first to tell Novak about Plame's identity, in exchange for his testimony about the all of the strategizing from that week.

The Woodward Leak

But the thing is, the immunity deal covers only the week of July 7. Only the stuff for which Fitzgerald already has evidence for (Novak's call, the ongoing conference calls with the White House, Ari's dance with classified information in his press briefings from that week). Sure, Fitzgerald asked if Ari had leaked the news to anyone besides Novak, Ari said he hadn't. Gossiping with Bob Woodward wasn't the same. Woodward was basically a PR writer, who wouldn't publish anything until his book ... and who was the best in history business at protecting a source.

Ari didn't lie exactly (I speculate), about his earlier conversation with Woodward. He just was less than forthcoming.

Because, you see, Ari found out about Plame's identity when he attended Marc Grossman's White House briefing on June 12. Or just as likely, Bush told him about it, in that nasty, catty tone Bush gets when he's belittling another human being. Or maybe Rove even told Ari, after coming out of a WHIG meeting. Particularly if this were second-hand, he may not have learned that the information was classified. Ari found out--at least--that Plame had suggested Wilson for the trip, that she worked in WMDs at the CIA. Precisely the kind of tidbit an asshole like Ari would love to pass on. Discreetly, of course. Not a problem at all, particularly if it's to someone like Woodward. Until the whole IIPA investigation happened. But since Fitzgerald wasn't really asking Ari about the time before July 7, it wouldn't matter if Ari asked Woodward to keep it secret.

For some reason (and this is a big question of mine regardless of who Mr. X is--why was Woodward so intent to come forward? just to clear the air, or to exonerate someone?), Woodward pressures Ari to come forward.

Woodward said he had tried twice before, once in 2004 and once earlier this year, to persuade the source to remove the confidentiality restriction, but with no success.

Thing is, Ari kind of figures his immunity deal has to do with the week of July 7, he knows Woodward won't tell, and he doesn't want to muck up his immunity deal ... or Fitzgerald's investigation. If Fitzgerald finds out about the Woodward gossip, then it damages the "Libby made me do it" line. And it opens up the possibility that he, Ari, would be held liable for the IIPA conviction after all. Nope, given that Fitzgerald already has the meeting log reflecting the Woodward interview and he hasn't asked anything more about it, no need to tell him. So Ari tells Woodward he has come clean with Fitzgerald.

But things get more intense the week of the indictment. Len Downie gets Woodward involved in the pre-indictment coverage. Woodward calls his own source--Ari--to see if he knows who Mr. X is. And, as Woodward described to Vivnovka, he "learned something more." I suspect he learned that his source was the same as one of Novak's sources. Only faced with the possibility he would show up in the indictment--presumably, after all, this "junkyard prosecutor" would check every angle on the guy who first leaked Plame's identity to Novak, right?--does Woodward admit to Downie that he, too, had received this leak.

But there is something else going on. Rove is heavily spinning, trying to avoid indictment. And, at precisely the same time Rove is spinning furiously, noted Rove mouthpiece Michael Isikoff receives a tip that Woodward knows who Mr. X is.

ISIKOFF: No, look, this is the biggest mystery in Washington, has been really for two years and now as we come down to the deadline of tomorrow the city is awash with rumors. There's a new one every 15 minutes and nobody really knows what's going to happen tomorrow. Nobody knows what Fitzgerald's got.

I talked to a source at the White House late this afternoon who told me that Bob is going to have a bombshell in tomorrow's paper identifying the Mr. X source who is behind the whole thing. So, I don't know, maybe this is Bob's opportunity.

KING:  Come clean.

WOODWARD: I wish I did have a bombshell. I don't even have a firecracker. I'm sorry. In fact, I mean this tells you something about the atmosphere here. I got a call from somebody in the CIA saying he got a call from the best "New York Times" reporter on this saying exactly that I supposedly had a bombshell.

KING:  (INAUDIBLE).

WOODWARD: Finally, this went around that I was going to do it tonight or in the paper. Finally, Len Downie, who is the editor of the "Washington Post" called me and said, "I hear you have a bombshell. Would you let me in on it."

I'm not sure how, but I suspect Rove knew Ari (if Mr. X is Ari) told Woodward, back in June. And since Rove's story and Ari's story conflict (again, this is speculation) on one critical point--who told Novak that Plame was covert, that she was an operative--Rove needed to find a way to discredit the witness to the last remaining issue Fitzgerald was about to accuse Rove of lying about, whether or not he had given Novak details of Plame's covert status. Presumably, Novak will back one of them up. But, perhaps in an attempt to avoid the IIPA charge or a perjury charge, Rove leaks the news that Ari told a journalist of Plame's identity a whole month before the Novak leak. It's going to discredit Ari and undermine Fitzgerald's ability to use Ari as a witness against Rove. So it's going to stave off the perjury charge, at least for the short term.

I'm not sure whether it was the Isikoff leak, or a real strike of conscience upon reading the indictment. But something makes Woodward realize that Ari misrepresented what he had come clean with Fitzgerald about. Woodward tells Ari that, either Ari comes forward, or Woodward will. Which convinces Ari to admit that he told Woodward of Plame's identity back in June 2003 and to clear Woodward to testify to Fitzgerald about their June 2003 conversation.

Which leaves Fitzgerald in a bit of an awkward spot. Ari is a critical witness for him, even in the Libby case. And if both Novak and Ari claim that Rove is the one who provided Novak with details of Plame's covert status, then Ari can be useful in an IIPA charge against Rove. But the whole early leaking to Woodward? It sure makes Ari's credibility as a witness a lot more problematic. All the more reason to keep Ari's name, as Mr. X, under wraps. Ari is a critical witness in the ongoing investigation, particularly of any IIPA charges. But revealing Ari's earlier leakage might discredit an important witness in Libby's perjury case, too.

In any case, if Ari is Mr. X, then he's basically in the position of someone who was part of a wide-ranging conspiracy to smear Wilson (not just to out Plame, but to reveal classified information about Wilson's trip), but decided to flip because he knew he had been set up. He's not the ideal witness. But I can't imagine anyone from this crowd would be.

Update: typo fixed in NIE discussion per &y.

Comments

[Anonymous Liberal]

EW,

Your scenario sounds plausible enough with regard to Novak, but the Woodward leak took place in mid-June, so Ari most likely was not Woodward's source. But then again, I don't think it's 100% clear that Novak and Woodward have the same source (but they probably do). I hope we find out someday.

[emptywheel]

Btw,

I realize I have not considered any of the more recent posturing about MR. X from Novak and Woodward. Here's my take on it:

1. partisan gunslinger. As anyone who has followed my PLame stuff knows, I treat the whole October 1 column from Novak as disinformation. So it doesn't matter in any case. But Ari would certainly qualify as someone who wasn't partisan TO NOVAK. Not in Bush's club, not in your party.

2. was not in the White House. This comment, from Woodward, may be deceptive or may be misreported. Did Woodward mean the SAO was never in the White House? Then Ari wouldn't qualify. Did he mean he wasn't leaking from the WHite House? (In my scenario, he would have been on AF1). Or did he mean he is not now in the White HOuse? Anyway, this may be a Woodward protection lie.

3. Bush should know. That's kind of why I threw in the possibility that Bush told Ari (and even, perhaps, that Ari told Woodward Bush told him). In any case, Bush ought to know, given that Ari was his press secretary.

[John Casper]

Thanks for the post, donation made per your request.

[SaltinWound]

I think we've been down this road before, but is it possible they were getting Ari to leak to people who knew already? So Libby or Rove tell Novak the whole story (more than any of them have admitted to), then get him to talk to Ari and get as much information from him as possible, to make it look like the leak came from Ari. Ari actually doesn't tell Novak much more than he told Dickerson, but it's enough to cover their tracks. I don't know how to explain Woodward, I still have a feeling it was Bush who told him. That also could have started a frenzy of ass covering, to make it look like Ari was talking.

[emptywheel]

Saltin

Yeah, I do think we've been down this road before. One point I don't make in this post is that, if you buy Libby's Judy testimony morning Steno Sue leak was intended to coach Judy, then he wanted her to make sure she said nothing about Libby speaking to Novak. Which would mean he had spoken to him. That's something I feel is very likely.

One other BUsh possibility is that he was participating in those conference calls between DC and Africa, strategizing what to say to people. Looking at it this way, I'm sure there was nightly conferencing (because they changed directions so often, and the direction changes were consistent across DC and Africa). Was Bush involved?

[SaltinWound]

One aspect of the theory of everyone covering for Bush that I like is it's the one thing all these different camps could agree on. If it weren't about keeping Bush propped up, why didn't all these horrible people turn on each other? Did I miss where I'm supposed to send a check?

[emptywheel]

Well, I think they DID turn on Ari, to some degree. And tried to turn on Powell. But that's one of the biggest reasons why I doubt Armitage. The OVP crowd would have loved an opportunity to turn on him. THough you could be right, that so long as he protects Bush, then they'll let Armitage go.

[&y]

emptywheel --

Most interesting, per usual. Of all the things in all the internets, there are few items that I look forward to more than your next Plame discussion. Always a delight to read.

P.S. I think you have a potentially-confusing typo in this sentence, "In a Libby-Rove leak last summer, it was claimed that Libby was involved in drafting the NIE." I think you mean to say "mea culpa" instead of NIE. I try never to mention typos that don't affect meaning (we all type faster tahn ew htink smoetimse), but you may want to change this one.

[emptywheel]

Thanks, &y. You're right, that made no sense.

[anonymous]

Rumsfield went to Morrocco about the same time Johnson went for the Iran- WMD - Plame leak, so it got people wondering who took the bait first. Rumsfeld may have got some answers needed by historical fans, but that is how some people live their lives.

Pakistan killed that Diplomat anyway even after CIA fired the Counter terror director for bombing Pakistan.

See, they really are mean!

[mswsm]

I think that Fitz knew ALL within a month. He has prosecuted enough mobsters to know the conspiracy and cover-up game. He pretended he didn't know about Woodward and the Judy meeting in June but he knew it ALL. He let each and everyone of them lie, lie, lie and then sideswipes them when they are before the grand jury. After a few days of twisting in the wind, he offers a deal. My bet is Ari told him EVERYTHING--including Woodward--if Ari was the leaker to Woodward. Ari had NO cover from the WH so he needed to tell all.

[William Ockham]

I've a got a new entrant in the Mr. X sweepstakes. I think this one is going to catch most everybody by surprise. I have a bit of trepidation about making this comment. My Mr. X isn't on anybody's suspect list and, if I've spotted him, Patrick Fitzgerald's job is even harder than we thought. Of course, I have no proof, but I think the circumstantial evidence is pretty strong. Drum roll, please.

Alberto Gonzales is Mr. X. Take a moment and ponder the consequences of that statement. Now, here's my case. According to my experiments, his name is the best fit in the redactions of the latest affidavit. Now, let's see how he matches up with the various statements that Novak and Woodward have made about their source:

1. Novak says he's not a partisan gunslinger. In Novak's view, Gonzales certainly fits that bill. Look at the column Novak wrote about a potential Gonzales nomination for the SCOTUS.
2. Novak is sure Bush knows about his source. Certainly, if Gonzales is his source, Novak would assume that Bush knows. Bush and Gonzales go waaay back.
3. Woodward's comment that Novak's source is not in the White House is sort of true. Gonzales is now the AG, back then he was WH Counsel.
4. If Gonzales is Woodward's source, that would explain Woodward's certainty that the whole thing was just gossip. Gonzales got the AG's job after the Plame outing. Woodward would have to assume that the whole thing was no big deal.

I'm sure emptywheel will spin up a more complete scenario, but here are a few things to ponder on a Saturday night (or early Sunday morning, depending on your time zone). Woodward has claimed that his source refused to release him from his pledge of confidentiality until late October, 2005. Fitzgerald clearly believes he knows who Novak's source is. If Gonzales was Novak's source, Novak must have given him up pretty earlier on in the investigation. Gonzales testified before the grand jury in 2004. Did he deny being Novak's source or admit it? He was appointed to be the Attorney General of the United States after that. When Gonzales 'fessed up last fall, did he implicate Bush? What else could he do, but say he was acting on Bush's orders? Is that why Fitzgerald went to see Bush's personal lawyer?

Take a bit of time to mull over all the possibilities and minefields that Fitzgerald has to deal with, if Gonzales is Mr. X. I'm going to go sleep on this one.

[jwp]

Government noir. Maybe not exactly a new genre, but rarely done better.

James Ellroy should take notes.

Plausible and entertaining. I look forward to the next chapter.

[emptywheel]

William

I'm still mulling through this. I still think that Fleischer is more likely, though I agree that Armitage and Gonzo both fit better.

But I'm not sure I agree with this:

If Gonzales is Woodward's source, that would explain Woodward's certainty that the whole thing was just gossip. Gonzales got the AG's job after the Plame outing. Woodward would have to assume that the whole thing was no big deal.

As the GOP did in Watergate before, they have used promotions to reward people who have helped a coverup. Consider all the promotions in this cause:

• Abu Gonzales to AG
• Rove to Deputy Chief of Staff
• Bolton to UN post
• Abrams to chief of democracy
• Rice to SOS
• Hadley to NSA
• John Hannah to Veep Chief of Staff

  And there are more I'm forgetting. So Abu G's promotion can only be taken as a sign that he was being rewarded for his loyalty, probably up to and including his willingness to obstruct the investigation. Anything beyond that and I think it needs to be weighed on its merits.

  My biggest doubt about Abu G is he's just not a press person. He's not good at it, for one. But he's also not known for it. With all my doubts about Armitage, at least with him we know that he is loves to work the press (and loves Woodward more specifically).

[emptywheel]

Oops. Got to turn off those list tags.

[kim]

A great thread, real intensity to the writing EW. One comment would be that whoever X is, it is hard to imagine X hiding the story about Woodward from Fitzgerald when that interview was taped. Whether this would be easy to forget depends on how often Woodward tapes his interviews I guess.

The Woodward leak also came at the time when the CIA was briefing Cheney on Wilson, Bob was quick onto the story! Interesting that he says someone from the CIA called him about the "bombshell" rumor.

[William Ockham]

emptywheel,

I don't think Woodward thinks the same way you and I do. He doesn't understand what this Administration is up to. As far as Gonzales not being a press person, I'm not sure what you're getting at. Mr. X was giving an interview for Woodward's book. Everybody in the Bush Administration understood that if you didn't talk to Woodward, you'd come off looking bad in one of the few books your boss actually might read.

The more difficult question is why Gonzales would leak to Novak. I have a theory about that. Remember the Murray Waas article about how Novak's call was really about Frances Townsend? If go back and read Novak's column from July 10, 2003. It was all about Novak's fantasy that the Bush administration was riddled with liberal Democrats (Rand Beers, Frances Townsend and other obvious pinkos). Now go back and look at the column where he outed Plame. The same old song, what's this pinko ambassador doing working for the Bush administration. So, besides Rove, who would Novak call to find out how the flaming liberal Frances Fragos Townsend made it through the White House vetting process? The person in charge of that process, White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales. I can see it now, the conversation was adversarial from the beginning. Gonzales is focused on defending Townsend against Novak, who's doing the dirty work of the Cheney-Libby-Addington faction. I bet Gonzales' eyes lit up when Novak moved on to Wilson. Here was his chance to get something done that everybody in the White House wanted done (and neither Rove or Libby had accomplished yet: Get somebody to slime Wilson in print). I can hear Gonzales now, struggling to keep the glee out of his voice and sound nonchalant, oh, nobody in the White House knew anything about Wilson. His wife, a nobody over the CIA's DO had him sent to Niger. You'll have to go ask Bill Harlow at CIA about that.

The problem is, Gonzales, the non-press person, bolloxed the whole thing up by telling Novak she was in the DO. He was supposed to stick with the cover story that she was an analyst. If he had, they might have been able to pull it off.

[Jeff]

It will be very interesting to see what Libby's lawyers actually said at the hearing with regard to Woodward's source - how persuasive their apparent claim that he was not in the White House was, and how persuasive they are that Woodward's and Novak's source were one and the same. If Woodward's and Novak's sources are one and the same, I find it harder to believe that it was Fleischer, though this is a very persuasive account of how central Fleischer was to the war on Wilson.

One other note: Waas' October 30 article offered some more evidence that Libby turned to Addington after his meeting with Miller in search of more info to give her.

[melior]

Plausible musings.

Except for the "real strike of conscience", that was comic relief, right?

[emptywheel]

Jeff

I guess I just have a hard time believing ANY of the 8-letter name possibilities leaked to both Woodward and Novak. Of the choices, I think Ari makes the most sense, if for no other reason than 1) they would have least reason to attack him, because he could hurt them bad, and 2) they did seem to attack him. I can't get over the same objection with Armitage, particularly since he has such a big ongoing conflict with Libby.

Thanks for mentioning the Waas article. I thought of it while I was posting, but was pretty much struggling to get everything else in without dedicating a week.

[KM]

EW, a couple of things. Where the declassification debate is concerned, I don't think too much hangs on the specific question whether Libby discussed the NIE with Miller on July 8 or July 12. Fitgerald's letter referred to Libby disclosing the contents of the NIE "in the course of his interaction with reporters in June and July 2003".

Secondly, I think either Miller or Libby just goofed her/his account of the Wilson-Mayaki conversation. I think one or the other ran together two distinct (and familiar) Admin talking points. One (which ever since Wilson's article is invariably preceded with references to the sipping of mint tea) is that Wilson didn't talk with anyone who mattered (another version of the "shoddy homework" talking point). The other is the risible claim that "actually, Wilson's report [i.e. the Mayaki mention] supported the 16 words".

[Jeff]

ew - Maybe you're right, and I really can't wait to see the actual hearing transcript (which, by the way, should be posted before I have a chance to get one from the court reporter, though I'll check again on that tomorrow), which should, I hope, shed some light on some of the relevant questions. In the meanwhile:

During lunch, Libby made two requests of Novak. . . . Second, Novak should be prepared to take out Joe Wilson, who Libby had heard was going to be on MTP with Novak the following Sunday, the same Sunday, Libby explained, that Wilson would publish an editorial in the NYT.

The trouble with this is that per Wilson's book, he appears to have been invited to be on MTP at 10:34 p.m. the night before. Which makes the speculation that Libby talked to Libby the previous week a little more speculative. Though Novak's initial comment to Wilson's friend on the street on July 8 -- that the administration should have or could have taken care of the uranium business weeks before at the very least bespeaks a fairly detailed level of knowledge of what was going on with Wilson.

why spend time smearing Ari, unless you knew that he was one of the leakers?

But haven't you offered an alternative answer yourself - namely, that tying Fleischer to the INR memo provides a plausible alternative to Libby for how Fleischer learned about the Wilsons' connection and her connection with the CIA.

I suspect he learned that his source was the same as one of Novak's sources.

I completely agree. The thing is, though, unless Woodward is as bad as Miller, who denied to Tuabman in fall 2003 that she thought there was an organized smear campaign, and that if there were, that she was a target of it, it seems inconceivable that Woodward would go around telling people that if they knew everything, they would see that there had been no conspiracy to out Plame if Fleischer were his source. Armitage fits better than Fleischer with that piece as well. Unless Woodward is as bad as Miller.

This post is awesomely impressive, by the way.

[emptywheel]

You guys are good!

KM,

Thanks for pointing out the June/July thing. I hadn't realized it said June, too.

Can you elaborate on what you mean by Libby/Miller screwing that up? Not sure I understand.

Jeff

Damn, I've got to figure out where I lost that book.

But I don't think it matters. I think it highly likely OVP had some kind of inkling about the op-ed. They knew what its contents would be because of Pincus' articles. And I suspect they would have found out from someone at the NYT the timing, especially (as I've always fancied) Judy was trying to write an article after the June 23 meeting but was told to hold it because Wilson was going to tell the story himself.

About Ari, I guess I should have said, "Why smear Ari unless he is a plausible leaker." And the Dickerson direction at the end of the week might have been enough. But I guess once they figured out Ari had cooperated, they wouldn't even need that much reason.

[Jeff]

ew - You are of course right that Wilson was fully on OVP's radar quite early. Another detail to add: it may well be that Miller was trying to write an article as early as June -- do we know when she says she went to Abramson about pursuing a story? June or July? -- but I pursued the question of who the journalist was who tipped off Wilson to his name coming out and who was going to reveal it, and the short answer is that there seems not to be much to the story. That is, it sounds like the Independent journalist just indicated to Wilson that they knew who he was (and so, basically, he might as well talk to them), not that there was a specific other reporter who was going to publish his name. (For the record, I sort of flubbed the question about State, though I got a strong sense of a connection with the most likely candidate, which is quite interesting; and didn't get to ask the other one about one or two briefers.)

Another thought: what if Armitage is 1? I was just looking over Woodward's book, and toward the end Woodward not only makes clear that he was talking with Armitage in the months after the beginning of the war, but basically indicates that Armitage was a source for a different WaPo story on October 12. Maybe he was busy.

[Swopa]

EW,

Some thoughts here on your recent posts -- I think the Fleischer testimony cited by Fitz (and quoted by you last week) makes Ari a highly probable candidate as Novak's first SAO source. But Armitage is still in the lead for Woodward.