The Armitage "News"
by emptywheel
Just a few words about the story that some are pointing to as a big deal. Armitage, whom we've been arguing was Woodward's source since March, is probably the Woodward source. And in other exciting news, my corn just grew 1/4 inch last night. (Actually, it is exciting, I picked the first cob last night, and it was stunningly beautiful. Really beautiful! McCaffrey the MilleniaLabrador promptly stole it out of my hand and started husking it, so I had to bribe him to get it back with the cob mr. emptywheel ate at dinner. McCaffrey promptly went into the other room and ate the whole butter-slathered cob.)
No, seriously, about the only thing new in the story is that it allows us to pinpoint the date of the Woodward conversation, to June 13. So the day after Walter Pincus published an article saying this:
After returning to the United States, the envoy reported to the CIA that the uranium-purchase story was false, the sources said. Among the envoy's conclusions was that the documents may have been forged because the "dates were wrong and the names were wrong," the former U.S. government official said.
However, the CIA did not include details of the former ambassador's report and his identity as the source, which would have added to the credibility of his findings, in its intelligence reports that were shared with other government agencies. Instead, the CIA only said that Niger government officials had denied the attempted deal had taken place, a senior administration said.
Woodward asked his old friend Armitage who Wilson was.
The more interesting aspect of the article, IMO, is the way in which an article co-bylined by the shillicious John Solomon portrays, first, an unnamed person effectively confirming that Armitage is Mr. X:
A person familiar with the information prosecutors have gathered, who spoke only on condition of anonymity because the material remains sealed, said Woodward's meeting with the confidential source was June 13, 2003.
Followed later by Bill Jeffress making what appears to be a logical sequiter from the anonymous comment, arguing that Armitage's apparent involvement provides reason to expose Woodward's source.
Libby's lawyer, William Jeffress, said Monday that Armitage's calendar only bolsters the defense's argument that information about the State Department official's role in the CIA leak affair should be released.
"I would hope that the facts on that would come out," Jeffress said. "We have asked for information as to Woodward's source in discovery, but that has been denied."
Reggie Walton, of course, has refrained from gagging the lawyers in this case. But I imagine Jeffress tried to avoid being seen as directly leaking the details of the sealed information provided by Fitzgerald. As he is no doubt hiding his kibbitzing of John Solomon, providing suggestions for other ways he can almost confirm what we all know but that Jeffress can't talk about--that Richard Armitage is Woodward's source.
So if I had to bet, I would say that Libby's team is still trying to invent a way to bring Armitage into this, as a way to confuse the jury and to exonerate Libby in the press.
Two more details folks have mentioned. One, evidence of an earlier meeting between Libby and Armitage:
Armitage's calendar also shows that a week before Woodward's meeting with Armitage, the deputy secretary of state met for 15 minutes with Libby.
That meeting occurred as State officials were about to prepare a report outlining how Plame's husband was sent to Niger before the Iraq war to check unverified intelligence that Iraq was seeking nuclear materials from Africa.
[snip]
Two people familiar with the meeting, however, said the Libby-Armitage meeting dealt with issues involving Pakistan and said the subject of the CIA leak case wasn't raised. Both spoke only on condition of anonymity because some information about the meeting remains classified.
If I had to guess, I'd say the two people familiar with the meeting are Jeffress and Armitage, who are both cited in the article. And if both sides are saying the meeting is a non-issue, it probably is a non-issue. Remember--these guys interacted regularly on these issues. Though I like the way John Solomon works in an insinuation that the meeting might relate to the INR memo, though we have no evidence Armitage was involved in producing the June 10 INR memo (recall the cover document of the INR memo lists those who were involved, and Armitage only shows up as a recipient of the second memo on July 7).
And there's this typical MSM stupidity:
Fitzgerald has signaled there are no plans — beyond the Libby indictment — to prosecute any other officials for releasing Plame's identity.
Um, no. Fitzgerald has signaled he has no plans to charge Rove with anything. He has not signaled one way or another whether he plans to prosecute anyone else. Sometimes these journalists forget there were more than two people involved in outing Valerie Plame. I'm not saying Fitz has more indictments in store--I'm saying he hasn't said one way or another.
Sorry for the gratuitous dog picture. But a long time ago, I planned to start putting pictures of McC up every time some journalist said something stupid about this case--because even McC isn't that stupid.
Though now I think he has a cob-induced bellyache.
Posted by: emptywheel | August 22, 2006 at 12:42
I'm having an impossible time growing corn this summer in Topanga Canyon, California.
Posted by: SaltinWound | August 22, 2006 at 13:11
When I read it, I assumed that Woodward was the anonymous source for the date of Woodward's interaction with his confidential source (and I'm still not sure that's not the case). But if it's Jeffress, that's a good point - and he will still be in trouble with Walton if it was him, regardless of having done so on background, won't he?
It's almost certainly the case Armitage didn't even know about the INR memo (and probably about Plame) until June 12 or 13, at the very earliest, since he was off earlier, and even the report that has him reading it in June has him reading it only after Pincus' article.
It's amazing to me how much better midwestern corn is than, say, corn on the east coast.
Posted by: Jeff | August 22, 2006 at 13:14
the dog picture's great.
and grown-yourself corn, yumm.
the squirrel's stripped our tiny plot before the corn got big enough to pick
a question:
some eons ago, at fdl, i seem to recall paul lukasiac arguing that woodward's last minute disclosure of a meeting with (? - armitage) seriously disrupted fitzgerald's case.
does this new revelation add anything to that particular viewpoint?
Posted by: orionATL | August 22, 2006 at 13:15
Jeff
I don't see anyway that Armitage would have revealed the date. First of all, he wouldn't have had to go to the sealed materials. Moreover, that's the detail he has guarded most carefully since the beginning.
orion
I think Woodward's revelation probably made it a lot harder to go after Rove for perjury. If Armitage is a credible witness, than you can prove that 1) either everything Armitage didn't say to Novak (including the NOC bit) Rove did, or 2) that Novak is lying about how many people he talked to. But now he's an easily impeachable witness, so you can't rely on him to prove your case.
Posted by: emptywheel | August 22, 2006 at 13:57
ew - You're probably right that Woodward wouldn't have revealed the date. But then Jeffress is likely to get in trouble, no?
Posted by: Jeff | August 22, 2006 at 14:16
You pretty much have to grow your corn (a real space-eater) to experience the real fresh-picked flavor, but a reasonable facsimile is possible by buying corn still in the husk, soaking it thoroughly in cold water, and microwaving it for around 8 min for one ear, 12-13 min for two ears (this is in an older microwave, so for powerful models reduce accordingly). The flavor of the silks permeates the kernels this way. It even works for several days old corn. It is the only food I've found that is better microwaved than cooked conventionally.
I grew corn only once (because you need to devote about 40 sq ft to it), but I was absolutely entranced by how the pollen drops from the tassels and migrates down the silks to the kernel. Each developed kernel is a fertilized seed. I could see how people worshipped the corn goddess. There is really no other vegetable quite like it.
Posted by: Mimikatz | August 22, 2006 at 14:17
I think Fitz has signaled pretty clearly he won't be charging Novak's first source, Mr X, in light of the fact that Fitz told Novak's lawyer that that part of the investigation that involved Novak was finished.
My reading is that there are likely no more charges, but if there are are any more charges, it would be of officials in the VP's offices.
Posted by: pontificator | August 22, 2006 at 14:21
EW, I have to take issue with you for your comment "even McC isn't that stupid." My sister has a Newfoundland retriever that's quite intelligent. She (the dog) has a good vocabulary and a keen sense of human psychology. I think you belittle the dog by comparing him to the hacks and shills in the media.
Posted by: KdmFromPhila | August 22, 2006 at 14:21
I'm lucky with my corn--it's in a windy spot, so I've been able to get it to fertilize without all that much planted. Right there next to my busy road, my little corn patch. Tomatoes too. Mmmm.
Though I've become a confirmed corn griller. Maybe it's because I'm in the Midwest so my corn is all same day fresh. But I love the carmelized little kernels.
Posted by: emptywheel | August 22, 2006 at 14:24
Kdm
You're right. McC is very intelligent too. He knows the days of the week and about 12 words for walk and was even learning to read walk signs (though I think he gave that up in favor of jaywalking).
But there's something effective about the phrase, "dumber than my dog." I wouldn't use it with George Allen, mind you, because he's just so much dumber that it ISN'T fair to my dog, to make the comparison. John Solomon though? He's not dumb, just shillicious.
Posted by: emptywheel | August 22, 2006 at 14:27
This is the first summer I've grilled (store bought) corn. Keep the husks on, soak it in water, and put it on the charcoal Weber grill for 30 or so minutes, rotating three times. The husks are blackened (but come off easy), a few kernals are darkened, and there's a hint of a different taste to it. It's worth trying.
Posted by: Jim E. | August 22, 2006 at 14:38
Actually another good way to cook corn is just throw it in the oven at 350 for 20 minutes. Sounds crazy, but the husks and silk come off really easy, and it tastes much better than boiled.
I'm not a fan of grilled corn, probably because I always forget to rotate it correctly and end up blackening half the cob.
But man, I've been loving the corn recently from the STL area. I'll be sad when August is over :(
Posted by: viget | August 22, 2006 at 14:49
The last couple years, I've boiled corn in the husk. Peel off the husk after, it's great every time (starting to feel like Saturday morning at firedoglake).
Posted by: SaltinWound | August 22, 2006 at 14:54
There's something very telling in the fact that Armitage met with Libby for 15 minutes about Pakistan and spent 1 hour to schmooze with Woodward. For those who don't recall, India and Pakistan had just agreed to normalize relations in May 2003 (after almost starting a nuclear war a year earlier) and Musharraf was coming to D.C. in about 3 weeks (June 24, 2003).
Just so everybody has this clear, let's review the Plame chronology:
May 29 - Libby calls up Grossman to ask about "the unnamed former ambassador". Why didn't he call Armitage? INR reported to Armitage, not Grossman.
June 6 - Libby meets with Armitage for 15 minutes to talk about Pakistan. Despite the fact that Libby's been getting updates from Grossman about the Wilson mission that obviously depend on information from INR, Libby doesn't raise the issue with Armitage. Grossman just happens to be in Europe/North Africa at the time of this Armitage/Libby meeting.
June 9 - Libby gets CIA fax about Wilson trip and Libby writes "Wilson" and "Joe Wilson"
June 10 - INR memo produced.
June 11 - Libby talks to Grenier(?) about Wilson's trip and Plame's employment
June 11 or 12 - Grossman meets with Libby (and others?) at the White House and briefs him on the INR memo.
June 12 - Pincus article is published. Libby and Cheney discuss Plame's undercover status.
June 13 - Armitage meets with Woodward. Somebody, presumably Armitage, tells Woodward that Wilson's wife is an analyst.
Posted by: William Ockham | August 22, 2006 at 14:54
I must disagree with the crack on eastern corn. Southern New Jersey has its Silver Queen variety - exquisitely sweet small kernels so tender you can eat it raw. But I prefer the more robust variety of white corn from home in Hanover County Virginia. I'll have to try that microwave trick . . .
When's Fitzmas coming this year?
Posted by: semiot | August 22, 2006 at 15:01
you grow corn ???
that IS news
I've got three neighbor kids growing pumpkins, sunflowers, and tomatoes
the sunflower seeds are working good
only so-so with the tomatoes
the punkins ain't doing anything
we're gonna try again next year, cept I gotta remind them so we start earlier
life goes on ...
Posted by: freepatriot | August 22, 2006 at 15:03
. . . Oh, and about those labs. Smartest, most gungho dog I ever knew was a lady lab belonging to my sister. Noche loved to swim in icy rivers and do cleanup duty retrieving beer cans and old boots from the bottom. She died in a bathtub. Her charred remains were found after she woke my sister up in an apartment fire. My sister came out fine, but Noche must have lost her way in the smoke. I'm a cat guy myself, but if I ever were to get a dog, it would be a lab.
Posted by: semiot | August 22, 2006 at 15:08
I actually just grill corn without the husks, right over the fire (always a wood fire for me, using a chimney so there's no starter fluid). I like it better than with husks. Though I haven't tried boiling in husks.
WO
You raise a good point. Why didn't Libby raise the issue with Armitage when they spoke, if it was so important. Very important question. I could suggest several answers...
Posted by: emptywheel | August 22, 2006 at 15:22
always a wood fire for me, using a chimney so there's no starter fluid
As though it even needed to be stated.
I'm standing by my crack against elitist coastal corn.
Posted by: Jeff | August 22, 2006 at 15:27
Yeah, well I lived in central Illinois for a while, and I found the corn tough and unfashionable.
Posted by: semiot | August 22, 2006 at 15:31
. . . and ubiquitous, as well.
Posted by: semiot | August 22, 2006 at 15:32
Hello, all
There was more than one person in the room when Woodward was told by Mr. X that Plame was CIA. Remember, Woodward taped his interview. From the February transcript:
02 MR. JEFFRESS: Your Honor, there is one thing that I
03 neglected to mention and again this is subject to filings that
04 have been made under seal but there is, in fact, a transcript
05 of a tape recording that involves official one.
06 And I remind you, Your Honor, that's exactly who
07 we're talking about. In the particular transcript there is,
08 and the government filed something else yesterday, there is a
09 factual dispute as to what is said or what is meant by a
10 portion of the transcript wherein it appears the official
11 saying, "everyone knows it," referring to the wife's employment
12 at the CIA.
13 We have not heard that tape. We did to hear that
14 tape. If, in fact, as the transcript suggests that one
15 official said, "Everyone knows it," who did he mean by
16 "everyone knows it."
17 It's vitally important to us, Your Honor, number one,
18 to investigate what other reporters knew and may have mentioned
19 it. And number two, to confront Mr. Russert with what other
20 reporters knew it.
21 And remember there is another ABC reporter, Andrea
22 Mitchell, who once publicly stated the identity of Ambassador
23 Wilson's wife, the fact that she worked for the CIA was well
24 known to reporters who were covering the intelligence
25 community.
00034
01 There are many, many leads to this, Your Honor, but
02 without key information such as the identity of this person,
03 the defense simply cannot fully understand it.
04 THE COURT: Let me ask government counsel. Is there
05 anything in that transcript or tape recording whereby this
06 government official number one says something to the effect
07 that everybody in the media corps knows about this?
08 MR. FITZGERALD: Your Honor, now that we have sort of
09 burned what was sealed, my understanding of that conversation,
10 there are people talking over each other, my understanding is
11 that was a reference that everyone knows it, that Mr. Wilson is
12 the unnamed ambassador.
13 THE COURT: Right.
14 MR. FITZGERALD: Mr. Wilson didn't reveal himself as
15 the unnamed ambassador until July 6. This was prior to that
16 time. We turned it over in an abundance of caution but I don't
17 believe that says it, and frankly there is a very limited
18 number of reporters that we found out who had known it. I
19 can't represent we know every reporter because we took
20 seriously the attorney general guidelines. But any reporter we
21 knew about we give over. If the point is to find out the
22 extent of knowledge of the reporters, we can't do more than
23 tell them every reporter we know about.
Posted by: Chow-Ye | August 22, 2006 at 15:45
Can we get back to Armitage from corn, please?
EW - you are absolutely amazing. When you first wrote that Armitage was Woodward's source back in winter/spring, I did not agree with you at first (because my candidate was Hadley) but I warmed up to your logic and finally your convinced me.
And you have nothing but public sources and a great logical mind
(and time to think). I congratulate you.
When AP broke (???) that story yesterday, for lot of people, it might have been breaking news. For readers of this blog, it is 6-month old news.
Keep that mind sharp!
Posted by: ecoast | August 22, 2006 at 15:48
Hey, I didn't break anything, ecoast. Tom Maguire had been pushing Armitage for months (I first did a skeptical Armitage post in December), but his theory just didn't make sense with what we knew. I think what we (because the commeters here contributed as much as I did) did was understand how Armitage could simultaneously be the Woodward Novak source yet not be indicted.
Posted by: emptywheel | August 22, 2006 at 16:03