February 03, 2007
by emptywheel
emptywheel@earthlink.net
As astute readers have noted, there is a key detail from the note Libby wrote in June 2003 recording the information Cheney had just passed along, that Plame worked in the Counter-Proliferation Department of the CIA.
The day recorded in the date was changed. And it has a squiggly line indicating an approximation.
This suggests the possibility that Libby changed the date to make it less incriminating. And that he added the squiggly line to further obscure the date. Which of course leads me to suspect that the date might have real significance.
Now, before I lay out four scenarios explaining the sensitivity of the date, let me just say--it gets worse. You see, Libby admitted to the FBI that this was dated after the fact (and somewhere, though I can't find it, someone admits that the day was changed).
DB On the note 6/12/03, line on top, meant approximately. Regarding an article by Pincus. Written for newspaper on June 12, he believed he talked about this note prior to that. He had written the date afterwards, within a couple of days, couldn't remember precisely when.
Z He dated it afterwards. He told you what about when.
DB A day or two before 6/12
Z What did he tell you VP told him
DB Libby told us that VP told him that AMb's wife worked in CP division. Libby explained that CP stood for Counter Proliferation.
Z Did Libby tell you where he tought VP learned this.
DB Yes–VP told him he received it from someone at CIA. He believed VP had learned it from Tenet. However he was not certain if it was Tenet or someone else.
So right now, we're trusting Scooter Libby to tell us when he dated this note--and that he dated it accurately. Also note (I'll come back to this) Libby was apparently none too sure about the source of this information--whether it was Tenet who passed on the information or someone else.
The Chronology as We Know It
Though the chronology on this is fuzzy, here's what we know of the ways in which Libby allegedly learned of Plame's ID.
May 29: At one of two Deputies meetings both attended, Libby asks Grossman about the Wilson trip. Grossman asks Armitage (who knows nothing), then asks Kansteiner and Ford, who know it was Joe. Grossman asked for a report. Then he told Armitage, asked for permission to call Joe. He called Joe, got his side of the trip. Then he called Libby with an interim report.
May 30-June 9: Grossman overseas.
June 10, 5:25 PM: Bill Harlow calls OVP Office of Public Affairs (:30 minutes)
June 10, 6:21 PM: Bill Harlow calls OVP Office of Public Affairs (4:24 minutes); One possible time when Harlow tells Martin of Plame.
Late June 10 or 11: Grossman receives INR memo.
June 11, 12:00-12:45: First possible time that Grossman tells Libby of Plame's role at one of three Deputies meetings.
June 11, 1:15: Libby calls Grenier for more information on Wilson. This is the first time Libby has called Grenier.
June 11, shortly after 1:15: Grenier calls back to Libby, who uses Wilson's name and sounds aggrieved.
June 11, afternoon: Grenier calls "Kevin," the Deputy Chief of the Joint Task Force on Iraq (JTFI). Kevin is unavailable. Grenier speaks to someone in the unit he doesn't know.
June 11, 2:37: Cathie Martin emails Jenny Mayfield to get time with Libby on Wilson stuff.
June 11, around 4:00: Someone "fully knowledgeable" at JTFI calls Grenier back, tells him that Plame worked in unit that had sent Wilson. Also says State and Defense had been very interested in the Niger intelligence.
June 11, before 4:15: Grenier tries to call Libby to relay this information, but can't get in touch with him before his 4:15 meeting with DCI.
June 11, 4:15-5:00?: Grenier is pulled out of a meeting with DCI to respond to Libby call. Grenier calls Libby back and tells him CIA sent Wilson, Plame worked in unit, and State and Defense were also interested in Niger intelligence. Grenier had never been pulled out of a meeting with DCI before. Libby asks if CIA will release news that State and Defense were also interested in the information. Libby and Grenier set up Harlow and someone named Cathie to arrange a CIA statement.
June 11, 5:27 PM: Bill Harlow calls OVP Office of Public Affairs (5:18); One likely time when Harlow tells Martin of Plame.
June 12: Pincus article
June 12, 12:00-1:30: Second possible time that Grossman tells Libby of Plame's role at CIA. (Note, Libby may have thanked Grenier for his information at the Iraq Deputies meeting, the 12:45-1:30 meeting.)
June 14, 7:00-7:40 AM: Libby asks CIA briefer Craig Schmall, " Why was the Amb told this was VP office question? Joe Wilson Valerie Wilson."
Before I get into my four scenarios, let me point out two things. First, the scenario that Libby's lawyers would like to argue--that Martin found out from Harlow on June 11 and then told Libby--doesn't necessarily hold up. They used her email to Jenny Mayfield to support this point, but her email, sent at 2:37 PM, was sent several hours before she purportedly spoke to Harlow at 5:27 PM. Which makes it possible she learned of Plame on June 10, and the next day got time with Libby to share that news. But then the Harlow call could not have been a response to Grenier, which clearly took place on June 11. But if Libby found out from Martin early on June 11, it might mean the Grenier call was a response to Martin's news.
Also, we know there was some harassment of the CIA, since three days after Libby spoke to Grenier, he asked Craig Schmall some of the same questions that Grenier had already answered. Therefore, we can't assume that, just because Libby already "knew" of something, he wouldn't keep asking the same damn questions.
Okay, here's the transcription of Libby's note recording his conversation with Cheney.
Scenario One: Dick Informs Libby Before the Grossman or Martin Inform Libby
One possibility is that, before Libby learned of Plame's identity through Grossman, Grenier, and Martin, he learned it from Cheney through a CIA channel he's not entirely forthcoming about. This is, IMO, the least likely scenario, mostly because of the spacing of Libby's note. The date is tightly spaced and if the day originally had the same spacing as the other two numbers, then it is probable that it was originally a double-digit number. Though of course, we're assuming that Libby wrote the date honestly to start with.
The one thing supporting this theory, strongly, is the reference to Nicholas Kristof--this appears to be a response to Kristof's May 6 column, not preparation for Pincus (as it would be if it were written in June). Also, the note, "hold, get agency to answer that," suggests it has not yet done so--placing the conversation before Martin's presumed June 11 conversation with Bill Harlow.
If this scenario were true (which I doubt), then it would suggest Cheney and Libby knew of Plame's identity well before they "learned" it in June. One other interesting thing--it would suggest that OVP already knew that this trip happened at its behest, well before it told journalists the opposite.
Scenario Two: Dick Informs Libby on June 10 or 11
This seems to be the default assumption--and would mean Libby's correction of the date was just that--an honest correction. This is, IMO, the only way bullet 4 makes sense--if Dick told Libby to get the CIA to say that Defense and State had been interested in the Niger question as well, at which point, while Pincus was still working on his June 12 story, Libby tried frantically to get CIA to back this statement.
But it would mean Libby knew everything Grenier was going to tell him when he dragged Grenier out of his meeting with DCI on June 11--that he basically just pulled him out of the meeting and led him into admitting this bit. Likewise, it would mean he already knew about Plame when Martin told him that news, presumably also on June 11. Effectively, Libby would have gotten Plame's ID source through two channels outside of the Vice President after he already knew it.
Scenario Three: Dick Informs Libby on June 12, 13, or 14
In this scenario, Dick would have learned of Plame from Libby via Martin, Grossman, and Grenier--and gone to find out more information, then reported back to Libby. This is where the supposition that Tenet was Cheney's source gets more interesting--particularly since Tenet has denied this news. Did Cheney go to someone more reliable to find out about Plame, someone like Fred Fleitz? In this scenario, the reference to Kristof might be a reference to Kristof's second column on the Niger claims, which came out on June 13, one day after Pincus' article. And it might explain why, on June 14, Libby was bitching to Craig Schmall, as if he believed CIA had not stated forcefully enough that State and Defense were also interested in this intelligence.
Scenario Four: Dick Informs Libby on June 15 or 18
This is the scenario that I find most interesting--that several days after Libby learned of Plame's ID from everyone and their mother, Dick came back to him with the critical detail about Plame, that she worked in CPD. The biggest detail supporting this claim is just the document itself--it looks like the number Libby may have overwritten could be a 5 or an 8 (see the loop below the bottom of the 2). Everything I said about scenario three would still hold. But it'd be interesting for two more reasons.
First, it would make it a lot less plausible that Libby forgot about Plame on July 10 or 8, since it would put his last knowledge of Plame later in June (and just a week or so before he spoke to Judy). It would effectively show a continuity of knowledge of Plame's ID, making the whole Russert story even less plausible. If it weren't implausible enough already.
Also, we know that the The New Republic article on this appeared on June 19, at which point Eric Edelman (who, we've learned, was involved in responding to Kristof in early May) asked Libby if they should start leaking info on Wilson to rebut the critics. Libby tells him there are problems with that that he can't explain on a non-secure line. In other words, if Libby and Cheney had this conversation at a later date, it makes it much more likely he was responding to Cheney's news when he told Edelman they couldn't leak this info. It would make it much more likely that Cheney made it crystal clear that Plame was covert.
Anyway, I'm not sure which it was, but Libby's dating of the note seems less than trustworthy, and there are numerous possibilities given that fact.
No comments:
Post a Comment