Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

AMERICAMERICAblog asks: 'Why is this White House transcript missing?"

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
tuvor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 09:53 PM
Original message
AMERICAMERICAblog asks: 'Why is this White House transcript missing?"
Edited on Wed Jul-20-05 09:54 PM by tuvor
Why is this White House transcript missing?
by John in DC - 7/20/2005 10:44:00 PM

Someone just emailed me about something that was apparently posted in the comments earlier today. Basically, a White House press gaggle on July 9, 2003 seems to be missing from the White House Web site. And they're right. The briefings before and after that briefing are there, but not the July 9, 2003 one.

Now, there isn't necessarily a briefing every day to post on the site, but on July 9, 2003 there was a briefing, or gaggle, and you can find it on OTHER Web sites, including the US embassies in Australia (http://canberra.usembassy.gov/hyper/2003/0709/epf301.ht... ) and Israel (http://www.usembassy-israel.org.il/publish/press/2003/j... ). But if you check the White House Web site, it's not where it's supposed to be (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/07 /).

Can somebody who's REALLY up on the Amb Wilson stuff read through this and tell me if there's any reason they wouldn't want this up? This could just be a glitch on their site, but nowadays you can never be sure :-)

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2005/07/why-is-this-whi...


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
chefgirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 10:03 PM
Response to Original message
1. Just a guess....
Don't know if it means anything, but I believe I remember there being some confusion as to whether or not Ari Fleischer was on that trip to Africa or if he stayed behind in D.C.

Seems there was a memo floating around Air Force One concerning Wilson, re:Niger, and some question as to who had access to that memo.

This transcript clearly shows that Ari did accompany the little idiot to Africa, and it may not be the content of the briefing, but who gave the briefing, that some people may not want known. :shrug:

-chef- (who is probably completely off base anyway)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Erika Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 10:06 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Kind of reminds me of the 18 minutes missing on Nixon tapes
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Goblyn Donating Member (36 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 10:15 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. WHOA!!!
-SNIP-
Q: What's the final language, Ari, your final position on the State of the Union speech and the uranium -- I know they were working on stuff last night, but I never got a chance to read it.

Q: Is this on the record?

MR. FLEISCHER: Yes, we're back on the record. After the speech, information was learned about the forged documents. With the advantage of hindsight, it's known now what was not known by the White House prior to the speech. This information should not have risen to the level of a presidential speech. There was reporting, although it wasn't very specific, about Iraq's seeking to obtain uranium from Africa. It's a classic issue of how hindsight is 20-20. The process was followed that led to the information going into the State of the Union; information about the yellow cake was only brought to the White House's attention later.

But there's a bigger picture here, and this is what's fundamental -- the case for war against Iraq was based on the threat that Saddam Hussein posed because of his possession of weapons of mass destruction, chemical and biological, and his efforts to reconstitute a nuclear program. In 1991, everybody in the world underestimated how close he was to getting a nuclear weapon. The case for going to war against Saddam is as just today as it was the day the President gave that speech.

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.

Q: Walk us through how much, if any of this --

MR. FLEISCHER: It was based on the national intelligence estimate; it was based on contemporaneous reporting leading up to the speech, which with the advantage of hindsight we now know that the yellow cake ties to Niger were not accurate. But again, in 1991, the world underestimated how close Iraq was to obtaining nuclear weapons. There is a bigger picture here that is just as valid today as it was the day of the speech.

Q: Are we going the other way now in overestimating their ability to reconstitute --

MR. FLEISCHER: Well, obviously the regime is gone, they're not reconstituting anything anymore.

Q: But that really wasn't the question. Did we overestimate his capacity for doing this before the regime was --

MR. FLEISCHER: It remains clear from the United Nations and others that Saddam had biological weapons, chemical weapons that he had not accounted for. Those are weapons of mass destruction. We continue to learn about the Iraqi nuclear program, information such as the scientist who had buried material in his garden for the purpose of bringing it out after the sanctions were imposed. The concerns are valid. The yellow cake report may have turned out to be inaccurate, but the broader concerns remain valid.

So it's important to get this in context. It's important to understand whether one specific sentence based on yellow cake was wrong, that does not change the fundamental case from being right.

Q: Does this increase the onus or the need to come up with significant discoveries of WMD that so far haven't been found?

MR. FLEISCHER: I think the American people continue to express their support for ridding the world of Saddam Hussein based on just cause, knowing that Saddam Hussein had biological and chemical weapons that were unaccounted for that we're still confident we'll find. I think the burden is on those people who think he didn't have weapons of mass destruction to tell the world where they are. We know he had them in the '90s, he used them. So just because they haven't yet been found doesn't mean they didn't exist. The burden is on the critics to explain where the weapons of mass destruction are. If they think they were destroyed, the burden is on them to explain when he destroyed them and where he destroyed them.

Q: What's the estimate on how long it will take, and what more access, if any, they need --

MR. FLEISCHER: It will take as long as it takes until they're discovered. The world is safer.

Q: Ari, back on the State of the Union, is there anything that the White House, that the administration is going to do differently to prevent something like that from happening, like how a piece of information that does not rise to the level that should be included in a speech, that ends up being inaccurate --

MR. FLEISCHER: There's always a thorough vetting process. We'll continue to follow the vetting process. But it is the nature of events that information can later be discovered after a speech -- and when that happens, as is in this case, it's important to be forthright, which is what this administration has done -- to discuss it openly, and that's what this administration has done.

Q: When you talked about the contemporaneous reporting right before the speech, what exactly do you mean?

MR. FLEISCHER: There was the national intelligence estimate, intelligence community.

Q: So you had other reports about Niger and about the yellow cake from Niger.

MR. FLEISCHER: -- part of the intelligence community's reporting leading up to the speech --

Q: There wasn't a lot --

Q: Some British --

MR. FLEISCHER: -- which subsequently -- no, the President in the State of the Union cited the British report. But there had been an independent American report which in the instance of yellow cake, subsequently turned out not to be valid. But keep in mind, again, we've said that about the yellow cake for an extended period of time. This administration has been forthright.

* * * * *

MR. FLEISCHER: Glad you guys made it in there. I was worried sick about you for awhile.

Q: Ari, Prime Minister Blair is coming next week, is that correct?

MR. FLEISCHER: I don't think that's correct.

Q: I've heard -- I thought I heard from somebody at the White House --

MR. FLEISCHER: -- saying I'm paying a little less attention to events after Monday than I used to, but I don't --

Q: I heard he's giving a joint address to Congress --

MR. FLEISCHER: I'll have to look. I don't know. I know there's another head of state visit that you guys know about.

Q: Right, to the ranch.

MR. FLEISCHER: But I'll have to ask.

Q: If you are able to get something on that I'd like to know.

MR. FLEISCHER: Okay.

Q: Is there anything else to link Saddam Hussein's attempt to acquire weapons to Africa, now that this yellow case -- Niger thing has been discussed?

MR. FLEISCHER: Yes, there was other reporting. But as I said, it didn't rise to the level of sufficient specificity. But there was other reports, yes.

Q: Is the President still concerned about Africa being a source -- potential source for these weapons?

MR. FLEISCHER: No, because the regime is gone. The regime is gone. You know, just because something didn't make it to the level where it should have been included in a presidential speech, in hindsight, doesn't mean the information was necessarily inaccurate. It means it should not have risen to his level.

This is the nature of some intelligence information. But, again, this is why I go right back to the bigger point, why did we go to war. We went to war because of chemical weapons, biological weapons. And as you know, in the case of nuclear, there are other issues that go into nuclear, not just yellow cake. So, again, that's why I urge you all to just keep this in perspective about what this one sentence means. And we have been honest about discussing the one sentence -- and I think that it's a case to be fair to the administration.

Q: Apparently, the Iraqi intelligence agent who had met with Atta in Prague, has there been help -- been apprehended, any information on that?

MR. FLEISCHER: I saw a report on it in the media. I don't have anything beyond that.

Q: Can I ask you one thing about AIDS? You know, here is the largest percentage of AIDS in the world, and yet it's not really on the agenda in southern Africa. I know you will be dealing with it in Uganda --

MR. FLEISCHER: It's on the President's agenda.

Q: Well, tell me about it. What is he going to be doing?

MR. FLEISCHER: He's in the meetings now, so we'll have a background briefing later today, and then you'll find out what the President said.

Q: So that's going to be at 3:00 p.m. at the filing center?

MR. FLEISCHER: I don't know what time. Somewhere between 1:00 p.m. and 3:00 p.m.

END

(end transcript)

(Distributed by the Bureau of International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov )

_SNIP_


Hmm seems to declare alot about oru intentions of going to war and the timeline..

whitehouse doing a little cleaning (read: erasing) up?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Debs Donating Member (723 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 01:41 PM
Response to Reply #3
35. Good catch Goblyn
Welcome to DU and I agree, considering the new talking point is that it was about democracy and WMDs were just part of the mix, this would be embarrassing
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joemurphy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 10:24 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. Lets see if it disappears from the embassy websites too.
Well, it's July 9th - day 3 after Wilson's article. Ari's spin on Wilson is that his information was no big deal. Wilson went to Niger, asked the government if it sold uranium to Iraq, and he came back and reported that they said they didn't. Ari claims the administration didn't find out there was nothing to the Niger uranium story until March, 2003 when it was learned the purchase documents were forgeries.

If this was Pinocchio a nose would be growing.

Question for Ari: If you guys knew the Niger uranium deal was phony in March, why didn't you clarify that fact to Congress and the American people. Now, in July, you tell us: "Whoops, it was thin intelligence. It shouldn't have been in the State of the Union Address."

It's also the administration's first direct response to Wilson's charge that the Bush Administration "twisted" intelligence to get us into war. Possibly the Administration's first salvo in the "War on Wilson" that Cooper would later write about in his Time article.

It isn't a direct attack on Wilson though. It just downplays the importance of Wilson's findings.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tess49 Donating Member (606 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 10:28 PM
Response to Reply #1
5. I like that -- "the little idiot". Perfect description.
I'm gonna steal it and drop it into a conversation sometime.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chefgirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 12:21 AM
Response to Reply #5
16. Please do..
Oh, please, feel free! I used to call him 'The idiot in the White House', however, I've found that I no longer need to narrow it down quite so much.
Seems everyone knows who the little idiot is these days. :eyes:

-chef-
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bunny planet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:46 PM
Response to Reply #1
15. Someone posted a transcript of Condi at the press briefing in Africa
earlier on DU. I heard Fleisher was definitely there. When ever a pertinent document goes missing with this crew you have to wonder. Better keep a close eye on them, they are getting desperate and going into heavy cover-up mode. Somebody remove the shredders from the WH.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pachamama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 12:51 AM
Response to Reply #1
18. I think page A01 of the Wash Post answers your question....
According to the article, it indicates that yes, Ari Fleischer was on that trip...

Ah, the plot thickens....pass the popcorn...its getting good...the suspense is killing me.... :popcorn:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blowback Donating Member (681 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 10:36 PM
Response to Original message
6. What it doesn't say...
Am I crazy, or does this transcript imply that the Wilson report WAS seen by the administration before the SOTU. Cause a lot of people have been saying lately that it never made it out of the "bowels of the CIA."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Al-CIAda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 10:58 PM
Response to Reply #6
10. Yes sir, I believe you are correct. Apparently another lie. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sparkly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:07 PM
Response to Reply #6
12. I find this part interesting...
"...the President in the State of the Union cited the British report. But there had been an independent American report which in the instance of yellow cake, subsequently turned out not to be valid."

There "had been" an American report? And then "subsequently" the report that "had been" written showed the yellow cak claims were not valid?

The only "subsequent" thing was Wilson's editorial. And in it, iirc, Wilson said more than merely "I asked Niger, and Niger denied it," as Ari claimed here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
snippy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 09:45 AM
Response to Reply #12
32. That American report might be the white paper prepared by the WHIG.
At one time that white paper was supposed to be the first known reference by anyone in the administration to the yellowcake lies. The WHIG never released it because it "was not strong enough."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=artic...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hissyspit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 10:39 PM
Response to Original message
7. nominated n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joemurphy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 10:48 PM
Response to Original message
8. Plamegate Timeline and Where Ari's Gaggle Fits In
Edited on Wed Jul-20-05 11:01 PM by joemurphy
February 5 - Colin Powell goes to the UN to make the case about WMDs and Saddam Hussein. Powell decides the Niger-Iraq uranium purchase allegations are too weak and does not mention them in his UN speech. He later explains that he omitted these allegations because he didn't think the evidence was strong enough to "present before the world." In another report he is said to have characterized this, and other "evidence" as "bullshit".

March 7, 2003 - The IAEA and Mohamed ElBaradei, provide proof that the Niger-Iraq claims were based on forgeries (Wilson 452).

March 8, 2003 - State Department says "we fell for it" regarding the forged documents

May 2, 2003 Bushs Mission Accomplished speech

May 6, 2003 - Nicholas Kristof in New York Times mentions Joe Wilson's trip to Niger to investigate claims Iraq sought purchase of 'yellowcake' uranium (no names mentioned) and that the fabled 16 words in George W. Bush's 2003 State of the Union Address (SOTU) came from forged documents

The column by Nicholas Kristoff in the New York Times was the first public mention of Wilson's trip to Niger (but Kristoffs column did not identify Wilson by name. Kristoff had been on a panel with Wilson four days earlier and said that Wilson told him that intelligence documents that proved Iraq attempted to buy uranium from Niger were forged and the White House should have known that before allowing Bush to include it in his State of the Union speech.

June, 2003 - According to an article date 10/13/03 in the Washington Post, a preliminary FBI investigation reveals that White House officials, including Rove and Libby, first learned of Plames name and CIA status around this time when questions surrounding Wilsons Niger trip were first brought to the attention of Cheneys aides by reporters.

One reason investigators are looking back (to June 2003) is that even before Novak's column appeared, government officials had been trying for more than a month to convince journalists that Wilson's mission wasn't as important as it was being portrayed, the Post reported.
Several CIA officers assigned to the White House and working mainly on the National Security staff may have been the first individuals to have learned that Plame was an undercover operative and that Wilson was her husband.
According to the Oct. 13, 2003 story in the Post, a former NSC staff member said one or more of those officers may have been aware of the Plame-Wilson relationship and briefed Cheney and Rove about her status, that she was married to Wilson and that she recommended him for the fact-finding trip to Niger

June 8, 2003 - Then National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice on Meet the Press denies Kristof's claim that the Administration knew the yellowcake story was unfounded

June 10, 2003 - The State Department issues the Air Force One Memo. It is dated June 10, 2003, nearly four weeks before Mr. Wilsons Op-Ed article in The New York Times. The memorandum was written for Marc Grossman, then the Under-Secretary of State for Political Affairs, and it refers explicitly to Valerie Wilson as being Mr. Wilson's wife.

The paragraph in the memo discussing Ms. Wilson's involvement in her husband's trip is marked at the beginning with a letter designation in brackets to indicate the information shouldn't be shared, according to the person familiar with the memo. Such a designation would indicate to a reader that the information was sensitive. The memo, though, doesn't specifically describe Ms. Wilson as an undercover agent, the person familiar with the memo said.

Generally, the federal government has three levels of classified information -- top secret, secret and confidential -- all indicating various levels of "damage" to national security if disclosed. There also is an unclassified designation -- indicating information that wouldn't harm national security if shared with the public -- but that wasn't the case for the material on the Wilsons prepared by the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research. It isn't known what level of classification was assigned to the information in the memo.

Who received the memo, which was prepared for Marc Grossman, then the under secretary of state for political affairs, and how widely it was circulated are issues as Mr. Fitzgerald tries to pinpoint the origin of the leak of Ms. Wilson's identity. According to the person familiar with the document, it didn't include a distribution list. It isn't known if President Bush has seen the memo

June 12, 2003 - This is the first public report on Wilson's trip, in a report by Walter Pincus of the Washington Post. Wilson isn't mentioned by name. Wilson was later identified as Pincus's source

By Walter Pincus, "CIA Did Not Share Doubt on Iraq Data; Bush Used Report Of Uranium Bid"

The Washington Post

"...the CIA in early February 2002 dispatched a retired U.S. ambassador to (Niger) to investigate the claims, according to the senior U.S. officials and the former government official, who is familiar with the event. The sources spoke on condition of anonymity and on condition that the name of the former ambassador not be disclosed."

June 13, 2003 - Kristof responds to Rices "Meet the Press" denial and sticks by his claim. Still Wilson's name not revealed

July 6, 2003: The article that started it all: Ambassador Joseph Wilsons "What I Didn't Find in Africa" appears in the New York Times as an op-ed piece. In the article Wilson claims the Bush Administration twisted intelligence to exaggerate the Iraq threat.

July 6, 2003 The same day Judith Miller has a telephone conversation with a White House source concerning the Wilson story. Miller will later refuse to divulge this source or the content of her conversation with him to the grand jury. The Washington Post has reported that Miller's source is I. Lewis (Scooter) Libby, Vice President Cheneys Chief of Staff. Judith Miller: Hearsted on Her Own Petard- by Justin Raimondo


July 6, 2003 - When Mr. Wilson's Op-Ed article appeared on July 6, 2003, a Sunday, Richard L. Armitage, then deputy secretary of state, called Carl W. Ford Jr., the assistant secretary for intelligence and research, at home, a former State Department official said. Mr. Armitage asked Mr. Ford to send a copy of the memorandum to Mr. Powell, who was preparing to leave for Africa with Mr. Bush, the former official said. Mr. Ford sent it to the White House for transmission to Mr. Powell.

July 7, 2003 White House phone records reflect Robert Novak calling Ari Fleischer on this date. This is the same date that a Top Secret Briefing Book (containing the text of the classified Air Force One Memo) is prepared by NSC staff to counter fallout from Wilsons July 6, 2003 NYT op-ed piece. The Briefing Book is faxed to Rice and others in Africa. It is presently unclear when or if Fleischer returned Novaks call.

Fleischer, who saw the July 7 Briefing Book (which, according to Newsweek, was faxed by NSC staff to Air Force One which was en route to Africa), wasn't part of Bush's inner circle during his tenure as press secretary. Rove, however, was at the heart of it. Given those facts, it seems highly doubtful that Fleischer would have acted on the information in the Briefing Book without the knowledge or approval of Rove and other top-level White House officials. The July 7 Briefing Book was largely a reproduction of an earlier State Department report prepared around June 12. Another key question that Fitzgerald is interested in, according to the grand jury witness and the lawyers familiar with the case, is whether Rove or Libby learned of the material in the Briefing Book and, if so, shared its content with reporters they talked to later. (Bloomberg.com: U.S.)

July 7, 2003 Bush, Powell, Fleischer, and Rice fly to Africa, Armitage makes sure Powell has copy of INR memo of 6/10/03 with him on the plane. Powell had been quick to disclaim responsibility for the inclusion of the sixteen words in the SOTU address. Accordingly, other administration officials were pressed into service to rebut the claims notably Condoleezza Rice and Donald Rumsfeld. A Briefing Book was assembled by WH staff, labeled Top Secret, reportedly containing scurrilous information concerning Wilson and including mention of Plame, her status with the CIA, and assertions that she was responsible for sending Wilson to Niger. Ari Fleischer, who was on the plane with Powell and Rice, would use the material to attack Wilson following Bushs return from Africa. It is unclear to what extent Rove read, or used, the Air Force One Memo or the Top Secret Briefing Book in his subsequent leaks to reporters. Rove at War - Newsweek Politics - MSNBC.com

But then Wilson went public. Some prominent administration officials scurried for cover. Traveling in Africa, Secretary of State Colin Powell, who had long harbored doubts, disowned the "sixteen words" about Niger that had ended up in Bush's prewar State of the Union speech. So did CIA Director George Tenet, who said they shouldn't have been in the text. But Cheneywho tended never to give an inch on any topicheld firm. And so, therefore, did Rove, who sometimes referred to the vice president as "Leadership." Rove took foreign-policy cues from the pro-war coterie that surrounded the vice president, and was personally and operationally close to Cheney's chief of staff, Lewis (Scooter) Libby.

Meanwhile, in transatlantic secure phone calls, the message machinery focused on a crucial topic: who should carry the freight on the following Sunday's talk shows? The message: protect Cheney by explaining that he had had nothing to do with sending Wilson to Niger, and dismiss the yellowcake issue. Powell was ruled out. He wasn't a team player, as he had proved by his dismissive comments about the "sixteen words." Donald Rumsfeld was pressed into duty, as was Condi Rice, the ultimate good soldier. She was on the Africa trip with the president, though, and wouldn't be getting back until Saturday night. To allow her to prepare on the long flight home to D.C., White House officials assembled a briefing book, which they faxed to the Bush entourage in Africa. The book was primarily prepared by her National Security Council staff. It contained classified informationperhaps including all or part of the memo from State. The entire binder was labeled TOP SECRET.

Missions accomplished. Except for a few little details. Under a 1982 law, it's a felony to intentionally disclose the name of a "covered" agent with the intent to harm national security. Under another, older statute, it could also be a felony to willfully disclose information from a classified documentwhich the State Department memo and, apparently, the Condi briefing book were. There is no indication that Rove saw the briefing book (Rumsfeld didn't get one) or that anyone disclosed classified information. But no one in the administration seems to have noticed the ironyor the legal dangerin assembling a TOP SECRET briefing book as guidance for the Sunday talk shows. Exactly what papers with what classifications were floating around on Air Force One? Who, if anyone, was dipping into them for info about the Wilson trip?

And if Rove knew Plame's identity, as Novak says, how did Rove learn it? A source close to Rove has said Rove never saw the State memo. The same source told NEWSWEEK last week that Rove "doesn't remember" where he heard the crucial information about Wilson's wife. But, the source said, Rove is "pretty sure he heard it directly or indirectly from a media source." The source close to Rove later acknowledged that Rove had been questioned by investigators about conversations he may have had with Libby, Cheney's chief of staff. Rove couldn't recall any specific exchange with Libby about Wilson's wife, the source said. A spokeswoman for the vice president's office said Libby would have no comment. Fitzgerald declined to comment

July 8, 2003 - A friend informs Wilson that Robert Novak believes that his wife had something to do with Wilson's appointment to investigate the Yellow Cake claim in Africa.
He asked Novak if he could walk a block or two with him, as they were headed in the same direction; Novak acquiesced. Striking up a conversation, my friend, without revealing that he knew me, asked Novak about the Uranium controversy. It was a minor problem, Novak replied, and opined that the administration should have dealt with it weeks before. My friend then asked Novak what he thought about me, and Novak answered: "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."

Wilson's friend went right to Wilson's office and documented the exchange

July 8, 2003 According to the NYT Robert Novak calls Rove and asks for confirmation that Wilsons wife, Valerie Plame, a CIA officer, had authorized Wilsons trip to Niger to investigate uranium sales. The NYT says Rove told Novak Oh, did you hear that too?



July 8, 2003 - According to the Washington Post, a lawyer (probably Roves lawyer, Robert Luskin) says that Novak showed up on a White House call log as calling Rove the week before the publication of Novaks July 2003 column.. At the end of that 15- or 20-minute call, according to the lawyer, Novak said he had learned that Wilson's wife worked for the CIA. "I heard that, too," Rove replied, according to the lawyer, confirming the Times account.

July 8, 2003 -Alden, Dinmore, Harding and Wetzel, publish an article in the Financial Times: "Bush under fire over Niger uranium connection"

A picture also emerged yesterday of how a special envoy's investigation showing that there was no truth that the Iraq-Niger reports were overlooked by the Bush administration. Joseph Wilson, a former ambassador, went last year to Niger at the request of the Central Intelligence Agency to assess the reports of an attempt made by Iraq to buy uranium. He reported back to the CIA that the reports appeared to be false. People in the Bush administration say that George Tenet, the director of Central Intelligence, had been unaware that Mr. Wilson was sent to Niger and senior figures at the National Security Council, such as Condoleezza Rice, the national security adviser and her deputy Stephen Hadley, did not see the reports containing his conclusions.

The BBC is also getting CIA leaks designed to place the blame firmly on the WH:

But the CIA official has said that a former US diplomat had already established the claim was false in March 2002 - and that the information had been passed on to government departments, including the White House, well before Mr Bush mentioned it in the speech. But a former US diplomat, Ambassador Joseph Wilson, went on the record at the weekend to say that he had traveled to Africa to investigate the uranium claims and found no evidence to support them. Now the CIA official has told the BBC that Mr Wilson's findings had been passed onto the White House as early as March 2002.

July 9, 2003 Presidential spokesperson Ari Fleischer holds a press gaggle in Africa. He tells reporters that Wilsons trip to Niger was not a major bit of intelligence undercutting the efforts of the Iraqis to obtain a nuclear weapon. Fleischer says that Wilson simply went to Niger, asked the Nigerien government if it sold uranium to Iraq and the government of course, said it didnt. Department of State Washington File: Transcript: White House Daily Briefing, July 9, 2003


So there's the chronology that I've pieced together. Nice, eh?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
writes2000 Donating Member (481 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 01:38 AM
Response to Reply #8
22. Great, Great Job, JM. Thanks for putting it together.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bklyncowgirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 06:37 AM
Response to Reply #8
27. Beautiful! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Justice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 06:48 AM
Response to Reply #8
28. Excellent -thanks
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hang a left Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 10:58 PM
Response to Original message
9. It was disappeared a long time ago.
I just posted about this in a different thread. I remember much discussion about this transcript disappearing over a year ago. Some DUers had it saved on their hard drive before it was scrubbed and they were trying to get it to Fitzgerald. I will try to go search the archives and find it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hang a left Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:06 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. I found the thread....very interesting....it takes me back
Here's the original thread.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

Please help me with this RE: Subpoena of WH records...
In this Newsday article (posted in LBN)
http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/nation/ny-uslea ...
it states that:
<snip>
That subpoena also sought a complete transcript of a July 12 press "gaggle," or informal briefing, by then-White House press secretary Ari Fleischer while at the National Hospital in Abuja, Nigeria.

That transcript is missing from the White House Web site containing transcripts of other press briefings. In a transcript the White House released at the time to Federal News Service, Fleischer discusses Wilson and his CIA report.
<snip>

Being the curious person that I am, I checked out the WH press briefing archive at
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/briefings /
and noticed that there is not a link for July 12, 2003.

I wondered if even though there is no link, that the file might still be there. The WH uses a fairly simple method for organizing URLs, so I just copied the one for July 11, 2003 and changed it to the 12th. I had to try a couple of times (the last number is apparently for distinguishing separate articles on the same day) but I did find the briefing transcript!
The url is here:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/07/2003071 ...

I have saved a copy of this, and would appreciate it if other people would also. But what should I do about this? Should I notify someone?

Thanks,
AZCat


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beam Me Up Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 12:58 AM
Response to Reply #11
19. Nevermind self delete
Edited on Thu Jul-21-05 01:03 AM by Beam Me Up
It really is helpful when you use the < div class = "excerpt" > ... < /div > HTML to distinguish excerpts. See link to "HTML lookup table" in posting message window.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hang a left Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 01:17 AM
Response to Reply #19
20. ??????
Sorry?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BQueen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 01:37 AM
Response to Reply #11
21. Wow! That's gone already!
I got an error 404 message when I tried your link....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hang a left Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 04:48 AM
Response to Reply #21
25. Click on the original DU thread link....
that will take you to all the original limks and reponses to the original post that is from May 2004.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
orleans Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 01:49 AM
Response to Reply #11
23. the newsday link is down
and so is the white house one. but this was originally posted a year ago...oh well
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hang a left Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 04:49 AM
Response to Reply #23
26. Click on the original DU thread link....
eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zen Democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:16 PM
Response to Original message
13. Check out this Condi Rice press gaggle on July 11, 2003
She brings up Wilson in this. Nobody asks her about Wilson. She brings it up. And when the reporter asks another question, she asks "Are you sure you're through with this?"

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/07/2003071...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hamlette Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:29 PM
Response to Original message
14. why didn't Wilson come forward BEFORE we invaded Iraq? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Democrat 4 Ever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 08:43 AM
Response to Reply #14
31. If I remember correctly Wilson called the CIA or the White House
about the incorrect information coming out about Niger and the yellowcake. He wanted to make sure they had seen his report but he was led to believe that they were getting the information from a source other than his work. He just thought they had found more information that contradicted his findings. Later he found out that was a lie, they were just ignoring his report because they were so antsy to send other people's kids to war.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hamlette Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 10:06 AM
Response to Reply #31
33. ahhh, that makes sense, thanks n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
skids Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 12:21 AM
Response to Original message
17. This has all the elements of a good filler story/side-column

With TWO instances of the whitehouse website screwing up, and the fact that Fitz was using legal avenues to get at one of them, this is the sort of thing MSM could pick up to fill those dull moments when there are no juicy details leaking from the investigation.

So bloggers take notice and hype it. Hopefully it will get picked up.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lala_rawraw Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 03:57 AM
Response to Original message
24. Wait,
What is this?

"Q: Apparently, the Iraqi intelligence agent who had met with Atta in Prague, has there been help -- been apprehended, any information on that? "
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sunnystarr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 08:16 AM
Response to Reply #24
30. I believe that was more bs and was discredited. (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Inland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 08:14 AM
Response to Original message
29. We were always at war with Eastasia. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eloriel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 01:00 PM
Response to Original message
34. This is an important thread
:kick:

Lotta very good info in it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stephanie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 09:48 PM
Response to Original message
36. I just posted in another thread that the same thing happened in 2004

I posted here > http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

That this was a memorable night at DU last year, when DUer AZCat found the missing transcript Fitz had subpoenaed.



http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

AZCat Donating Member (1000+ posts)

Fri Mar-05-04 12:54 AM

Please help me with this RE: Subpoena of WH records...

In this Newsday article (posted in LBN)
http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/nation/ny-uslea ...
it states that:
<snip>
That subpoena also sought a complete transcript of a July 12 press "gaggle," or informal briefing, by then-White House press secretary Ari Fleischer while at the National Hospital in Abuja, Nigeria.

That transcript is missing from the White House Web site containing transcripts of other press briefings. In a transcript the White House released at the time to Federal News Service, Fleischer discusses Wilson and his CIA report.
<snip>

Being the curious person that I am, I checked out the WH press briefing archive at
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/briefings /
and noticed that there is not a link for July 12, 2003.

I wondered if even though there is no link, that the file might still be there. The WH uses a fairly simple method for organizing URLs, so I just copied the one for July 11, 2003 and changed it to the 12th. I had to try a couple of times (the last number is apparently for distinguishing separate articles on the same day) but I did find the briefing transcript!
The url is here:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/07/2003071 ...

I have saved a copy of this, and would appreciate it if other people would also. But what should I do about this? Should I notify someone?

Thanks,
AZCat
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
guruoo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 11:16 PM
Response to Original message
37. Here it is, they just removed the link
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
guruoo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 11:28 PM
Response to Reply #37
38. They appairently scrubbed the link from the page
because I find it referenced on several web pages
Example:
Joseph C. Wilson: Information From Answers.com
Press gaggle (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/07/2003070... ).
The White House. Schmidt, Susan (July 9, 2004). Plame's input is cited on ...http://www.answers.com/topic/joseph-c-wilson - 31k
You may be able to roughly determine the time at which it
was scrubbed by examining the publish dates of the pages
in which it's referenced: (google) http://tinyurl.com/ankcr
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat Aug 30th 2014, 08:06 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC