President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Kamala Harris

(R) Donald Trump

80%↑

20%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) V. Archuleta

98%

2%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Marshall Dawson

95%

5%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Hurd

(D) Adam Frisch

52%↑

48%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(D) Trisha Calvarese

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank

(D) River Gassen

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) John Fabbricatore

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen

(R) Sergei Matveyuk

90%

10%

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

52%↑

48%↓

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
October 25, 2005 08:00 AM UTC

Bad Timing for O'Donnell Part Deux; Cheney in Trouble

  • 40 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

As we wrote yesterday, Republican Rick O’Donnell’s fundraiser with Vice President Dick Cheney might have come at an inopportune moment with the Veep facing trouble in the CIA leak probe. Well, it turns out that trouble is more than we would have guessed, because it sounds like Cheney himself may have been the source of the leak. From the Associated Press:

The White House on Tuesday sidestepped questions about whether Vice President Dick Cheney passed on to his top aide the identity of a CIA officer central to a federal grand jury probe. Notes in the hands of a federal prosecutor suggest that Cheney’s chief of staff, I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, first heard of the CIA officer from Cheney himself, The New York Times reported in Tuesday’s editions.

A federal prosecutor is investigating whether the officer’s identity was improperly disclosed. The Times said notes of a previously undisclosed June 12, 2003, conversation between Libby and Cheney appear to differ from Libby’s grand jury testimony that he first heard of Valerie Plame from journalists.

“This is a question relating to an ongoing investigation and we’re not having any further comment on the investigation while it’s ongoing,” White House press secretary Scott McClellan said. Pressed about Cheney’s knowledge about the CIA officer, McClellan said: “I think you’re prejudging things and speculating and we’re not going to prejudge or speculate about things.”

McClellan said Cheney – who participated in a morning video conference on the Florida hurricane from Wyoming, where he is speaking at a University of Wyoming dinner tonight – is doing a “great job” as vice president.

The New York Times identified its sources in the story as lawyers involved in the case.

Libby has emerged at the center of Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald’s criminal investigation in recent weeks because of the Cheney aide’s conversations about Plame with Times reporter Judith Miller. Miller said Libby spoke to her about Plame and her husband, Bush administration critic Joseph Wilson, on three occasions – although not necessarily by name and without indicating he knew she was undercover.

Libby’s notes show that Cheney knew Plame worked at the CIA more than a month before her identity was publicly exposed by columnist Robert Novak.

Tweet
Share

Comments

40 thoughts on “Bad Timing for O’Donnell Part Deux; Cheney in Trouble”

  1. Forget for a moment that progressives have a superior sense of what is just and honorable in community, in business and in our responsibilities to the other nations who share the same oceans, air and precious resources of this finite planet.  Even if we were wrong about all these things by some aberration of philosophy or mental defect, would it not indeed invalidate what neocons would have us believe regarding their own moral compass? Every fairytale, every good action adventure movie and more than a few biblical stories identify rogues that are similar to the characters in this American nightmare called the Bush administration.  This is beyond partisan discontent, it is agonizing witness to the shameful, lawless, gluttonous, witless antipathy of public service.  Only a fascist could look at a troll such as Cheney and not be revolted

  4. so Jason, how much is Eddie P. paying you? 

    First of all, not even the NY Times suggested that Cheney did anything illegal.  From the NY Times Story:

    It would not be illegal for either Mr.  Cheney or Mr. Libby, both of whom are presumably cleared to know the government’s deepest secrets, to discuss a C.I.A. officer or her link to a critic of the administration.

    Second, your description of Cheney as the “source of the leak” is inaccurate.  No where in the story does it claim that Cheney told a reporter anything, or knew of Plame’s status as an undercover agent.

    If Libby mislead the GJ then he should face the penality.  O’Donnell said as much yesterday.  From the AP Story:  “He also said politicians need to follow strong moral standards and should be accountable.”

  5. “If Libby mislead (misled mc) the GJ then he should face the penality. O’Donnell said as much yesterday. From the AP Story: “He also said politicians need to follow strong moral standards and should be accountable.”

    That is so noble of ROD, LOL, did anyone ask him if he knew any, present company excepted?

  6. “First of all, not even the NY Times suggested that Cheney did anything illegal”

    Correct, at this point we have no idea that Cheney did anything illegal. However the NYT article does mention that Cheney spoke to Fitzgerald while under oath… I hope the VP was honest.

    Second, your description of Cheney as the “source of the leak” is inaccurate. No where in the story does it claim that Cheney told a reporter anything, or knew of Plame’s status as an undercover agent.

    Not really, Cheney was most certainly Libby’s source which of course means that he’s known this entire time. He may not have given Libby the marching orders but he’s known for 2+ years where Scooter got his information. If Cheney wasn’t in any jeapordy over passing on that information why would Libby go to such extreme ends to protect him?

  7. 3BM – I will beg to differ, since “source of the leak,” at least to me, would indicate that the source spoke with an unauthorized person.  No where in the NY Times story does it assert that.  No where is the NY Times story does it assert that Cheney ordered or suggested Libby leak that information.

    I would agree, however, that it doesn’t look good for Libby, if he told the GJ that he got the information from somewhere else and that is proven false.  The NY Times story doesn’t prove a thing, since it quotes a bunch of anon sources.

  8. You caught us, Hack Attack. We’re actually creating the news. Everything that happens bad to someone you like is because of us.

    Notes in the hands of a federal prosecutor suggest that Cheney’s chief of staff, I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, first heard of the CIA officer from Cheney himself, The New York Times reported in Tuesday’s editions.

    The NY Times says that Cheney could be the source of the leak, not us. If Cheney gave the name to Libby, who gave it to the Times, that makes Cheney the source of the leak. We didn’t report that – the Times did.

  9. If the story is true, what are the chances that Cheney gave this testimony under oath?  He could be up for perjury on this note alone.

    The story goes on to say that Tenet told Cheney the name; Tenet is the one who reported this whole thing to the DoJ for investigation, and has been co-operating with the prosecutor.  My read on this is that Tenet either (a) was not the source of the information, or (b) told Cheney that Plame’s identity was Top Secret/Compartmentalized, and Cheney went ahead and disclosed it to Libby anyway; any other interpretation would put Tenet in such a profoundly dumb position that I wouldn’t believe it of him.

    In other words, the story is likely only partially true.  How much of it is true, I don’t know; this certainly sounds like Libby trying to save his own hide.

  10. Wow, the sarcasm defense, I didn’t expect that one.  Don’t actually respond to the issue at hand, deflect it elsewhere.  That’s ok, we don’t really expect anything else anyway.

    Please show where in the story the phrase “source of the leak” appears.  How about this, even the word “source.”  The answer is that it doesn’t appear in the NY Times story at all.

    The fact that Libby may have heard the name from Cheney is not material to WHO leaked the name.  It is material to whether Libby mislead the Grand Jury by saying otherwise.

  11. For the last time, this is DIRECTLY from the Associated Press story. We didn’t write this:

    Notes in the hands of a federal prosecutor suggest that Cheney’s chief of staff, I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, first heard of the CIA officer from Cheney himself, The New York Times reported in Tuesday’s editions.

  12. source
    Pronunciation Key  (s?rs, srs)
    n.

      1. The point at which something springs into being or from which it derives or is obtained.
      2. The point of origin, such as a spring, of a stream or river. See Synonyms at origin.
      3. One that causes, creates, or initiates; a maker.
      4. One, such as a person or document, that supplies information: A reporter is only as reliable as his or her sources.
      5. Physics. The point or part of a system where energy or mass is added to the system.

  13. A CIA NOC’s identity is Top Secret/Compartmentalized information; even people with Top Secret clearance are supposed to be cleared by the information owner (the DDO?) on a Need To Know basis before receiving the information.  When said information is given to someone, it is always made clear that the information is not to be passed on further.  Violation of this extremely sensitive classification is almost unheard-of except in cases of malice.

    A kind DailyKos user brings up the following point: Bush and Cheney could be in Big Trouble for violating the following section (792) of the Espionage Act:

    Whoever harbors or conceals any person who he knows, or has reasonable grounds to believe or suspect, has committed, or is about to commit, an offense under sections 793 or 794 of this title, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

    Bush and Cheney both reportedly knew about their underlings’ leak and concealed that fact.  The leak itself is covered under Section 793 of the Espionage Act, which is easier to prove than violations of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act.  Section 793 has been used several times to prosecute leaks of classified information to the media and other non-foreign-government organizations, including the recent guilty plea of Larry Franklin.

  14. For the last time, NOTHING IN THAT OR THE NY TIMES STORY says Cheney leaked the name to the press! 

    If Libby told the GJ that he got it from a reporter, and the special prosecutor can show that he lied, then Libby has some problems. 

    That doesn’t mean, from your own words that Cheney was the “source of the leak.”  Telling your staff member who has clearance the name is not a leak!  Telling a reporter is a leak. 

    I would think a reporter would actually know the difference.

  17. The CIA does not distribute compartmentalized information like candy.  It’s their business to not let that stuff out.  If Cheney got that information from the CIA, he had it with classification attatched.

    Rove, in his conversation with at least one reporter, said that Plame’s identity “was about to be declassified”.  The purported State Department memo with Plame’s information on it was also labeled TS/NF (no foreign).  So someone in this whole scandal knew of the classification.

  18. I am not aware that either Libby or Cheney knew that she was undercover or had classified status.

    You don’t think that maybe, just maybe, George Tenet might have mentioned that fact to Cheney when he reported back to him?

    Sure seems logical that the DCI would have made something like that very clear, doesn’t it?

  19. Perhaps, from what I have read, that assertion hasn’t been made.  If it was, I missed it.  But that doesn’t really address what set me off today, which was the lead paragraph and headline of this posting.

  20. I have to agree somewhat with HackAttack–there is no material in the AP article or anything else I’ve read so far that suggests Dick Cheney is likely to be indicted for his sharing of classified information with Libby.

    It really doesn’t pass the smell test that Cheney didn’t know Joe Wilson’s wife was a CIA operative, and indeed our Vice President should be considered to have a proactive duty to clarify such status and to defend it as he would defend any aspect of our nation’s security.  Cheney was obviously deeply involved, and may have broken laws even if he gave truthful testimony to the grand jury, but so far we don’t have public evidence to suggest anything other than Libby and Rove taking the fall.

  21. I won’t disagree on that assessment, Beaupreznit.  We really know nothing about the way Fitzgerald and the Grand Jury have been taking this whole thing; all of the press reports seem to have been based on the reports of defense lawyers or reporters involved in the case.

  22. What disturbs me most about this conversation is how focused it is on the letter of the law.  Wilson correctly points out that the Bush administration is inflating evidence.  Vice-President Cheney uses his position to go to the head of the CIA and get classified information about Wilson, namely that his wife is a CIA operative.  Cheney gives that information to his chief of staff, who causes its public disclosure in a mis-guided attempt to undermine Wilson’s credibility.  Regardless of what laws it does or doesn’t break, that conduct is deplorable.

    But since everyone is concerned with legalisms – passing classified information to someone with clearance to receive it (which Libby presumably had)cannot possibly be a “leak.”  However, doing so with the intention of facilitating that person’s commission of a felony probably is criminal conspiracy.  Did Cheney tell Libby with the intent that Libby use that information to damage Wilson?  Why else would he have told Libby, who had no legitimate need to know?  Unfortunately, Libby is probably too loyal to testify against Cheney, so we are left with hoping that Cheney lied to the grand jury, so he can at least be indicted for perjury/obstruction/whatever.  And while I suspect Cheney is smart enough to not have opened himself up to an indictment, the possibility can’t be too remote if, as rumored, the administration already has discussed succession if Cheney needs to resign.

  23. I think the discussion of the reasoning behind this whole leak probe is seperable from the legal waiting game we’re playing this week, and it may very well be that we won’t get any resolution on the underlying stovepiping of intelligence and misleading the Congress and the public into the Iraq war this week.

    The Niger forgery story is beginning to take on a new life, and Fitzgerald has reportedly seen and passed on to newly-appointed Deputy AG Paul McNulty (investigating the Larry Franklin/AIPAC espionage scandal) the unredacted report of the Italian Parliament on the forgeries.  La Repubblica (article analyzed by Talking Points Memo – written by Josh Micah Marshall, who wrote the most definitive article on the Niger forgeries in the Washington Monthly more than a year ago) revealed today that the CIA repeatedly rejected the Niger forgeries when offered by Italian intelligence officials, and that it was finally stovepiped around the CIA.  It is possible (even probable?) that Fitzgerald is deferring this investigation to McNulty.

  24. We may be suprised at who actually is the target of indictments. Wilson, the Times reporter or maybe 2 Times reporters. I wouldn’t get your hopes up. You may be very disappointed.

  25. Keep smoking what you’re smoking, Rich Hand – it will ease the pain.

    The Washington Note writes, and Talking Points Memo backs up, a report that 1-5 (leaning towards 5) SEALED indictments will be issued tomorrow and that Fitzgerald will be having a press conference on Thursday.

    If the indictments remain sealed, this likely means the investigation is not over; Fitzgerald can extend the term of this Grand Jury or impanel a new jury (rumor has it a new jury may already be in process and that Fitzgerald has asked a judge to impanel it).  Sealed indictments mean only the targets know of their charges, unless the targets leak the information.  Multiple rumors are also reported from Republican circles today about McCain being asked to replace Cheney “in the event that he has health problems”.

    Having watched the SCO/IBM trial vicariously through Groklaw.net, this slow development of a case is not unexpected, though very painful to endure as a spectator.  And the waiting continues…

  28. Actually, the McCain rumor has floated among a number of people; Ex-CIA analyst Larry Johnson mentioned it on the Ed Schultz show, and said he heard this from Republican Senate sources (Johnson is a Republican and maintains excellent contacts).

  30. The Plame leak was refered to Justice by the CIA because Valerie Wilson was a NOC. If she wasn’t a NOC or a OC, the CIA wouldn’t have referred it to justice.

    BushCO sacrificed our security for gotcha politics.  WHIG manufactured evidence that has cost 2000 of our best their lives and when Wilson started to pull the lid off the Niger forgery and WHIGs manufactered evidence of Saddam’s WMD programs, it was time for payback.  The timeline shows they were working to discredit Wilson weeks before his July 5th column.

    BushCO are traitors. If Republicans were actually Americans instead of rapid homers who fly the elephant higher than the Stars and Stripes, Bush would have already been impeached and these Neocon fascist pigs wouldn be burnt flesh.

    Republicans are the Tories of the 21st century…loyal to the King until the end. 

    I hope Fitzgerald nails these fuckers and we can get back to being the greatest country in the history of man instead of a weak imitation led by a cowboy who’s all hat and no cattle.

  31. Couldn’t have said it better myself, Kenevan! I don’t want to set my expectations too high (Hell, it worked for Laura Bush!), but hopefully the wait to see what Fitzgerald has on this WH cabal will have been worth it. Impeachment as soon as the country takes back the Congress in 2006.

  32. You can’t be serious about impeachment, not even you, Sir Robin.  Unless you think the Dempocrats will capture 2/3 of the Senate in 06, it would be a waste of time comparable to the Clinton fiasco.  I’ve long thought Clinton and Dubya shared one secret power — the power to drive their enemies mad and force them into catastrophic misjudgments.  Let the voters sort it out in 08, when Hillary Clinton squares off against Colin Powell.  Well, I can dream, anyway.

  33. Voyageur,
    You’re right.  The Republicans are too corrupt to actually put the Stars and Stripes ahead of partisan politics and impeach Bush for lying us into a war.  The time of James Baker is 30 years past and all we have left are the new breed of Republicans…neocon fascist pigs.  Support the GOP – the party of traitors. Team America! Fuck yea!

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

35 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!