In this ingenious scenario, Tenet could have told top-security-clearance Cheney that Wilson's wife recommended Wilson for the Niger inquiry BUT [in the readers words] (cough,cough) FAILED TO MENTION she was a clandestine N.O.C. working for the operations' side (not the public CIA analytical side). In the readers words, Did Tenet anticipate that Cheney couldn't resist using this [item] in a black op to hatchet a critic?
No proof that thats what happened, of course, but what a reckoning: No wonder when Powell showed Bush and Cheney (only) the INR memo with Plame's info marked SECRET NFE, Cheney (to quote Powell) zeroed in on it! At that fateful moment on AF1 (ironically over Africa), Cheney knew he had swallowed Tenet's poison pill and his kill the messenger plan, being implemented by Scooter, was outing a secret clandestine CIA operative . . . Surprise, surprise!
Furthermore: as the public knows, following Novaks columns outing a CIA NOC & her front company, it was Tenet himself who carefully reviewed the facts and insisted that the DOJ investigate this "treasonous act." http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/24/politics/24cnd-leak.html?pagewanted=print
Many questions arise from the text of Bob Woodwards guarded but revealing statement (Testifying in the CIA Leak Case, Washington Post Nov.16, 2005). Emailed and telephoned messages for Woodward at the paper have not been answered. Here are some questions that come to mind:
When Mrs. Wilson was mentioned, was the CIA front co. Brewster-Jennings mentioned as well? Was Brewster-Jennings mentioned by any administration officials in the same period?
Who was the administration official who first told Woodward about Mrs. Wilson?
Now that that official has gone to the prosecutor himself, why is (only) the public not allowed to know his name? Is that secrecy to protect material for Woodwards upcoming book on Bushs second term?
The pertinent interview is said to have taken place in mid-June 2003. What was the date? Could the conversation have been provoked by the June 14, 2003, conference on the Iraq war held at the Capitol, where Wilson gave the keynote speech? Could it have been in response to Wilsons saying, at that conference, that he was about to go public with his Niger information?
Was the interview on the phone or in person?
Who initiated the interview, the reporter or the unnamed official?
In retrospect, doesnt it seem odd that more than one government official mentioned that Wilsons wife was a CIA analyst, and also referred to her only as Wilsons wife rather than by name? Don't those mentions, alike in style as in substance, seem concerted, especially in light of later excuses that we didnt use her name?
Did this official also drop the impression that Wilsons Niger trip had been arranged by Mrs. Wilson? Why doesnt Woodwards statement clarify that point, either way?
Was any documentation provided with the information, by the unnamed administration official?
Woodwards statement says that the reference seemed casual and offhand. An administration official dropped an item about a CIA analyst to Bob Woodward, who has maintained contacts in the CIA for years and has written a book about the CIA, and he took the reference to be casual and offhand? why?
The statement says Woodward then told Washington Post reporter Walter Pincus about the item. How soon after? Was it before July 13? In other words, was Woodward rather than Novak the first media person to transmit this item?
Bob Woodward, who has been criticized widely for years for being in bed with the CIA, and who is also management at the Post, idly dropped this item about a CIA analyst to one of his reporters? why?
Did Woodward also pass along the item about Brewster-Jennings?
Did he imply or express to Pincus that Mrs. Wilson arranged the trip?
The statement makes clear that Woodward had at least four conversations pertinent to the Plame inquiry, with at least three administration officials. Who initiated these interviews? Were they all recorded, and in their entirety?
According to the statement, Though neither Wilson nor Wilsons wifes name had surfaced publicly at this point, Pincus had published a story the day before, Sunday, June 22, about the Iraq intelligence before the war. I testified that I had read the story, which referred to the CIA mission by a former senior American diplomat to visit Niger. Although his name was not used in the story, I knew that referred to Wilson. How? From the unnamed official, or from elsewhere?
According to the statement, I also testified that I had a conversation with a third person on June 23, 2003. The person was I. Lewis Scooter Libby, and we talked on the phone. Was this in response to the Pincus article the day before?
According to the statement, I testified that on June 27, 2003, I met with Libby at 5:10 p.m. in his office adjacent to the White House . . . Libby discussed the October 2002 [NIE] on Iraqs alleged weapons of mass destruction, mentioned yellowcakeand said there was an effort by the Iraqis to get it from Africa. It goes back to February 02. This was the time of Wilsons trip to Niger. What does this item from Woodwards notes mean? Was it being suggested that the purported attempt to buy yellowcake came from Wilsons trip, rather than the other way around?
As has been pointed out by other writers, many of the same questions arise for Woodward as arose for Judith Miller at the NYTimes. Since the story here is obviously that the administration went gunning for Wilson, why didnt Woodward report that? (Time magazine suggested on July 18 that the administration had declared war against Wilson.)
Since Woodward was not writing on this story, how is an official who planted items with him a source? Woodwards statement does not assert that he in any way solicited information about Mrs. Wilson in these conversations; quite the contrary. Is Woodward claiming blanket confidentiality for all items he hears, whether in journalistic context or not? Wouldnt that be rather like a priests claiming the confidentiality of the confessional if someone revealed a crime to him while he was sitting at a bus stop?
Obviously it cannot be stated with certainty what difference it would have made, had Woodward published an item at that time, that an administration official had told him about Wilsons wife working for the CIA. We could already see that the White House was attacking its critics, although this would have been a particularly pointed example.
For what it is worth, I have read Woodwards book Plan of Attack, and no senior government official in it comes off as casual or offhand. But then, the book does not include June or July of 2003.