Let’s say Raw Story is correct and Stephen Hadley was Woodward’s source. It won’t surprise the BooTrib columnists. Way back on October 18th Larry Johnson sent me an email:
LJ
But, of course, Hadley wasn’t indicted, and neither were Rove, Cheney, or Mary Matalin. But, if Larry’s source was right, Hadley expected to be indicted. So, what might have happened?
October 28th came, Libby was indicted and Hadley was left hanging. Less than a week later he was telling Fitzgerald about a conversation that he had with Bob Woodward. That sounds like enough time for Hadley’s lawyers to take stock, look at the solid case against Libby, send out some feelers to Fitz, and negotiate terms to lessen Hadley’s legal exposure. But, merely revealing a conversation with Woodward would not have been particularly enticing to Fitzgerald. How does it advance his investigation? More likely, Hadley agreed to divulge a bunch of information of which the conversation with Woodward was only a small part.
The first thing to consider is this:
Hadley was admitting to a potential crime. Depending on Hadley’s understanding of Valerie Wilson’s covert status at the time he talked to Woodward, he could be guilty of violating the Intelligence Identities Act. Before he offered up this information he would have sought assurances that he would not be charged with that crime. He also probably sought to avoid charges of perjury, false statements, and obstruction of justice. Woodward has been signaling for months that, if he was ever called to testify, he would be a friendly witness. So, Hadley felt comfortable that Woodward would back up his story that he didn’t know Mrs. Wilson was a covert officer. And Fitz knew he was facing a daunting challenge in proving otherwise.
So, if Hadley is the source it appears that he cut a deal. The deal might entail pleading to a minor charge and possibly avoiding jail time. Or, it might entail providing extensive testimony in exchange for immunity, or minor charges. But, just using common sense, it seems unlikely that Fitz would make a deal without getting indictable intelligence about higher ups. And since Hadley is the National Security Adviser, it doesn’t go much higher.
In conclusion, it makes perfect sense that Hadley was the leaker. And if we was, things are about to get real ugly in the White House.
Some other things to remember about Hadley:
Hadley took the blame for the 16 words in the State of the Union speech. George Tenet told him to take those words out of a speech in Cincinnati in 2002. The CIA sent Hadley at least two warnings about the veracity of the Niger documents, which he claimed to have failed to pass on his boss, Condi Rice. He offered to resign.
And it was an email from Karl Rove to Hadley that exposed Rove’s conversation with Time reporter, Michael Cooper. It was Hadley that met with the head of SISMI, the Italian intelligence agency:
So, Hadley is up to his neck in this mess.
What is Fitz waiting for? If he has Hadley, what is the other shoe? Cheney? Did he think he would get anything out of Woodward? Why didn’t Woodward talk to Fitz before Hadley. True he was protecting sources, but he had information beyond those sources. Why isn’t Woodward getting slapped with withholding evidence?
to my knowledge, Woodward was never called to the GJ or made to talk to the FBI. He kept his involvement secret and made sure the WAPO reporters kept it quiet. He was outed by the source he sought to protect. Ironic, isn’t it?
A few comments about Bob Woodward.
A lot of people seem to want to make Woodward into some sort of hero because of his Watergate stories. Let’s be clear: Woodward is a rich kid who attended Yale, interned for a Republican Congressman, and got a job with the Washington Post when his credentials did not merit such a position.
He was teamed with Carl Bernstein because his experience did not lend itself to covering such a story. In the end, his contacts with Deep Throat occured not because he was a great reporter, but because of a chance contact.
I say all this so people will stop thinking of Woodward as someone who wants to write about the abuses of power, or about how the elites screw the little guy — Woodward doesn’t give a shit about the little guy.
Woodward has covered for the Bush administration since his first contacts with them. His first book was nothing more than a glossing over of the extreme incompetence he witnessed. In the end he said nothing, he admitted to seeing nothing, and he wrote even less.
Thank you for this historical insight. As someone who was a teenager during Watergate, I was one of those folks who had Woodward on a pedistle and wondered how he was “turned to the dark side.” Your bits of background information paint a picture of a young ambitious reporter who was in the right place at the right time and rode a story to a successful career not out of hatred of Nixon so much as out of self-interest. It explains the current Woodward very logically.
Woodward was at Yale, then Naval Intelligence, then a career with Katerine Graham’s CIA front company, the Washington Post.
Katherine admitted she was on the CIA payroll. Her husband was with OSS and the Agency from the start.
Woodward has always carried water for the CIA. They were delighted to take down that Quaker Socialist Nixon, putting things like OSHA, EPA, FDA, Clean Water, Clean Air and then visiting China, and promising to get us out of Vietnam. That commie had to go.
What did Ben Bradlee say? How it bugged him no end that people thought of the Post as a liberal bastion.
Never was. Never will be anything but the house organ of the overclass.
I agree with your speculation BooMan, although I would add that Hadley probably was indicted on October 28th (just under seal), and Fitz was sending him a message in his press conference with his “we know that Libby was the first one to leak Valerie Wilson’s name to the press.” Hadley testified before the GJ, and I imagine that his testimony included something along the lines of “I discussed Wilson’s wife and her CIA status with Scooter, but I never talked to anyone in the press about it. As far as I know, Scooter was the first one to leak to the press.”
So, I think Fitz already had him on perjury (I don’t know exactly what evidence he might have had, maybe Rove said something in his 11th hour negotiation). So Hadley flips. Hadley was expecting to be indicted anyway. He coughs up Woodward (and obviously a lot more to avoid indictment, or maybe Woodward told Fitz an even bigger bombshell).
So here’s my question: Why is he still NSA? If Bush (or Cheney) knew he had legal exposure, and guessed that he would be likely to flip, why didn’t they get rid of him (I’m not suggesting having him “disappeared” but at least a forced resignation)? I don’t see him being a loyal soldier here, unless he’s leading Fitz on a wild goose chase. Or Condi’s somehow protecting him. Cause I bet he’s got the goods on Dick.
Keep your friends close and your (potential) enemies even closer.
Honestly? I don’t know why Hadley is still at the WH. One of the things that makes me think this scandal is just unmanagable is the irrational ways the administration is reacting to it.
Why did Libby turn over notes and then testify in direct contradiction to them? Why didn’t Libby resign after the election to protect the administration? Why did they come out with useless talking points that help no one and no one can take seriously anymore?
The bottom line is that Fitz cracked their cover-up. And they have no excuses from the President on down. I think they are just out of options.
Just one person’s opinion, but haven’t you noticed? No one is fired from the WH for loyalty. It’s the hallmark of a true-believer, a trait W, by virtue of his own blind faith that he is god’s instrument on Earth, most admires. Hadley is a hard-liner and has already proven his faith by falling on his sword for the Prez over the infamous State of the Union speech.
In a related vein, it occurs to me that the WH’s — and Hadley’s — assertion that Yellowcake/WMDgate was just bad intelligence doesn’t ring true. Keep in mind that the American intelligence community is not shabby in spite of its highly publicized failures and faux pas; it’s managed to manipulate foreign and domestic behavior in the way desired by the administration it serves.
So, saying the intelligence was, on this one, just wrong is. . .just wrong. L’affaire Niger yellowcake is definitely the explosion of a conspiracy to manipulate and manufacture false intelligence by the WH to produce domestic behavior it desired.
And it worked, until Mr. Wilson went to Washington and said the yellowcake has no clothes.
I’m not sure he can easily let anyone go. I’m sure they think that once one person goes the rest will follow…and how is it going to look to the country if the WH starts hemmoraging staff? You can be sure that once one person leaves people will start to sniff Bush’s defeat on the air and come howling for more.
I’m sure that’s how the Bushies see it, anyway. A bit like Bush’s own personal ‘domino theory.’
… just because i couldn’t resist….. Hadley’s had it… or Hadley’s hadlIt?
Since IANAL my question is: does it have to be proven that a crime was committed before conspracy charges can be brought?
It is a crime to conspire to commit a crime that may or may not eventually take place. Overt acts in furtherance of the conspiracy need to be proved for conviction.
, , , Fitz would make a deal without getting indictable intelligence about higher ups
Fitzgerald seems to be drilling to the truth, whatever that truth may be, and wherever, and with whoever that truth may be found. If I was “prosecutor for a day” I would be pushing the CIA to release an unclassified/redacted damage report.
Ain’t gonna happen with Goss in charge.
Connecting the dots, Hadley makes perfect sense, but there has got to be more to this than Woodward is admitting to. His career must be flashing before his eyes just about now.
Another reason to take this seriously is that Raw Story seems to be building up a pretty good track record for getting it right.
I am truly convinced that this whole Woodward thing is more smoke and mirrors. Why would Hadley of all people go to Fitz and tell him about Woodward. That would just make Hadley complicit in the whole thing. I think they are trying to convince Fitz that Libby wasn’t the first to out Valerie to reporters and that way they go back to saying all the reporters knew of her CIA identity. Oh the tangled webs they weave. This is getting way too complex. Follow the money and that all leads to Cheney.
Hadley was ‘invited’ by Fitz.
Two points Leezy.
First, while there is some room to spin this as minimizing Libby’s ‘central’ role, it does absolutely nothing to exonerate of the charges he is facing. Nothing. He lied rather extensively and elaborately, and Fitz has the proof. The most that can be said for Libby is that this might protect him getting even more serious indictments.
So, while Libby’s lawyers celebrated it is just for show and to maybe have some minimal effect on a potential jury pool.
Second, this is terrible news for the administration because it means firing Libby did not get rid of the malignancy. This confirms yet another leaker, and it opens up huge swaths of possibilities for bring more perjury and obstruction charges against who knows how many people.
So, the administration did not leak this as a strategy. This kills them.
This has got to be someone who was facing imminent indictment who decided to make the best deal for themselves. Correcting the record? Indeed.
I don’t think Fitz knew about this leak to Woodward or he would have called Woodward in to testify. Fitz just discovered this. And it doesn’t do a damn thing for the administration except expand the conspiracy and the potential pool of indictees.
giving up Hadley? I think this info is being given to Fitz through Rove to keep him off the hook. Unless the noose is tighening on Cheney and Libby and Hadley are trying to stop Fitz from ever getting to Cheney. I think Rove is behind everything and pulling all the strings. He will do everything in his power to keep GW and Himself safe in all this. They are one in the same. They have been together, I believe, for 32 years. Rove will do anything he can to bring down everyone but Himself and Georgie. That’s my take.
Rove/Bush canNOT be thinking that he will survive all this. Even Nixon thought that s*t and look where it got him.
Fitz is playing big time poker. But he’s got the cards.
It is just all so freaken confusing. Thanks for your points. Well taken. So who is it then? Who left Woodward out to dry because he has lost all credibility now hasn’t he?
Everyone is acting as if, because we are just hearing about this new SAO, that Fitz is hearing about it for the first time too. I don’t buy that, especially if it is Steven Hadley. Think about it–there are only a handful of SAOs and it would shock me if Fitz missed interviewing any of them over the last two years. So why didn’t this come out earlier? Is this a “correction” to earlier testimony?
My bet would be that Fitz is way ahead of the rest of us on this.
This is very nice analysis, better than most of what I’ve been reading today. Thanks.
By the way, I have thought that the great Bob Woodward was a stooge and a tool for MORE than five years–I thought he was insufferable during the great right wing conspiracy against Bill Clinton. It really does my heart good to see him Judyized. Even Howard Kurtz, who is usually a similar, self-serving, self-referential, inside the Beltway, nothing matters if it is outside Bethesda, Maryland tool–even Howie blasted Woodward in today’s Post. Great reading. I want to see Woodward go to jail.
Never forget, however, that the Post has some really great reporters, such as Pincus or Dana Priest.
Great reporters who listen when Woodward says “keep me out of this.”
Don’t get me wrong. Pincus is a great reporter. Maybe the best in the nation. But, he still agreed to cover this story knowing Woodward had been fed some early dirt and saying nothing.
Great reporters who listen when Woodward says “keep me out of this.”
This is the one thing that pisses me off the most. Now we have to wonder just how many reporters, editors, and so on, are really involved in all of this.
We already know that too many have completely failed us. Your “Bay of Pigs” piece was bang on.
Now I have that awful Barry Manilowmangle of Chopin’s prelude in C minor running through my head.
Bob, Bob,
Could it be Hadley?
Is that who na-amed Plame, at last?
.
Left bloggers in USA driving on wrong side of road in Europe …
Wed Nov 16th, 2005 at 11:07:41 PM PDT
The initial discussion throughout the American press, picked up by some on this website, was that someone, specifically Scooter Libby had “outed” Valerie Plame who was an undercover agent. After discussion and research, Jerome and I agreed that Valerie was not an undercover agent, and that discussion was posted earlier. Note the charge against Libby was not the he “outed an undercover agent”.
Libby was then charged by Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald of 5 counts, ranging from revealing confidential information, to obstruction of justice and perjury. It’s a joke in Washington that it was confidential information that Valerie Plame worked for the CIA, and that she was an undercover agent …
Hmmm … just ignore or more fitting for a reply?
“Treason doth never prosper: what’s the reason?
For if it prosper, none dare call it treason.”
▼ ▼ ▼ MY DIARY
Where there is smoke there is usually fire. Not that Hadley is not a likely candidate. But if Libby can be called a “former hill staffer” I think bush would qualify as a “SAO”…
Okay, let’s think about this.
If Bush told Woodward about Wilson’s wife and then the administration launched a smear campaign against Wilson, outed his wife, Bush promised to get to the bottom of it…etc. then why would Bush come forward and tell Fitz now? It would end his presidency. Bush can’t be indicted, and he still can jettison Cheney if he has to.
I can see no circumstances under which the source is Bush.
The only way it could be Cheney is if he is doing it to try to save Libby, which would be the honorable thing to do. First he calls Dubya and asks about a pardon. Bush tells him to fuck off. Then Cheney decides to try to cut a deal to keep Scooter out of jail. I think this is extremely extremely unlikely. But it is at least within the realm of the possible.
Not so for Bush being the source.
Rove is already in trouble. Since then PFitz has had Ralston on the stand. What did she reveal, and why has PFitz been in contact with bush’s lawyers since?
There is plenty of reason to believe this is possible. The fact that Ralston faces the inquisition then Bushies lawyers are talking to PFitz, and then the man that has been doing ongoing interviews with bush(one of the few reporters on earth that has had decent access to the preznit) announces that he has had to testify.
I am not saying it is the only possibility, but it is just as strong a possibility as any other “conspiracy theory”.
Bush may have had his hand forced by further testimony of others. Same can be said of Cheney. Hadley was already toast. Hadley even admitted he was toast (according to our superb sources!) I honestly don’t think Woodward was refering to him.
Woodward ain’t a complete idiot. If he were trying to cover for the White House wouldn’t he have served this effort better by saying a “senior NSC staffer” (or whatever department Hadley or “other is in) instead of throwing this at the administrations feet with his “SAO” statement?
No, I think I stand on some logical ground here. Just as logical as any other reasoning. It is a strong possiblity.
Yeah, but my thinking all this while has been that Cheney would handle the smear, since his bunch are enforcers, but that Bush knew (with Rove assisting) and would be apprised.