I think I may have found evidence that Ari Fleischer committed perjury today. If Ari Fleischer did not commit perjury today, then former Time Magazine reporter John Dickerson is a big-time liar. First I will introduce the principals, then I will provide the setting and significance of this testimony, and, finally, I will set off the comments of Dickerson against the testimony of Fleischer (and I will do it in pretty color-coded boxes).
Most of you will remember Ari Fleischer as President’s Bush’s first press secretary. He served as press secretary from the inauguration in January 2001 until July 14th, 2003 (coincidentally, the same day that Robert Novak’s column appeared). Fleischer testified today that he had lunch with Scooter Libby on July 7th, 2003 (the day after Joseph Wilson made his appearance on Meet the Press and his editorial appeared in the New York Times). During that lunch, Fleischer testified that Libby told him the name ‘Valerie Plame’ and that she was responsible for sending her husband to Niger. Later that same day Fleischer boarded Air Force One and headed to Africa with the President, Condi Rice, Colin Powell, and a host of other officials.
Fleischer testified that four days later (July 11th) while in Uganda, he told reporters David Gregory (NBC), Tamara Lippert (Newsweek) and John Dickerson (Time Magazine) that Wilson’s wife worked at the CIA and was responsible for sending him on the trip.
John Dickerson no longer works for Time. Last I knew, he worked for Slate Magazine as their Chief Political Correspondent. On February 7, 2006 he wrote a column for Slate wherein he revealed that a ‘senior administration official’ had given him a tip: ‘go ask the CIA who sent Wilson’. That senior administration official was Ari Fleischer and they had that conversation in Uganda on July 11th, 2003.
You may have aleady noticed a discrepency in the story Dickerson told and the story Fleischer testified to today. Dickerson said that Fleischer gave him a tip to go ask who sent Wilson. Fleischer said he straight-up told Dickerson (and Gregory and Lippert) that Wilson’s wife was responsible.
This discrepency has enormous potential consquences. Fleischer claims that he did not understand the information Libby was giving him about Plame was classified even though Libby told him it that it was ‘hush-hush and on the Q.T.’ If he didn’t think it was classified then he wouldn’t be worried about off-handedly telling Dickerson about Plame. But, if he didn’t give her name away as he claims, but rather, told the reporters to seek out the ‘low-level person’ in the CIA that was responsible for sending Wilson…then he knew the information was classified.
Fleischer has immunity for the leak of Plame’s name, but he doesn’t have immunity against perjuring himself in this trial. Therefore, he would be crazy to lie on the stand. And, yet, it’s hard to avoid the conclusion that he did exactly that when he testified today. Unless, that is, John Dickerson is a big-fat liar.
and
Accounts of the conversation in Uganda:
Fleischer: President walking toward second event. Meeting with young children who were going to sing songs. A group of reporters on the side of the road.
Was the converation on the record?
Fleischer: One of the many conversations I had with the press, the event was not one I had to be there. You sidle up to reporters and chat what was on their mind. Maybe this will address some of these issues about how people got sent. This backs up WH statement.
On the basic characterization of the talking points:
Fleischer: Allegation WH twisted intelligence. Amb Wilson wrote that a report had been filed. He said Cheney had played a role must be known by VP. I had been told by two WH officials, which I seemed like I should send on. VP wasn’t involved in it. That’s why I made a judgment to say that to the press.
On what Fleischer said about Plame:
As we try to work out the motivations pulling at Ari, we should look at one more piece of his testimony. Here he notes that his information about Plame was not of much interest to the reporters at the time.
Fleischer: Press’s reaction was so what. Didnt’ take out notebook, Didn’t ask any follow-up calls.
Prosecutor: Metaphorically speaking?
Fleischer: Like a lot of things i said to the press it had no impact.
Prosecutor: Did you have a reaction to their lack of reaction?
Fleischer: I try to think of things through the eyes of reporters. I don’t think reporters are going to be particularly interested. There wasn’t much news there. No one really cares who sent him.
Prosecutor: Did you have any hestitation about sharing this?
Fleischer: I never would have thought this was classified. never in my wildest dreams believed this involved, as I’ve read since, this involved a covert officer.
Now, let’s compare this story by Ari to the elaborate explanation Dickerson gave.
At the end of the two conversations I wrote down in my notebook: “look who sent.” It was about 10:30 a.m. in Washington as the event ended. I called the Washington bureau but couldn’t reach anyone (they were all huddled in the morning meeting). What struck me was how hard both officials were working to knock down Wilson. Discrediting your opposition is a standard tactic in Washington, but the Bush team usually played the game differently. At that stage in the first term, Bush aides usually blew off their critics. Or, they continued to assert their set of facts in the hope of overcoming criticism by force of repetition.
We boarded Air Force One about 11 a.m. Washington time and flew to Nigeria. When I got into the press filing center there, I picked my way though dubious local food and checked my e-mail. White House officials had warned us the country was a hot zone of infestation. To avoid parasites we were not only told not to drink the water but not to shower, wash, or brush our teeth with it. We were also advised to bring our own sheets to sleep on. So, eating the locally provided dinner was probably a bad idea. I pushed aside the clumps of stew.
It had been a long week. I was co-writing a long story on the trip for the European edition, filing each day to the Web site and also filing for the domestic cover story on the fallout over the 16 words. Oh, and I also had to file a story on violence in Liberia. My inbox was a mess. In the middle of it was an e-mail from Matt Cooper telling me to call him from a land line when I had some privacy. At some time after 1 p.m. his time, I called him. He told me that he had talked to Karl Rove that morning and that Rove had given him the same Wilson takedown I’d been getting in Uganda. But Matt had the one key fact I didn’t: Rove had said that Wilson’s wife sent him.
So, that explained the wink-wink nudge-nudge I was getting about who sent Wilson. Matt and I agreed to point out in our files to the cover story that White House officials were going so directly after Wilson. We also agreed that I wouldn’t go back to my sources about the wife business. The universe of people who knew this information was undoubtedly small. Mentioning it to other officials would potentially out Rove as Time’s source to his colleagues. Plus, it was Matt’s scoop and his arrangement with Rove. He had a better sense of how to get the information confirmed without violating their agreement.
Now, for my money, Dickerson is spinning a pretty elaborate tale here if the truth is that Ari Fleischer spurted out the information that Wilson’s wife was responsible for the trip. It looks like perjury to me.
Good job, Booman. I think you’re onto something. I hope certain prosecutors are listening. Really good work.
Your post is silly. Ari has everything to lose and nothing to gain by lying. Dickerson has nothing to lose and everything to gain by lying. Why is it not Dickerson who “commits perjury”?
We have the markings of a troll here. Someone who has never commented or rated anyone or posted anything before, followed up an uprating from someone “else” of the same profile. Interesting. Maybe Booman is more right than he knows.
That isn’t trolling. He/she disagrees with you.
Could Fleischer be lying? Yes, of course he could, and I contend he is exceptional at lying.
But the point of Fleischer having much to lose, including freedom, leaves us to ask, ‘Why would he?’
All Ari has done is make the calling of David Gregory to appear, all the more likely.
Your answer is a troll’s defense – “he/she disagrees with you. That’s not trolling.”
I disagree with people here all the time and rarely call anyone a troll. But when someone’s one and only appearance is to come in and defend a Republican, and to have another person jump in behind them, that’s troll behavior.
Does that mean the person IS a troll? Hell if I know. I’m just saying we should judge people by their comments over time, and dismiss the one-shots unless they take the time to make a decent argument, which this poster did not.
So, Lisa, Repubs are not welcome just because they are repubs? While people like you who will not discuss the issues but talk about “trolls” are? You are double silly. AND, on the issues, just see what reactions to Dickerson have been in other progressive forums!
BooMan’s diary has been linked at TPM so new folks are bound to show up. Besides, whenwego has a valid point. If the defense can prove that Ari lied he goes directly to jail and does not collect $200.
in a real world he’d be in deep shit…
in the Hood he’d be dead…
great catch, never would have made that connection.
fitz may yet pull the thread that unravels the whole affair.
keep digging Boo
Lying is his JOB.
If he had been under oath at the press conferences, he would have had to be a mute or he would now be serving 2000 concurrent life sentences.
AG
How can you tell when someoine like Fl;eischer is lying?
1-His lips are moving.
Or
2-The lips of the person whose hand is up his ass are moving.
Bet on it.
I wonder who is going to play the John Dean role in this farce?
AG
why did the lyrics to Jan and Dean’s Deadman’s Curve just pop into my head?
CIA mind control device, no doubt.
AG
Ok.. but why would he say that he had told Dickerson more than he had?
I mean, sure, it looks a lot like perjury, but why???
I think he (Ari) wanted to emphasize the point that he didn’t know she was covert, hence it was no big deal that he mentioned her name.
The crime of perjury requires, among other things, that the prosecutor prove intent (that the false statement was made “knowingly” or “willfully” but not simply as the result of confusion, mistake or faulty memory). That’s actually what part of the Libby trial is about – Fitzgerald must prove intent for the counts related to perjury. That’s why we’re getting testimony about motive.
Why would Fleischer have intentionally lied? In order to have an intelligent discussion about whether Ari Fleischer committed perjury today, we have to have a theory as to why he would have “knowingly” or “willfully” lied.
I can do that but this diary is too long as it is.
We excoriated the right wingers for claiming that Clinton perjured himself without bringing up the problem with proving the element of materiality. We should hold ourselves to the same standard. If you are going to raise the issue of perjury you can’t ignore such a major issue.
I’ll get to it. I’m actually turning over the significance of this and haven’t made up my mind what it means.
As for the standard, he may have lied under oath, but proving perjury requires more than that. I’m aware of how hard it is to prove.
Yet, Dickerson’s story can be corroborated by other witnesses and emails and phone records. Or it can’t.
Why would Dickerson make up a story that others knew was not true?
Don’t know. I just didn’t want you to go down a path without thinking of the key problem with the path.
Now … as long as I’m here … you’re missing a more practical point. Does this mean that Dickerson can be used by the defense to impeach Fleischer’s credibility as a witness? And how would that affect Fitzgerald’s case?
I’d love to debate this with you forever .. but ..
Have fun with it. 🙂
Booman explained the intent here:
But, if he didn’t give her name away as he claims, but rather, told the reporters to seek out the ‘low-level person’ in the CIA that was responsible for sending Wilson…then he knew the information was classified.
He has immunity. Unless he perjures himself.
Good point, I missed that. Guess we’ll have to wait for another diary.
this whole thing is insane.
i am getting weary from the sensation that i am living under a government comprised of of “survivor” contestants.
No one need establish motive or intent to establish a change in a story. Why is immaterial to the fact that his story has changed. Which version is true is important. Why he lied is completely irrelevant to his having lied.
Holy Hannah! Hadn’t noticed that. Nice post. Sorry to say it took Atrios to point it out to me. I get a minor dispensation, though, for having to put my 4 month old down tonight with no help from the woman. Hard to troll the blogs with a small person literally screaming in one’s ear, while alternately frowning and doing the Saint Vitus dance. He’s actually pretty cute though, once he quiets down.
“THE WOMAN??????????????” You make Well’s sound like a feminist in shining armor for calling Plame “the wife.” I am sooooooooooooooo sick of the unnecessary misogyny!
If Ari’s loyalty is to Bush and not to Cheney, throwing all the blame on Scooter while leaving out Rove’s part protects Bush-Rove from prosecution and also gets back at Cheney-Libby for their snotty attitude and independence.
Thus, Ari has two motives for telling an inaccurate story. He keeps Rove (and by extension, Bush) out of the narrative, and he dumps on those bofastofards in the OVP.
I wondered about what might be motives.
Ari could have said more than one thing to Dickerson. E.g.:
Ari: “Check out who sent Wilson on his trip to Niger.”
Journalist: “Why should we care about that?”
Ari: “Because it’s Wilson’s frickin wife, Valerie Plame, who works at CIA.”
So far as I know Dickerson never explicitly said Ari didn’t give him the name.
yeah, he did say that. He said Rove gave Cooper the info on the wife. He didn’t get it from Ari.
I wish…. this could have enormous political consequences to the criminals in the WH.
What seems more likely is that Shrub will retire peacefully to his ranch and long after we are all dead and gone this will make a really good subject for a PhD dissertation.
I’d love to hear what David Gregory has to say about it: whether he was prompted to look into the origins of the trip, or whether he was directly told “If you want to know who sent Ambassador Wilson to Niger, it was his wife, she works there.”
Gregory can either corroborate Fleischer or Dickerson or give a ‘I can’t recall’. I can see the discrepancy between Fleischer’s testimony and Dickerson’s reporting but Dickerson could just be sloppy or dim. His reporting on his own role (from about a year ago and tonight) is filled with references to not being part of the cool group of journalists that are so involved in the case.
Could it be that Dickerson just wasn’t paying attention to Ari or just behind the curve on the entire affair so when Fleishcher name-dropped ‘Wilson’s wife’ it went in one ear and out the other? Gregory can break the tie. If Gregory doesn’t weigh in then I’m inclined to believe Ari Fleischer over Dickerson. Ari is the one with his ass on the line for a perjury charge, not Dickerson who seems to be angling for better cocktail party invites.
Yup – That’s the way it’s lookin’ to me too.
I don’t know what it is about NBC, but none of them want to talk about their involvement, no matter how minimal it is.
Apparently they have their own “We can’t comment on an on-going
investigationtrial” thing goin’ on.I think I’ll side with Ari for now, but I’d be just as happy to be wrong, especially if he’s perjured himself.
The explanation that Dickerson just didn’t pick up on it is very reasonable. The most probable explanation, maybe.
But there’s also a discrepancy between what Fleischer said today and how Fitz described it to Wells back in January 2006:
This accords well with what Dickerson is saying. Dickerson wasn’t on the list, which 5 journalists the government was aware of that knew about Plame before the Novak column, and Gregory wasn’t either.
So it’s all very messy and contradictory.
I’m very interested in whether Gregory will now say anything about it.
At this point, his sitting silent on what he knows or doesn’t know would be taking protection of the cocktail weenies to an amazing degree.
Dickerson has already written about this:
And on the credibility of Dickerson, Media Matters weighs in on an Al Franken Show where Dickerson was the guest:
I only read these both briefly, and don’t have any opinion yet, except to say that Dickerson sounds to me like a whiny baby, and is dying to be included in the trial, but not as a bystander. Just a feeling I get.
OTOH, if he’s telling the truth (or lying for that matter), the only way we can know for sure is for Fitz or Well to put David Gregory on the stand.
It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
Wait a minute. The accounts of today’s testimony I’ve read all indicate that Libby told Fleischer over lunch that Wilson’s wife worked at the CIA in counterproliferation. I thought we had established that within the beltway it is universally understood that EVERYBODY working counterproliferation is classified.
Why, especially given immunity, would Ari claim to have given more information than it appears he actually gave in that initial leak? Because he is desperate to be seen – for posterity, by his children, who knows? – as an unwitting participant in the whole sordid mess. Only by asserting that he blabbed unchecked at the first opportunity can he get away with the most un-Ari-like declaration that he “never in my wildest dreams thought this information would be classified.”
From Tuesday’s Washington Post “Fleischer, testifying under an immunity agreement with the prosecution, also made it clear that Libby had told him Wilson’s wife held a position in the CIA’s counterproliferation division, where most employees work in a covert capacity.”
More info is needed to flesh this out — what will the other reporters say who listened to Ari by the roadside in Africa?
But even though immunized, Ari may be fibbing. His vanity may have motivated him from day one to deny any awareness of classification of the status of Wilson’s wife and therefore explain why he talked about it at all. He had two choices — admit he knew she was classified and blabbed about her anyway, or admit he knew nothing of her status and blabbed freely. His ego may have caused him to commit to a story early in which he blabbed more freely because he allegedly did not know of covert status. Why fib if immunized — because he still does not want to look like a dick. Plus you have to realize how people reconstruct memory of things (I am a trial lawyer) — they want to remember in a way that denies that they were stupid louts who did not care about proper security.
I also recall that part of the story was that a briefing book (for Powell?) was on Air Force One that had the info about Plame and clearly showed it as classified (this was not brought out in Ari’s testimony). Allegedly, this info was viewed by many during the flight. This suggests to me that Ari may have actually known of the classified nature of it, and yet participated in the whispering campaign to use the nepotism claim to smear Wilson.
Also, according to Ari’s story, he was told by Libby that it was “hush, hush and on the QT” and then he turns around and blabs it to Dickerson, et al. I don’t know which is more ridiculous — that Libby actually said this or that Ari claims it. Maybe Libby did more than this and actually indicated to Ari that she was classified, but that they nonetheless talked about how to get the dirt out? In any event, what made Ari think he could be so free about it later with Dickerson even if only “QT protected”?
Even though immunized, Ari still has the motivation to tell the story in a way most flattering to him. In fact, people have a weird way of remembering bullshit because they want to remember it that way, and they are not necessarily “lying” in the deliberately false sort of way — more like creatively re-remembering it.
To add another point — the news stories claim Ari freaked when he read about the criminal investigation. At that time, he is now in the private sphere and must be aware of his increased vulnerability to being a fall guy (as a fellow snakee, he knew with whom he was dealing on this). His level of fear makes more sense if he knew he was a little dirty on this — i.e., knew he had knowledge of covert status but got involved in the whispering campaign. Plus what is going to happen to his private business if he admits to being such a stupid shit?
Dickerson’s story that only Cooper got the whole leak from Rove (i.e., exactly who allegedly sent Wilson) just makes so much more sense.
None of this helps Libby, as I don’t see Ari inventing the Libby luncheon, though I suspect Libby said a lot more than “it’s hush hush and on the QT.”
Great Diary Booman. I have been very busy but I had to come take a look at this. I think I will be hanging out at the pond here while this trial is going on. I am loving every second of it.
This kind of detailed comparison is what was previously called “journalism”.
And now it is called “why we get our news from blogs.”
so now i am REALLY confused. ari says he told plame’s name, dickerson says he didn’t. huh? and if cooper says he got plame’s name from rove, where does armitage enter into all of this? help! i’m lost in the seas of deceit.