Until the start of the Libby trial, most folks and chroniclers assumed that the Nick Kristof piece in May of 2003 spurred the White House to go after Joe and Valerie Wilson. But based on the timeline emerging from the Libby trial the real culprit is Walter Pincus, the legendary warhorse reporter at the Washington Post, whose work on an article that appeared on June 12, 2003 set in motion the events that eventually produced the “outing” of Valerie Plame, the wife of Ambassdor Joe Wilson and an undercover CIA officer.
The Nick Kristof piece was the first major shot across the bow of the Administration on its fabricated case for going to war, but did not generate the reaction that the Pincus piece garnered. Kristoff–whose piece only devoted two paragraphs to Joe Wilson’s story–wrote:
I’m told by a person involved in the Niger caper that more than a year ago the vice president’s office asked for an investigation of the uranium deal, so a former U.S. ambassador to Africa was dispatched to Niger. In February 2002, according to someone present at the meetings, that envoy reported to the C.I.A. and State Department that the information was unequivocally wrong and that the documents had been forged.
The envoy reported, for example, that a Niger minister whose signature was on one of the documents had in fact been out of office for more than a decade. In addition, the Niger mining program was structured so that the uranium diversion had been impossible. The envoy’s debunking of the forgery was passed around the administration and seemed to be accepted — except that President Bush and the State Department kept citing it anyway. “It’s disingenuous for the State Department people to say they were bamboozled because they knew about this for a year,” one insider said.
Kristof mistakenly asserted that Joe Wilson claimed his trip proved the documents were a forgery. Kristof subsequently sent an email to Joe Wilson saying:
i remember you saying that you had not seen the documents. my recollection is that at we had some information about the documents at that time – e.g. the names of people in them – but i do clearly remember you saying that you had not been shown them.
While the Kristof article stirred some interest at the White House, it did not start the five alarm fire. That “honor” belongs to Walter Pincus.
Pincus started working in late May 2003 on an article about what the
CIA did (or did not) tell the White House about Iraq’s efforts to get
uranium from Niger. His inquiries in turn inspired a series of efforts
on the part of Dick Cheney and Scooter Libby that led to the unmaksing
of Valerie Plame. Walter did not do anything wrong; he just did his
reporter’s job. But his questioning was the proverbial stone in the
shoe for the Office of the Vice President.
The Walter Pincus piece appeared
on 12 June 2003. But articles like this just don’t materialize
overnight. They usually start a week or two in advance. Thanks to the
trial of Scooter Libby we can fill in the blanks on the timeline of
Pincus’ work. The first witnesses called–Marc Grossman, Robert Grenier, and Cathie Martin–each provided critical testimony about events covering the period 29 May 2003 to 12 June 2003. Let’s look at the specifics.
29 May 2003. Pincus apparently started working on the piece around 29 May 2003. How do we know? According to Marc Grossman, a senior State Department official who testified in the first week of the Libby trial, Libby pulled him aside after a meeting on that date and asked him what he knew about a Joe Wilson and his trip to Niger.
Grossman told Libby this was the first he had heard of the issue and said he would check with others at the State Department. First he spoke with Deputy Secretary of State Rich Armitage, who claimed ignorance of the matter, and then he emailed the head of the Bureau of Intelligence and Research, Carl Ford, and the Assistant Secretary for African Affairs (Kansteiner). Ford and Kansteiner reported back, “yes we knew about it” and provided a summary of the events. Armed with this information Grossman called Libby, summarized his findings, and promised to get him more information when he returned from an overseas trip.
9 June 2003. The pace of events accelerated and the CIA faxed two documents to the White House: a memo on the Niger affair (which had originally been prepared for the House Intelligence Committee on April 3, 2003) and a report on the forged documents. Both were accompanied by a cover sheet stipulating that the attached document should be urgently passed “A.S.A.P.” to Mr. Hannah and Mr. Libby in the Vice President’s office. Someone in Cheney’s office had called the CIA and requested a copy of the memo. (We do not know how they learned of this.) The memo lays out in detail the chronology of what the intelligence community knew (and did not know) about Iraq’s alleged efforts to acquire yellowcake. The memo makes it very clear that the intelligence community doubted the claims early on in 2002 and referenced the intelligence report generated by Ambassador Wilson’s trip.
11 June 2003. The level of panic in the Vice President’s Office was rising. Around mid-day, the State Deparment’s Marc Grossman gave Scooter Libby a copy of the State Department INR memo on the Joe Wilson trip, including the news about Valerie’s alleged role in the mission. According to testimony by CIA officer Robert Grenier, Scooter Libby made an unprecedented call to Grenier and asked him to verify CIA’s role in sending Wilson to Niger. Grenier contacted an official in the Counter Proliferation Division and confirmed the details, including the fact that Valerie Wilson worked in the Division. Grenier was called out of a meeting with CIA Director Tenet late in the afternoon by another desperate Libby phone call. Libby, clearly aware that Pincus’ article would hit the streets the next day, pressed the CIA to go on the record that the CIA, not the Vice President, sent Libby. Grenier pulled CIA spokesman Bill Harlow from the same meeting and put him on the phone with Libby. In the end, Harlow ended up speaking with Cathie Martin, the Vice President’s person in charge of press affairs.
12 June 2003. The Walter Pincus article hit the streets. White House sources tried, even in June, to pin the blame on the CIA for the flap over Iraq’s alleged efforts to get uranium from Niger. Someone in the Vice President’s office, masquerading as a “Senior Intelligence Official” accused the CIA of sloppiness and incompetence and insisted that:
The CIA did not pass on the detailed results of its investigation to the White House or
other government agencies, the officials said.
The official went on to minimize the importance of Joe Wilson’s trip, claiming that:
“This gent made a visit to the region and chatted up his friends,” a senior intelligence official said, describing the agency’s view of the mission. “He relayed back to us that they said it was not true and that he believed them.”
The White House officials, however, did not tell Pincus about the memos they had received from both CIA and INR, which painted a much different picture of the events leading up to the President’s January 2003 State of the Union address.
Pincus’s inquiry to the CIA revealed a different picture of the events and clearly signaled that the Agency was not going to be a willing scapegoat. Pincus reported that one senior CIA analyst accused the White House of cherry picking intelligence. The CIA analyst said:
the case “is indicative of larger problems” involving the handling of intelligence about Iraq’s alleged chemical, biological and nuclear weapons programs and its links to al Qaeda, which the administration cited as justification for war. “Information not consistent with the administration agenda was discarded and information that was [consistent] was not seriously scrutinized.
If you search the web for Plamegate Timelines you will find many references to the Kristof article and few mentions of the Pincus article. And where Pincus is mentioned it is usually as an afterthought. Two weeks into the Libby trial it is now apparent that the Timelines should be revised and updated. It was Walter Pincus, not Nicholas Kristof, who got under the skin of the Vice President and his staff. And it was his questions that started Cheney’s office on its mission to discredit Joe Wilson. As Karl Rove later told Chris Matthews, Joe Wilson’s wife was fair game. June 2003 marked the start of the intense effort to out Valerie Plame, which culminated in the leaks in July 2003 to Robert Novak, Matt Cooper, and others.
Just another reminder of the power of the press when a competent reporter tries to do his job rather than curry favor for an invitation to the White House Christmas Party.
Well, there’s another side here.
He’s not just a “competent reporter.” He’s also the CIA’s guy at the Post.
So one could argue he was simply serving his employer, as he had for years, to protect their flank.
I’m no fan of Pincus. His slandering of Gary Webb is just one small instance in a litany of journalistic contortions he’s taken over the years to protect the Agency. And no surprise there. He wrote an article in 1967 that ran with the bold headline, “How I Traveled Abroad on CIA Subsidy,” an article I sent to Gary Webb, who then sent it to some other sources so he wouldn’t have to be the one to remind people of how Pincus had already proclaimed his loyalties long ago.
(That article had been sitting, unfiled, on my desk for a year at the time. I knew there’d be some perfect opportunity for it. When Pincus was the opening salvo in the CIA’s war against Gary Webb’s stories of their Contra-Cocaine dealings, I figured it was time to set the cat free.)
I’m furious at the outing of Plame. But I’m not about to laud Pincus for doing whatever the CIA wants him to do, be it a paid or unpaid assignment.
You’ve got to be kidding. Do you believe in mind control? And how exactly is this Pincus covering for the CIA? You discredit someone because of prior association? Guess that means Ray McGovern and Mel Goodman and Valerie Plame should not be believed either.
Come back to planet eart Lisa. The Bush Administration cooked the intel books on the case for war in Iraq. Some unnamed but courageous CIA officers tried to warn the public, as one did in this piece, and you focus on Gary Webb? I don’t get it. Must be my four years at CIA addled my brains.
Must be, Larry.
Seriously – I don’t have the time to detail how Pincus has shilled for the CIA over the years. The Webb one was so bald it sticks out easily in memory. But there were other instances.
Come back to planet earth yourself, Larry. The CIA is not all wine and roses.
And fortunately – this page lays out Pincus’s background in bright detail:
See the original for links to more info. And it should be noted that journalists who serve the CIA have often been awarded Pulitzer Prize winning scoops. For example, Hal Hendrix:
So now Pincus is serving the Agency in a good way. Fine. But that doesn’t mean we should laud him (unless the person lauding is CIA, such as you, in which case it’s totally understandable), or forget his transgressions against the truth in defense of the Agency.
Do you think Judith Miller and Robert Novak should have been held in contempt for not revealing their sources re the Plame episode?
As usual Lisa, you add a fuller perspective to a story. Since the CIA already knew they were being set up by OVP & Condi, do you think they used Pincus as some sort of a messenger for pre-emptive pushback? As much as I like Kristoff, Pincus brings the old war horse weight to the story, similar to Murtha’s arrival at the Iraq debate and Pincus’ story would certainly cause pause if not give the Niger story legs.
I’m not sure how his story gave the Niger story legs – but I’m awfully tired tonight.
Do I think the CIA set Pincus on this story? I think they didn’t have to. After years of being a trained monkey you don’t have to wait for orders.
One other thing to consider is that the White House and parts of the CIA were very much at odds during this whole period. Whether Pincus was acting in concert with the CIA or not in this instance, the thought that he might be certainly would have occurred to the White House, and that might have been enough to cause them to react strongly to the Pincus article. They could well have construed it as a shot across their bow from the CIA. Pincus was also one of the few journalists who cast doubt on Saddam’s possession of WMD before the war so the White House could have been looking at all these stories as part of a larger mosaic that had its roots at Langley.