Waas On How 'Scooter' Misled Federal Prosecutors

[G_j]

TODAY'S DEMOCRACY NOW!:

* Exclusive Interview: Murray Waas On How Dick Cheney's Top Aide 'Scooter'
Libby Misled Federal Prosecutors in the CIA Leak Case *

As speculation grows that Libby and Karl Rove could be indicted, we speak
with Waas on his new expose that Libby never told prosecutors that in June
2003 he spoke with New York Times reporter Judith Miller about CIA operative
Valerie Plame and her husband Ambassador Joseph Wilson, a critic of the Iraq
war. Miller will testify once again today about their conversations.

Listen/Watch/Read
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/10/12/1416219

Murray Waas, investigative journalist who writes for a number of publications. Among them, American Prospect magazine and Salon.com. He has broken a number of stories on the saga of the outing of CIA operative Valerie Plame. He maintains a blog at WhateverAlready.blogspot.com. His latest story is:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RUSH TRANSCRIPT
AMY GOODMAN: Early this morning, I reached Murray Waas on the phone in Washington. He has been the leading investigative reporter covering the story. In this exclusive interview, I asked him to lay out this latest story, quote, headlined, "Libby did not tell grand jury about key conversation." Murray Waas.

MURRAY WAAS: The key thing is that Lewis Libby had three meetings or telephone conversations with Judith Miller during the crucial period of time when senior officials in the Bush administration, Karl Rove and Lewis Libby and others, were engaged in an intensive damage control campaign about Joe Wilson's story, and so Libby had been twice interviewed by the F.B.I. and twice been before the grand jury, and he told them about a meeting that he had with Judith Miller. Then he told them about a subsequent phone conversation, but he totally omitted and didn't tell them on four separate occasions about the earliest of their contacts. And now, Judith Miller, only in recent days, has stumbled upon some old notes, which have disclosed for the first time to the prosecutors in the closing days of their investigation that this earlier contact had taken place.

..more..

[napi21]

1. Don't get too excited about that! He could say he simply forgot.

Remember, to prove purgury, you have to prove the person LIED, not just forgot!

I've been following this story pretty close, and although there's been NOTHING leaked from the prosecutor, it does appear he's checking and cross checking conflicting testimony. IF there was conflicting testimony, and someone said "there was NO conversation" and additional info proved there was, that's one thing. Without something like that, the I forgot story would likely fly.

[FrankBooth]

3. Umm ...

I think that was why Judy, Judy, Judy was in testimony for the last couple of days.


Libby is so fucked.

[Sallow]

5. "Don't get too excited about that! He could say he simply forgot."

Much as I would like to see something happen to Rove and Libby, I would have to agree with this. Rove, at least, is a master of convolution. When asked about this, he simply said he never said the name of Wilson's wife and that he was told by a reporter about her employment at the CIA. Pressed, he couldn't remember the name of the reporter..and really didn't have too. The standard for proving they did something wrong is pretty high as well. The Agent had to have been on foreign assignment in the last five years and the person revealing the name has to have known this. But I think an indictment would be a big victory..

[Carolab]

2. Thanks for this. Goodman and Waas, a good interview. n/t

[G_j]

4. FYI..