Joseph Wilson

Day by day, witness by witness, exhibit by exhibit, Patrick Fitzgerald, the prosecutor in the trial  read more »

At long last, the fog of mystification generated by the Bush administration and the Washington media  read more »

Hours after I.  read more »

Something popped out of yesterday's Times report on the Libby-Cheney leak investigation: the name Joseph C. Wilson IV.

I thought the ambassador's name was Joe Wilson, or as his book, The Politics of Truth, is bylined, Joseph Wilson. I was curious about who all the other Joseph C. Wilsons were and I leafed through the book. Nothing. He says his mother's family was a big political family in California, but only says that his parents were "expatriate journalists and authors," though his father also "had a couple of jobs bringing American products to European customers, but the enterprises didn't work out." That's not very forthcoming. I have the strong sense that Wilson, former ski bum and diplomat, is a rich kid.

Yes, he was right about Niger, and we can hope this case brings Karl Rove and Dick Cheney down—but what sort of packaging is going on? Could the truthteller have a little more plain dealing about his own background?

Whatever indictments may or may not have issued from the grand jury sitting in Washington by the pub  read more »

In honor of Salon's new women-only blog, The Broadsheet, where the ladies of Salon are speed-posting Rita Dove poems, meditations about Kotex advertisements, and a shocking new theory that the White House's smear of Joseph Wilson was intended to be emasculating, the New York Observer was also thinking of getting its very own women's blog! (After all, we have lots of funky office estrogen to vent too!)

But, as usual, the gals around the office couldn't get it together to even settle on a name for their new blog. Apparently, a vicious (yes) cat-fight broke out over the first proposal, "The Litterbox." Then, "ObservHer" didn't pick up much traction, and, at the end of that conversation, senior editor Suzy Hansen got shot with a stapler over suggesting that variant proposal "Catbox" just be shortened to "Box." (Yeah, that didn't go over big with the feminist majority.)  read more »

In the end, we just decided to launch a men's blog instead, since, you know, men actually get things done instead of just jawing about them all day long. (Oh, don't look at us like that, gals!) So, without further ado, welcome to... The Cockpit!

WTF, Stemware You guys, last night after we closed the paper, when we totally went out for dude-food at 1 a.m., and had to go to that stupid French place on Park Avenue, and I ordered that beer? And they brought the beer to me in a red wine glass? What the fuck was that, yo? 'Kay, IM me later, I'll be in my office or something. Or out getting a beer... in A GLASS, MAN. Sheesh. --posted by Tom "El Beisbol" Scocca at 12:14 p.m. I'll Take Fruity Writers For $100, Alex Ha ha, dudes. Check it out. Say "Jonathan Lethem" ten times. Doethn't it thound lithpy? Ha ha ha. Lethem! Lethem! Lethem! LEETTHEMMMM! Ah, shit, hang on, I gotta go get a Dr. Pepper.

Oh yeah, did u see? Thcooter Libbey is on crutches today. Heh. What a fag! --posted by Choire "Hot Dog, Homey!" Sicha at 12:39 p.m. Top Ten Lies Sold To Us By Lesbians 10. Farmer's markets. 9. Tempeh. (See also: seitan.) 8. Moving in. 7. Barter 6. Anne Heche. (Heh. Anne He-she.) 5. Indonesian rice salad. 4. Processing. 3. Collective action. (See also: the WNBA.) 2. Ani DiFranco. 1. Ecuadorian sweaters. --posted by Tom "Rockin' Out, Man!" McGeveran at 12:52 p.m.

—The Transom

Of all the evidence that has emerged so far in the C.I.A.  read more »

Of all the evidence that has emerged so far in the C.I.A.  read more »

Last week, as reporter Judith Miller prepared to return to The New York Times newsroom—having  read more »

Last week, as reporter Judith Miller prepared to return to The New York Times newsroom—having gott  read more »

New York Times op-ed columnist Nicholas D. Kristof--the first journalist to have written about former ambassador Joseph Wilson's now-famous fact-finding trip to Niger--was originally on prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald's subpoena list in 2003, but was never subpoenaed.

In a phone conversation this afternoon, Kristof said he had been on the list. He also said that he had never heard from Bush administration officials about his columns, and had never discussed the subject with Times reporter Judith Miller.

Word that the columnist had been on the list "seeped to me unofficially," Kristof said. He added that people both inside and outside the Times had told him of his role in Fitzgerald's investigation, and of a possible subpoena.

Earlier today, Miller testifed for two hours in a return trip to Fitzgerald's grand jury, which is investigating the leaking of CIA operative Valerie Plame Wilson's identity to the press. Her first round of testimony came after she spent 85 days in jail for refusing to discuss her conversations with vice-presidential chief of staff I. Lewis (Scooter) Libby, on the grounds she was protecting a confidential source.

Kristof said that though he had written about Joseph Wilson, he never heard from Libby, presidential advisor Karl Rove or other administration officials about his columns. Kristof also said that he did not discuss the columns with Miller. It remains unclear what story Miller was working on when she spoke with Libby in 2003, or for what editor.

The leak was widely thought to have followed from Joseph Wilson's July 2003 Times op-ed piece, in which the ex-diplomat, citing his own CIA-assigned investigation, cast doubt on the Bush administration's claims that Iraq had sought to buy uranium from Niger.

But last week, Miller revealed to Fitzgerald that she had conversed with vice-presidential chief of staff I. Lewis (Scooter) Libby in June of 2003--not merely in July, as her previous testimony had established.

Kristof had written about Joseph Wilson's uranium inquiries on May 6, 2003, using the ex-diplomat as an anonymous background source. That column inspired Washington Post reporter Walter Pincus to report about Wilson--also without using his name--in a front-page piece on June 12.

Pincus was among the reporters summoned to testify before Fitzgerald's grand jury, but Kristof was not. The prosecutor apparently abandoned plans to subpoena Kristof after it was pointed out that Kristof's writings on the subject--on May 6 and June 13, 2003--all predated the Robert Novak column in July that revealed Valerie Wilson's identity.

"It was correct I was on such a list," Kristof said. "Several months later, I did hear unofficially there was a decision not to call me."

Times spokesperson Catherine Mathis would neither confirm nor deny whether Kristof had been on Fitzgerald's subpoena list.

"As you know the grand jury proceedings are secret," Mathis said in an e-mail. "We are only aware of the subpoenas that we actually received. Mr. Kristof did not receive one."

A spokesperson for Fitzgerald declined to comment.

Kristof also said that he had been planning to write about Miller's incarceration. He had arranged to meet with Miller at the Alexandria Detention Center on October 3, but Miller negotiated her release before the appointed day.

The purpose of the meeting was to write a column about Miller's prison experience, Kristof said.

"I was planning to write a column describing her condition and saying a reporter has no business being in prison and should be out," he said. "I'm waiting, as a lot of people are, for the Times opus on it, and I don't feel right now that I understand it well enough to weigh in. I'm eagerly looking forward to that piece. I think it's important, and I may write about it if I have something useful to add."  read more »

--Gabriel Sherman

According to sources involved in the Judith Miller case, lawyers for Miller have turned over an additional, previously unreported batch of notes on the New York Times reporter's conversations with I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby to prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald. The notes, a source said, could significantly change the time frame of Miller's involvement with Libby.

After spending 85 days in jail for civil contempt, Miller testified before Fitzgerald's grand jury on September 30 and turned over one set of edited notes. Those notes covered a pair of conversations she had with Libby, the vice president's chief of staff, in July of 2003--shortly after former ambassador Joseph Wilson published a Times op-ed challenging the Bush adminstration's account of the evidence for Iraq's nuclear ambitions.

The appearance of that op-ed is generally seen as the event that triggered the leaking of the information that Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame Wilson, was a CIA employee, which led in turn to Fitzgerald's investigation. But a lawyer close to the investigation said that the new set of notes details earlier contact Miller had with Libby--possibly in May 2003, two months before Wilson's op-ed appeared.

The existence of the additional notes may be behind the Times' report today that Fitzgerald may call Miller back for additional testimony October 11.

Robert Bennett, a lawyer for Miller, declined to comment. Joseph Tate, the lawyer representing Libby, did not return calls seeking comment. Times lawyer George Freeman would not comment.

The presence of the undisclosed set of notes comes as the Times is seeking to quell internal and external criticism over a lack of transparency in the Miller case. In today's Times, executive editor Bill Keller said Miller's potential return trip to meet with Fitzgerald could further delay the Times' plans to publish an account of the Miller saga. Deputy managing editor Jonathan Landman, who has been tapped to edit the report, declined to discuss the state of the paper's Miller reporting.  read more »

"I'm not going to talk about it," he said.

--Gabriel Sherman

Very few of the journalists rallying behind New York Times reporter Judith Miller seem thrilled abou  read more »

For nearly two years, the Bush White House has been repeating falsehoods—to the  read more »

For nearly two years, the Bush White House has been repeating falsehoods-to the press and the public  read more »

Yesterday, while Scott McClellan was being jumped by a mob of wilding reporters, it must've felt as if the Bush administration didn't have a friend in the world. Did anyone who worked in the media have anything nice to say about Karl Rove's alleged leaking of Valerie Plame's name? Anyone? Little help?

Thankfully, John "Norman's Son" Podhoretz, the self-appointed ambassador from Bush Country, has come to Rove's defense in today's New York Post. And much like O.J. Simpson, he's going in search of the real perpetrators: As it turns out, The Architect isn't guilty of anything. He's actually a hero!

According to Podhoretz's SCANDAL IMPLOSION, if anyone's guilty of anything here, it's Valerie Plame's husband Joseph Wilson for padding his credentials and lying "repeatedly." In fact, the op-ed shows us, Rove didn't commit a crime—he exposed one:

This Rove-Cooper conversation discredits Wilson, not Plame. In fact, nothing we know so far was done either with the purpose of exposing or even the knowledge that these remarks would be exposing an undercover CIA operative.

But Plame's undercover status at the time was and is a little questionable in any case. How undercover could she have been when her name was published at the time as part of Joseph Wilson's own biography online (see cpsag.com/our_team/wilson.html)?  read more »

So if the offense wasn't against Plame, what of the offense against Wilson? There was no offense. As many of Joe Wilson's own hottest defenders would no doubt argue in relation to President Bush, exposing a liar is not only not a crime, it's a public service.

Can a Presidential Medal of Honor for Rove be far behind? If so, perhaps Podhoretz would volunteer to polish it.

—Matt Haber

From today's White House press briefing:

Q: Do you stand by your statement from the fall of 2003, when you were asked specifically about Karl and Elliot Abrams and Scooter Libby, and you said, "I've gone to each of those gentlemen, and they have told me they are not involved in this"? Q: Do you stand by that statement? MCCLELLAN: And if you will recall, I said that, as part of helping the investigators move forward on the investigation, we're not going to get into commenting on it. That was something I stated back near that time as well. Q: Scott, this is ridiculous. The notion that you're going to stand before us, after having commented with that level of detail, and tell people watching this that somehow you've decided not to talk. You've got a public record out there. Do you stand by your remarks from that podium or not? MCCLELLAN: I'm well aware, like you, of what was previously said. And I will be glad to talk about it at the appropriate time. The appropriate time is when the investigation... Q: (inaudible) when it's appropriate and when it's inappropriate? MCCLELLAN: If you'll let me finish. Q: No, you're not finishing. You're not saying anything. You stood at that podium and said that Karl Rove was not involved. And now we find out that he spoke about Joseph Wilson's wife. So don't you owe the American public a fuller explanation. Was he involved or was he not? Because contrary to what you told the American people, he did indeed talk about his wife, didn't he? MCCLELLAN: There will be a time to talk about this, but now is not the time to talk about it. QUESTION: Do you think people will accept that, what you're saying today? MCCLELLAN: Again, I've responded to the question. QUESTION: You're in a bad spot here, Scott... [...] MCCLELLAN: I appreciate your questions. You can keep asking them, but you have my response. Q: Well, we are going to keep asking them. When did the president learn that Karl Rove had had a conversation with a news reporter about the involvement of Joseph Wilson's wife in the decision to send him to Africa? MCCLELLAN: I've responded to the questions. Q: When did the president learn that Karl Rove had been... MCCLELLAN: I've responded to your questions.  read more »

From the White House press briefing of July 5:

Q: If nobody has anything else, do you have anything on the birthday, anything at all? MCCLELLAN: He celebrated that last night. Q: He did? MCCLELLAN: Yes, he had a celebration - yes, they had some friends over to watch the fireworks and they had a birthday cake - Q: What kind of birthday cake? MCCLELLAN: I don't know. Q: Did she give anything? MCCLELLAN: I was down on the lawn with family and friends. Q: Was Don Evans there? MCCLELLAN: He was in town this weekend. Q: What did he get for his birthday. MCCLELLAN: I will see if there's any more to provide you. I think he might have taken a low-key approach to this birthday. Q: Why? Because of his age? Q: Did he see any of Live 8 concert? Did he see his friend, Bono, in the Live 8 concert at all? MCCLELLAN: We didn't talk about it.

With their renewed assault on Ambassador Joseph C.  read more »