Who's the Real CIA Leaker? Tapes Tell the Story

February 12, 2007 6:29 PM

Jason Ryan and Brian Ross Report:

Richard_armitage_nr A tape recording made by investigative reporter Bob Woodward tells the story of who provided him with the name of CIA agent Valerie Plame, and it's not Scooter Libby.

Libby is on trial for lying to a federal grand jury but not charged with the crime of divulging the name of a secret CIA operative.

The official who provided Plame's name to columnist Robert Novak was then Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage (pictured).

He also provided the name to Woodward during an interview that Woodward recorded on June 13, 2003.

The pertinent portion of the recorded interview is one minute long, and it was played for the jury in the Libby trial today with Armitage's expletives deleted.

Woodward: ...What's Scowcroft up to?
Armitage: [ ] Scowcroft is looking into the yellowcake thing.
Woodward: Oh yeah?
Armitage: As the PFIAB.
Woodward: Yeah. What happened there?
Armitage: They're back together. [coughs] They knew with yellowcake, the CIA is not going to be hurt by this one---
Woodward: I know, that's---
Armitage: -- Hadley and Bob Joseph know. It's documented. We've got our documents on it. We're clean as a [ ] whistle. And George personally got it out of the Cincinnati speech of the president.
Woodward: Oh he did?
Armitage: Oh yeah.
Woodward: Oh really?
Armitage: Yeah.
Woodward: It was taken out?
Armitage: Taken out. George said you can't do this.
Woodward: How come it wasn't taken out of the State of the Union then?
Armitage: Because I think it was overruled by the types down at the White House. Condi doesn't like being in the hot spot. But she ---
Woodward: But it was Joe Wilson who was sent by the agency. I mean that's just ---
Armitage: His wife works in the agency.
Woodward: --- Why doesn't that come out? Why does ---
Armitage: Everyone knows it.
Woodward: ---that have to be a big secret? Everyone knows.
Armitage: Yeah. And I know [ ] Joe Wilson's been calling everybody. He's pissed off because he was designated as a low-level guy, went out to look at it. So, he's all pissed off.
Woodward: But why would they send him?
Armitage: Because his wife's a [ ] analyst at the agency.
Woodward: It's still weird.
Armitage: It---It's perfect. This is what she does, she is a WMD analyst out there.
Woodward: Oh she is.
Armitage: Yeah.
Woodward: Oh, I see.
Armitage: [ ] look at it.
Woodward: Oh I see. I didn't [ ].
Armitage: Yeah. See?
Woodward: Oh, she's the chief WMD?
Armitage: No she isn't the chief, no.
Woodward: But high enough up that she can say, "Oh yeah, hubby will go."
Armitage: Yeah, he knows Africa.
Woodward: Was she out there with him?
Armitage: No.
Woodward: When he was ambassador?
Armitage: Not to my knowledge. I don't know. I don't know if she was out there or not. But his wife is in the agency and is a WMD analyst. How about that [ ]?

Armitage freely admitted to prosecutors that he had revealed Plame's name, not realizing she was still functioning undercover at the CIA.

Special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald was aware of Armitage's admission but continued his investigation to see if others in the White House were also involved.

Armitage was not charged with any crime.

To Blotter Homepage

February 12, 2007 | Permalink | User Comments (18)

User Comments

Armitage should be on trial. Why isn't he being prosecuted? He is the smoking gun the special prosecutor was looking for. I guess if you pretend not to know you've broken the law, you get off scott free. Pathetic...

Posted by: Pathetic | Feb 12, 2007 7:09:10 PM

I wanted to contact you guys to let you know that Mr. Armitage came to DeSales Univeristy this past fall and I had the oppurtunity to sit down and interview him. I have the interview on tape along with a speech he gave about the situation in the Middle East and North Korea. Please contact me if you would like to see/use the footage.

Posted by: Jason Pirrung | Feb 12, 2007 7:30:33 PM

The blotter is not a real news team.

Posted by: mate | Feb 12, 2007 7:54:03 PM

This news has been out for almost a year. Why is ABC just getting to it now? Joel Mobray explained it on Dennis Prager's radio show more than 9 months ago. The question is, why does Libby have to go on trial when Sandy Berger goes free after witnesses saw him stuff documents in his pants? This is what ABC should be overhyping, it goes directly to National Security.

Posted by: Jeremy S. | Feb 12, 2007 7:55:48 PM

How come you left out [expletive]. Folks should know that Armitage has a potty mouth, especially when everyone was so upset over blogger party mouths recently.

Posted by: NaR | Feb 12, 2007 8:35:02 PM

It doesn't seem to make any sense that Libby's attorneys keep making a case for outting Plame when that's not what Scooter is in the hot seat for. Libby lied, which is why he's in court. Just because Libby didn't talk to Novak doesn't mean Libby didn't lie to the FBI. When Libby talked to Fitzgerald, that's when Libby lied.

Posted by: Linda | Feb 12, 2007 9:17:03 PM

What is even MORE important - Wilson's wife WASN'T "undercover" and hasn't been for more than the 5 years required by the statute that Fitzgerald was charged with investigating? Sounds just as political a prosecution as the Duke University kids to me.

Posted by: Steve | Feb 12, 2007 9:37:07 PM

He leaks and doesn't know it? Guys like that can get people killed! He's a joke. A very bad joke.

Posted by: John Munk | Feb 12, 2007 9:41:51 PM

Armitage, Fleicher, Rove, Libby - all got their information from Cheney, who went directly to the CIA and asked who sent Wilson. Any moron can figure out that the push to spam the media with Plame's identity came directly from Cheney. Cheney should have been forced to take the stand and testify under oath about this. How this administration can get away with these tactics to get us into a war costing half a trillion dollars and more than 3000 American lives is unbelievable.

Posted by: kbbpll | Feb 12, 2007 10:01:12 PM

Wow, this is news? Here's anothere non-news "flash", "revealing" new information such as (a) Joe Wilson lied repeatedly in his numerous misrepresentations about how he got the job and what his wife did with CIA and (b) the fact that Joe Wilson "uncovered" a forged document whose existence was already acknowledged in the MI5 intelligence assessment that concluded that there was STILL an attempt by Saddam to obtain YCake from Niger, which is what Bush quoted in the State of the Union in 2003.

At least Bush relied on consensus intelligence about WMD. Wilson and his supporters have been making it up out of wholecloth. Even the Washington Post apologized for foisting the Wilson canard on the public.

Wake up, liberals!!

Posted by: Tom Skrobola | Feb 12, 2007 10:31:19 PM

Armitage got the info the same time as Cheney... from a memo sent from the CIA explaining how Wilson had been chosen.

Armitage told Woodward days before he told Novak, and many days before Libby supposedly told his reporter contacts.

Further: Libby spoke to many other reporters who all claim he did not mention Wilson or Plame to them... all about the same time he supposedly leaked the info. So it certainly doesn't seem Libby was working too hard at getting the word on our Wilson.

Finally: Libby is accused of lies to the FBI, not of leaking the info.... facts now clearly show that the actually leaks to the public were unintentional and were due to Armitage at the State Department, NOT from the VP's office. Remember, Armitage was AGAINST the Iraq invasion, being an old Colin Powell guy in the State Department.

Posted by: KarlQuick | Feb 12, 2007 10:44:16 PM

Where and when is it ever going to end? Bush said he was going to fire who ever leaked the information. Do you think it's going to happen? Hell, no!

Posted by: DADDY and JENNY | Feb 13, 2007 5:32:56 AM

Doesn't ABC know that this story was out a long time ago. Novak already confirmed Armitage told him and how he told several months ago. This headline and this story serve to confuse the issue for those readers who rely on their reportage.

Posted by: Zach | Feb 13, 2007 8:41:18 AM

It's amazing the misinformation and outright stupidity that neocon sympathizers have posted on this thread.

Hey Jeremy S., Sandy Berger didn't "go free". He did something called a "plea bargain" and there was plenty of publicity about it when it happened almost TWO YEARS ago. How is it that you can be so ignorant?

Posted by: Y def | Feb 13, 2007 11:52:52 AM

so if the info was out anyway, why does Libby have to lie to anyone? The real issue is "what's the real message that the white house was trying to send to Wilson."

If you go back to the original leak, you find almost an overaction to the Plame name by present and ex-CIA. The answer can be found in re-tracing
Joe Wilson's career throughout the eighties and nineties, and how he just happens to show up at hot spots (like the food writer in "Havana")with the likes of Grossman, cheney et al. (for cheney to even say he never heard of Wilson is outrageous, and contradicts his tenure as defense secretary under 41, and his travels as halliburton exec in the nineties.)

Another mystery is George Tenet and his motivation for calling in the FBI. If tenet does not issue the finding, the case goes away in the next headline. Was Tenet just thoroughly fed up with the way the white house was treating him, or was he sending them message that an agent in deep cover was not to be part of a political football game.

Posted by: paulm | Feb 13, 2007 1:12:23 PM

This is what I call the proverbial witch hunt by one party over the other by using the justice system at their pleasure. They wont call it payback but that's what it is. A we pay taxes for these jokers on both parties to continue playing the same game.

Meanwhile, me and my buddies go to war to try to fix what our politicians screwed up at the beginning.

Posted by: jw | Feb 18, 2007 12:41:59 PM

Joe Wilson should be charged for exposing his wife! Where are the charges against him? Valerie Plame unethically had her husband work for the CIA to go to Africa; where is the investigation of this unethical action? Joe Wilson came back and ran to the NY Times with his (false) report and did not file a required discovery document with the CIA first, where are the charges against him? Valerie Plame was not an undercover CIA agent as the media wants to protray; so exposure that she did work for the CIA was not a crime anyway...so what is Scooter Libby charged with???

Posted by: Ray Kohn | Feb 22, 2007 1:57:13 PM

Plame was NOT COVERT. there was NO crime! Why the press doesn't report this is the true crime.

Posted by: jason | Feb 22, 2007 2:18:27 PM

Post a comment