Sunday, November 06, 2005

 

Did Joey W. Doctor those Docs Himself?

If you have not been following the Plamegate/Joe Wilson/Fitzmas story then you need to read AJ Strata and Mac Ranger. These guys have dug their teeth into this story like a pit-bull. Suffice it to say that those liberals who were disappointed at the loot that Fitzmas brought should be happy with what they got because it can only get worse for them as the case unfolds.

One stunning fact that I've seen referenced a few times in following this story is the amazing pre-knowledge that Joe Wilson had regarding the forged docs. The following is taken from the Senate Intellegence Report that looked into the pre-war intellegence (boldface mine):

the former ambassador noted that his CIA contacts told him there were documents pertaining to the alleged Iraq-Niger uranium transaction and that the source of the information was the XX intelligence service. The DO reports officer told Committee staff that he did not provide the former ambassador with any information about the source or details of
-44 -
the original reporting as it would have required sharing classified information and, noted that there were no “documents” circulating in the IC at the time of the former ambassador’s trip, only intelligence reports from XX intelligence regarding an alleged Iraq-Niger uranium deal. Meeting notes and other correspondence show that details of the reporting were discussed at the February 19,2002 meeting, but none of the meeting participants recall telling the former ambassador the source of the report -
(U) The former ambassador also told Committee staff that he was the source of a Washington Post article (“CIA Did Not Share Doubt on Iraq Data; Bush Used Report of Uranium Bid,” June 12,2003) which said, “among the Envoy’s conclusions was that the documents may have been forged because ‘the dates were wrong and the names were wrong.”’ Committee staff asked how the former ambassador could have come to the conclusion that the “dates were wrong and the names were wrong” when he had never seen the CIA reports and had no knowledge of what names and dates were in the reports. The former ambassador said that he may have “misspoken”to the reporter when he said he concluded the documents were “forged.” He also said he may have become confused about his own recollection after the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reported in March 2003 that the names and dates on the documents were not correct and may have thought he had seen the names himself. The former ambassador reiterated that he had been able to collect the names of the government officials which should have been on the documents.


"Confused"? "Misspoken"? Yeah, we believe you Joe. Somehow I suspect than not even Fitzgerald believes Joe on this one and that we are in for a hell of a ride as this case develops.

Mac Ranger makes an interesting point regarding Joe's prescience of those forgeries:
What was Wilson doing in Niger in 1999? That is besides the "Uranium issues". I wonder though, Did Joe happen to bring back, oh.. any Nigerian "letterhead" with him from his trip to Niger in 1999? Would have been real convenient if he did. In fact it would have been down right helpful for somebody "close" to Joe with connections to "Giacomo", could then really get things "cooking". Not [much], a little "date" here, a little "name" there, and "Presto!"

Buckle your seat belts folks this thing is going to move fast!

|

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?