18Jun/150

Scooter Libby helped Judith Miller concoct the fairy tale titled “The Story”

Ernie Souchak, Editor-in-Chief

It's no surprise that Judith Miller's long overdue book, "The Story", is permeated with falsehoods and flat-out lies.

What is as a surprise is that Scooter Libby has been so clumsy in concealing his intimate involvement in the writing and selling of Miller's latest fairy tale.

In August of 2013, roughly eight months before her book was originally due to be released, I interviewed Miller about her upcoming "memoir." My focus was primarily on the Libby trial.

During that interview, Miller confessed to me that she knew that Deputy Secretary of State Dick Armitage was not the person who exposed Valerie Plame as a CIA employee.

But Miller forgets to mention that fact in her book. Instead, she sticks to the government's false version that Armitage exposed Plame's identity.

Here's another fact that Miller forgets to mention in her book: She was aware of FBI whistleblower Sibel Edmonds' sworn testimony that Under Secretary of State Marc Grossman was actually the one who exposed Plame as a CIA employee in 2001.

However, Miller refused to answer any questions regarding Edmonds - stating she would address Edmonds' important testimony in her book.

Surprise, surprise. Miller apparently forgot to mention Edmonds or Grossman in her book.

What Miller did do immediately following our discussion was to inform Libby how poorly the interview went for her.

And just one hour later, I heard from Scooter himself:

_________________________________________

-----Original Message-----

From: Lewis Libby
To: (redacted)
Sent: August 28, 2013 at 5:06 PM
Subject: RE: Media inquiry (clearing your name)

Off-the-record

(name redacted),

Thanks for your e-mail. My apologies for the delay in responding; I have been on the road a fair amount and have had difficulty catching up.

I am grateful to you and the many others who have expressed outrage at how I have been treated and who have offered help. While I appreciate such offers, I have consistently let others know that this is not the way that I wish to proceed. That remains the case.

There may well come a time when this will shift, but for now I continue to think that this would not be a good time for others to address my case. This does not change that I remain grateful for your interest and kind inquiry.

Best,

Scooter Libby

-----Original Message-----

From: (redacted)
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2013 7:06 AM
To: Lewis Libby
Subject: Media inquiry (clearing your name)

Scooter

Are you OK with my attempting to clear your name?

(name redacted)

-----Original Message-----

From: (redacted)
To: Joseph Tate
Sent: August 13, 2013, 4:07 PM
Subject: Fwd: Media inquiry (U.S. v Libby)

Mr. Tate

Can I get a statement?

(name redacted)

-----Original Message-----

From: (redacted)
To: Joseph Tate
Sent: August 12, 2013, 8:04 PM
Subject: Media inquiry (U.S. v Libby)

Mr. Joseph A. Tate

Were you aware of the fact that FBI whistleblower Sibel Edmonds had documented for the Dept. of Justice that, "Special Counsel" Patrick Fitzgerald's star witness in U.S v Libby, Undersecretary of State Marc Grossman, was the man who had blown Brewster Jennings & Associates and Valerie Plame's CIA cover in 2001? The government has it on tape.

Did Patrick Fitzgerald withhold this information from you and Mr. Libby?

What does Dechert partner Glenn A. Fine say about it? Glenn had this information before Fitzgerald was appointed "Special Counsel"

(name redacted)
American Thinker

-----Original Message-----

From: (redacted)
To: Patrick Fitzgerald
Sent: August 4, 2013, 12:24 PM
Subject: Media inquiry (Sibel Edmonds)

Mr. Patrick Fitzgerald

In the course of your investigating the leak of Valerie Plame's identity as a CIA employee.

(1) Was Sibel Edmonds interviewed?

(2) Were you provided, or did you have access to information about Sibel Edmonds, and the information that she provided Glenn Fine and the Office of Inspector General regarding Brewster Jennings & Associates?

(name redacted)
Writer, American Thinker website

-----Original Message-----

From: (redacted)
To: (redacted)
Sent: August 3, 2013, 8:12 PM
Subject: Valerie Plame Wilson’s friend, Marc Grossman, guilty of Treason!

Valerie Plame Wilson’s friend, Marc Grossman, guilty of Treason!

http://illinoispaytoplay.com/2013/08/03/valerie-plame-wilsons-friend-marc-grossman-guilty-of-treason/

___________________________________________

First things first. I never expressed any outrage about how Scooter was treated. Although I will admit I did not like being lied to.

As you can clearly see, Libby did not want me to clear his name by stating facts. This was due to the fact that he was already working closely with Judith Miller to concoct a story that was in complete contradiction of those same facts.

Here's another underreported fact that Libby, Miller and many others in Washington would rather the public not know: The judge in the Libby case - Reggie B Walton - was the same judge who imposed a gag order on Edmonds under the State Secrets Act.

What are the odds of that?

Here's a news flash for Scooter: I was already aware of the fact that Libby's attorneys had arranged for Edmonds to meet them late one night at the Willard Hotel, where she offered to testify on his behalf.

However, Libby's attorneys never did call Edmonds to testify at his trial.

Why in the world would they refuse to call a witness who could blow the government's whole case out of the water?

After all, Judge Walton considered Edmonds so credible that he gagged her, supposedly for the sake of national security.

So unless Libby himself insisted that Edmonds not be called as a defense witness his attorneys are guilty of legal malpractice.

And if he did, you have to ask yourself why Libby would insist that the one person whose testimony would result in his case being dismissed not be called as a witness for the defense?

Even more ridiculous, Judge Walton allowed the Libby trial to proceed when he knew that Grossman exposed Plame's identity two years prior to the start of the Libby investigation.

As for Miller's decision to exclude Edmonds' testimony from her so-called "correct the record" book, she should at the very least explain why she chose to ignore evidence that would have averted her well-publicized 85 day incarceration .

One thing is for certain "The Story" deserve far more scrutiny from the media than it has been subjected to so far.

Deja vu - Judith Miller is once again spreading false narratives and the complicit media is letting her get away with it.

 

Up next: My communications with Libby and the PR team he assembled behind the scenes to sell us Miller's latest literary work of fiction.

19Oct/130

Scooter Libby’s attorneys might be forced to “Win”

Ernie Souchak, Editor-in-Chief

Lewis Libby, center, listens to his lawyer Ted Wells, left, speak to reporters outside federal court after his arraignment hearing in Washington, D.C. Also pictured are Libby's wife Harriet and lawyer Joseph Tate.

 

The attorneys assembled to form the "legal team" that defended Lewis "Scooter" Libby, in the case
U.S. v Libby, apparently have a dilemma.

Scooter Libby's attorneys might be forced to win the case for their client.

The email communication below, contains a possible explanation as to why Libby's attorneys have not yet demanded justice for their client Scooter Libby.

From: (redacted)
To: ted wells
Sent: October 6, 2013 at 4:03 PM
Subject: How about you

Mr. Theodore Wells

What is your dilemma?

(name redacted)

-----Original Message-----

From: (redacted)
To: joseph tate
Sent:October 5, 2013 at 4:15 PM
Subject: You have a decision to make.

Mr. Joseph Tate

The fact that you and your firm Dechert LLP represented Lewis 'Scooter" Libby in U.S. v Libby puts you in a very per-carious situation due to recent developments.

As you can see from the Illinois Pay-to-Play article linked below, your client should never have been indicted much less ever brought to trial. And, as Libby's defense attorney in that case, it is incumbent on you to rectify this egregious misconduct on the part of the Dept. of Justice.

The dilemma for you and Dechert LLP is, if you honor your obligation to your client and your profession, your partner at the firm, Glenn Fine, may lose his license to practice law.

However, if you ignore your obligation to your client, you will lose the trust of those who have, and would consider hiring your firm, and you diminish your entire profession.
Perhaps, even exposing the firm to legal complications and liabilities.

Advance notice of your decision would be appreciated.

(name redacted)

DoJ Inspector General Glenn A. Fine complicit in fraud known as “Plamegate”

http://illinoispaytoplay.com/2013/10/04/doj-inspector-general-glenn-a-fine-complicit-in-the-fraud-known-as-plamegate/

Officers of the court are required to report illegal and or un-ethical conduct. Not to mention the obligation they have to their client.

The conduct of the Dept of Justice in U.S. v Libby was both un-ethical and illegal.

So, no dilemma, officers. Just do what's required!

Oh, and could someone please wake up Inspector General Michael E. Horowitz. He needs to have a serious chat with the new FBI Director James B. Comey.

The Libby "legal team" aka officers of the court.

Theodore V. Wells
Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP
1285 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10019-6064

William H. Jeffress
Baker Botts LLP
1299 Pennsylvania Ave., NW
Washington, D.C. 20004-2400

Joseph A. Tate
Dechert LLP
2929 Arch Street
Philadelphia, PA 19104-2808

John D. Cline
235 Montgomery Street, Suite 1070
San Francisco, California 94104