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.

19May/150

Judith Miller’s “trial and error” approach to journalism!

Ernie Souchak, Editor-in-Chief

While on a tour hawking her new book "The Story" Judith Miller admitted to James O'Keefe that she takes a "trial and error" approach to journalism.

Miller's exact quote: "That's what journalism is, trial and error."

Wow! That's the most incredible thing I have ever heard a person who purports to be a journalist say. For Miller, journalism is a - crapshoot!

Add that to the fact that she claims to have written her new book to correct the record, and you have unadulterated stupidity.

But wait, it gets even better.

Miller, while being interviewed by Ed Morrissey, gave the following explanation for why she now believes that she gave false testimony in the U.S. v Libby trial:

"My memory failed me, in part because the prosecutor withheld information I needed to decipher my own notes."

Really Judy, reporting is trial and error, and you need someone else to decipher your own notes? Truly remarkable!

More remarkable is that Miller now credits Scooter Libby with deciphering her notes correctly for her in 2010. Libby's interpretation of her notes was that he's innocent. Imagine that!

Miller has yet to offer an explanation for her waiting five years to profess Scooter's innocence after her epiphany that she gave false testimony.

I'll come back to Miller's notes and the importance of her relying on others to decipher them in a more in-depth  follow up article that will detail Libby's behind-the-scenes involvement in her book.

Unlike Miller, I do not believe journalism is done by trial and error, I believe you just report the facts and let the chips fall where they may.

With that in mind, here are some of the facts that Miller and friends do not want you to know.

Fact: Deputy Secretary of State Dick Armitage did not expose Valerie Plame as an employee of the CIA in 2003.

It was Under Secretary of State Marc Grossman who exposed Brewster Jennings & Associates and Plame in 2001. (Remember, Miller confessed to me in 2013 that she knew it was not Armitage.)

Grossman not only outed Plame, at the same time he was also caught on an FBI wiretap bragging that he would fax articles to the New York Times and they would just print them under someone's byline.

Judith's byline? Perhaps.

Fact: On October 1, 2003 when Armitage came forward to claim he was the leaker of Plame's identity, it was not Patrick Fitzgerald that asked him to keep it to himself. It was the FBI - under the direction of Attorney General John Ashcroft and FBI Director Robert Mueller who instructed Armitage, Colin Powell and then State Department Counsel William H Taft who was present in the room - not to tell anyone.

Fact: Attorney General John Ashcroft did not recuse himself in the Plame case because of his close ties to the White House. Ashcroft recused himself because at that time he was in front of FISA court Judge Reggie B. Walton enforcing a gag order on the one person who could tell the world that Plamegate was all a sham! That person being FBI whistleblower, Sibel Edmonds.

Walton was also the judge who presided over the Libby case. What a coincidence.

So you see Judith, there's no trial and error. It's simple. A real journalist just states the facts from the get-go.

And since you admit you can't do that, we're not interested in anymore of your false narratives!

By the way, how many times do you feel you're allowed to be wrong?

17Jun/140

Judith Miller’s book canceled due to recent Plamegate confession

Ernie Souchak, Editor-in-Chief

Fox News contributor and author Judith Miller recently confessed that Dick Armitage was not the person who exposed Valerie Plame as CIA, and that "a lot of people" in Washington knew this.

Miller went on to say that she was going to tell the story of what really happened during the Plamegate scandal her way in a book due out this spring.

Keep in mind that at that time, Miller had not planned to make a confession about Plamegate. When she realized what she had done, she immediately contacted Scooter Libby in hopes that he could do damage control.

Anyone want to guess what happened next?

Suddenly, with absolutly no warning and no explanation, the release of Miller's book was canceled.

Ouch. It's gotta hurt when you write your memoir and you can't release it because of your own big mouth.

Now Miller is refusing to answer any questions about Plamegate or the cancellation of her eagerly awaited book.

And she's not alone.

Her publisher, Simon & Schuster, and Fox News are also refusing to answer any questions.

The good news: former CIA attorney John Rizzo's recent willingness to discuss Plamegate and his acknowledgment that it was a CIA disinformation campaign could very well make hearing Miller's version of events unnecessary.

We'll see, won't we?

In any case, it might be a good time for you to consider another career change, Judith.

Just a suggestion.

28Feb/140

Richard Perle feeds American Thinker editor Thomas Lifson

Ernie Souchak, Editor-in-Chief

Not only was Richard Perle feeding the American Thinker what he wanted them to report during the Iraq war and Plamegate.

Turns out he was also sautéing foie gras for American Thinker editor Thomas Lifson and friends.

Lifson's good friend Bob Lee tells of an intimate gathering at the house of Washington insiders Clarice and Howard Feldman, where Perle played a co-host of sorts.

Yes, this is the same Clarice Feldman who writes for American Thinker and who recently insisted that Plamegate was not a deliberate plot by Goerge W. "Bush and pals to distract from Iraq."

It also turns out that Clarice Feldman considers Richard Perle such a good friend that she puts him to work in her kitchen when he attends her soirées.

Here's what Bob Lee wrote about the intimate gathering.

Richard Perle Sauteed The Foie Gras …

There were probably 1000s of other such conversational gourmands meeting inside the Washington Beltway on Friday night. Nine adults enjoying a 4-course gourmet dinner au conversation. Ours had a former Asst Secty of Defense, the ex-wife of The Head of The World Bank, a military historian, a Libby Trial aficionado, a right-wing fanatic from Berkley, and a North Carolina couple referred to as friends of Tom. … That grotesquely hilarious report about Apple Cheek Johnny's Poverty Castle ??? Wait til BobLee tells you THE REAL STORY!

If you want to skip down to the hilarious REAL STORY about Apple Cheek’s Monster Manse go ahead … but do come back up for this account of our Foggy Bottom Fandango.

Remember The Brunswick Stew Party a few years ago. Given my druthers I’d take that over Friday night for pure conviviality plus b-stew trumps foie gras every time with me. But, our dinner party in a prominent DC-A list neighborhood certainly added a few memories to the life larder. The Mizzus could not get out of Georgetown fast enough Saturday as urban congestion about did her in. With me it was the Euros and faux Euros that slink up /down M Street. They are sorta like Shineolas except they (the Euros) have greasier hair.

Our dear friend Thomas The Berkley Right-winger had invited us. Clarice and Howard were our gracious hosts. We had no idea who was on the guest list, nor did they. They likely still don’t know and we’re still not sure ourselves.

Howard perked up when I said I am a legendary humorist. So is my brother he said. Feldman ... yikes ... was this MARTY FELDMAN's brother??? ... Hump, what hump ... Walk this way ... I'll take the one in the turban. No ... Michael Feldman ... an NPR talk show guy that is well outside my interest sphere.

When the big man in the hat said his name was Richard Perle I first thought the guy that started those Vision Centers. Close … the former Reagan Asst Secty of Defense not affectionately known around DC as the Prince of Darkness. Richard, legend has it, was the first one to get GWB’s ear after 9/11 and strongly recommend taking down Saddam ASAP.

I introduced myself as the last remaining member of The Flying Wallendas and Mizzus said she was Stephanie Powers’ younger sister. I detected a glimmer of recognition with the name Wallenda but it flickered and died quickly. After game after game of “hey look, IT’S BOBLEE…” it was sort of nice to be naught but a whozit for an evening. Now I know how those three little white boys at the end of Dean’s bench musta felt all those years.

A pre-dinner conversational mini-joust highlighted by one of Thomas’ Napa Valley finest led us to the dinner table. I was seated between Thomas From Berkley and a little Jewish lady named Clare with a daughter at Chapel Hill and an ex-husband who was almost CIA Director and instead is Head of The World Bank – Paul Wolfowitz.

Mizzus was between Richard and Peter The Lawyer From Annapolis. During the course of four courses and about two hours of chitting and chatting, Peter actually used the word Parenthetically ... TWICE. In well over 50 years I’ve never used in once nor do I ever intend to. Peter used it with a deftness that would lead one to believe he uses it daily if not hourly. I wonder if Paul Johnson, a football coach who lives in Annapolis, has ever used the word parenthetically? I doubt it.

A French onion soufflé began our epicurean journey. At about the 15-minute mark Richard left the table. When he returned he had grease stains all over the front of his blue oxford button-down. Since I’ve been known to get a tab rowdy in eating I chose not to inquire “yo Perle, whats with the grease spots?”

Clarise explained it all … she had asked Richard to sautee the foie gras. Although he knew one should slide the foie gras delicately into the hot pan, silly Prince of Darkness DROPPED the foie gras from several inches above the skillet … voila … grease spots all over his shirt. And this was the man that convinced GWB to take out Saddam! I wonder if Cindy Sheehan knows how to sautee foie gras?

The thought occured to me twixt Course Two & Three ... suppose Ol' Fruitcake Freddie From Franklin Street had been hiding under the table? That silly wabbit's tin foil hat woulda been spinning like a top. Lord have mercy, Freddie would have been dialing up the Mutha Ship for sure to report a new CONSPIRACY!

I cleaned my plate because that’s how I was raised plus, like Mikey, I eat most anything. Mizzus nibbled and later expressed her pique at the goose liver. The Beef Wellington of Course Three was equally tasty to me but a bit too rare for Mizzus.

As the evening progressed everyone seemed to assume familiar roles … listening to Richard Perle tell about meeting with world leaders and getting the Chi Coms to reduce the price of AK47s to the Mujaheedin. Richard Perle does NOT care much for The Saudis. In other words, the same chit chat you get about anywhere. Richard did ask me which other humorists I admire the most. Since I did not mention PJ O’Rourke or Robert Benchley it didn’t much matter who I mentioned. I deftly dropped Dave Huxtable’s name and I thought I noticed a slight shiver from ex-Mrs Wolfowitz.

John McCain’s name came up. Mizzus did that finger down the throat gag sign which took Peter Parenthetical aback. The military historian lady even pretended to care on that. Richard seconded Mizzus’ low opinion of McCrazy with a few stories on him that likely are not in his official bio. Apparently John McCrazy has a hair trigger temper and the attention span of a gnat. But, unlike Barack, he has normal ears ... and unlike Hilly, he has discernible ankles.

I noted to ex-Mrs Wolfowitz that out-of-state tuition had just been increased at UNC. She said she didn’t care since her(daughter’s) father can afford it. He’s head of The World Bank. She’s likely right. I tried a second question tied to 40 Point Frank’s next career move. I lost ex-Mrs Wolfowitz … never to regain her. I later learned she is a somewhat famous anthropologist specializing in Sumatra. She woulda lost me quickly on that.

We did learn all about the shadow government that really runs Washington … the insidious webees that have been in place forever and defy all administrations and/or new personalities.

Clarice, our gracious host, attends the Scooter Libby Trial each day. She had many harsh words for Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald. I later learned from Thomas that there are at least two websites devoted to people who dislike Clarice a lot. TWO … My kinda woman!

On the drive home Saturday we stopped at the Silver Diner at Potomac Mills. Mizzus had a grilled cheese. I had a crab cake melt. It was good.

>>><<<

Wow. Although no doubt unintentionally, Bob Lee has opened a serious can of worms for the American Thinker by preserving for the record the events of that little get-together.

First thing we have to ask is this:

If Richard Perle was feeling chatty enough to talk about "meeting with world leaders and getting the Chi Coms to reduce the price of AK47s to the Mujaheedin", why did Lifson and Feldman not find this interesting enough to write about?

And as long as Perle was telling war stories, why didn't Lifson or Feldman ask him about more current topics, such as the 550 Tons of yellowcake that was then still sitting in Iraq?

And while we're at it, why didn't the American Thinker editor ask Clare Wolfowitz about the letter she wrote to George W. Bush that derailed ex-husband Paul Wolfowitz's bid to be the director of the CIA.

Instead, Thomas Lifson and Clarice Feldman continued to publish stories attacking those who disagreed with Perle or Wolfowitz without disclosing that they were close personal friends.

How is that for journalistic integrity?

We now know that Clarice Feldman's ridiculous attack on Sibel Edmonds' credibility, claiming Edmonds "misunderstood what she had overheard," certainly must have come from Richard Perle.

We also know that Feldman cannot name Perle as her source for that dubious claim due to the fact that Edmonds made it clear that if the FBI wiretap tapes she translated were ever made public, Perle would go to prison.

Remember, the Department of Defense, Perle's old stomping grounds, was instrumental in invoking states secrets privilege on Edmonds so that she could not talk publicly about what was on those tapes.

Bit of a conflict there, don't ya think, Clarice?

If that's not enough to make you ask who's running things at the American Thinker, we have reason to believe that the "military historian lady" at this private gathering was none other than Laurie Mylroie.

If so, we have a few questions for Clarice Feldman's "dear friend" Mylroie as well.

Perhaps Lifson or Feldman will get back to us on that.

In any case, we can hardly wait to read Judith Miller's tell all book due out this spring.

Judith, can you give us a preview?

1Feb/140

Murray Waas: Plamegate cover-up is “something that is bigger than Watergate”

Ernie Souchak, Editor-in-Chief

IMG_1807.PNG

In a recent phone interview Murray Waas, the reporter who claimed to be the recipient of anonymous Plamegate grand jury leaks, confessed that the Plamegate cover-up is "something that is bigger than Watergate".

Keep this in mind as the Plamegate cover-up continues to be exposed.

Waas is now desperately trying to distance himself from the book he purportedly wrote entitled United States v. I. Lewis Libby, and the reporting he did on Plamegate.

Why would a journalist distance himself from the very body of work that earned him national recognition?

What would cause an author to disown his own book?

And, even more perplexing, what makes Waas think that American Thinker editor Thomas Lifson would be sympathetic to his fear of his confession getting out?

Waas has been communicating with the American Thinker in hopes of defusing the current predicament his recent statements have created for him, so perhaps the better question is:

Why would Waas think the American Thinker would be sympathetic to his attempt to conceal the Plamegate cover-up, and his part in it? A cover-up Waas admitted was bigger than Watergate.

Strangely enough, since Waas' confession American Thinker contributor Clarice Feldman has also called Plamegate a "hoax". And she has now added former FBI Director Robert Mueller to her list of people who "conspired to conceal" this from the White House.

When looked at logically, Feldman's list of conspirators-which now includes the State Department, the Department of Justice and the FBI-fully supports Waas' admission of a big Washington cover-up.

Feldman and the American Thinker want us to believe that top officials at these three different agencies, who all served at the pleasure of the President, kept him in the dark for three years that Dick Armitage was Robert Novak's source.

Why is the American Thinker still clinging to the official Armitage "disinformation campaign" version of the Plamegate story, and ignoring the recent confessions of both Judith Miller and Murray Waas?

I wonder, could this ludicrous position the American Thinker is taking have been in any way influenced by their close relationship with members of the discontinued 501(c) 3 known as the Project for the New American Century (PNAC)

More to come....

25Jan/140

American Thinker’s credibility is dissipating quickly

Ernie Souchak, Editor-in-Chief

American Thinker's credibility is dissipating quickly.

You see, not disclosing conflicts of interest is turning out to be the norm at American Thinker.

For example: IP2P recently informed its readers of Clarice Feldman's close personal relationship with Richard Perle, whom she frequently goes on the attack for and staunchly defends. As in the case of her baseless attack on Sibel Edmonds.

Now IP2P has also learned that Feldman shares a close friendship with Paul Wolfowitz and Douglas Feith. And as is the case with Perle, she has never disclosed her conflict of interest when attacking others on their behalf.

Nor has American Thinker editor Thomas Lifson required her to do so.

Keeping American Thinker's failure to disclose in mind, let me tell you some other disturbing facts that will have you asking this question: Who is really running the show over at American Thinker?

On September 20, 2012 American Thinker posted an article by Lee Cary entitled "Obama's Chicago Arab-American network comes into focus".

Cary's article states some unflattering facts about a man named Nadhmi Auchi, aka. Saddam Hussein's bag man.

Naturally Auchi did not appreciate this article and to no one's surprise he instructed his lawyers at the London law firm Carter-Ruck to send a letter threatening legal action if said article was not taken down.

Upon receiving Auchi's letter, Lifson took the article down momentarily to verify that it was completely factual. After determining that it was correct, Lifson promptly reposted Cary's article unchanged.

That's because Lee Cary's work was solid, and contributor John A. Shaw is as honest and credible a man as you will ever find.

Taking down that article would have given the public the perception that there was something wrong with the story. And that clearly would not be fair to either Cary or Shaw.

At that time IP2P, which was also named in the letter from Auchi's law firm, posted an article praising American Thinker for doing the right thing.

Due to many factors, including Auchi's inability to legally enter the United States, the letter from his lawyers was an idle threat. And that should have been the end of the story.

Unfortunately that happy ending was not to be.

What happened next was that someone on this side of the pond told Lifson to take the article down. And he did, a second time!

We can not tell you exactly who it was at the moment, we can tell that it was not Nadhmi Auchi or his people, according to Lifson.

Could it have been one of Clarice Feldman's close friends? Perhaps Wolfowitz, Perle or Feith?

In any case, if that wasn't bad enough, Lifson then had the audacity to think that IP2P would take the article down as well. And for some peculiar reason, he would not even tell us why.

Of course Lifson received a prompt, "Hell no!"

In fact, we at IP2P still feel that Thomas Lifson owes Cary and Shaw a formal apology for removing their article a second time from American Thinker without even giving them the courtesy of an explanation.

And more importantly, due to recent revelations about American Thinker's close ties to the Washington elite, Lifson needs to publicly address his publication's controversial policy of not disclosing conflicts of interest.

Read the article that Thomas Lifson took down twice here:

Obama's Chicago Arab-American network comes into focus

 

Related articles by John A. Shaw

REZKO, OBAMA, AND THE NADHMI AUCHI RAILROAD LINKING CHICAGO, WASHINGTON, AND BAGHDAD (Part 1 of 3)

REZKO, OBAMA, AND THE NADHMI AUCHI RAILROAD LINKING CHICAGO, WASHINGTON, AND BAGHDAD (Part 2 of 3)

REZKO, OBAMA, AND THE NADHMI AUCHI RAILROAD LINKING CHICAGO, WASHINGTON, AND BAGHDAD (Part 3 of 3)

 

15Jan/140

Plamegate Update: American Thinker fails to disclose conflicts of interest!

Ernie Souchak, Editor-inChief

American Thinker's failure to disclose conflicts of interest raises serious ethical questions about the website.

Case in point.

Meet Clarice Feldman, attorney, Washington insider, and close personal friend of Richard Perle and his wife Leslie Barr.

IMG_1179.PNG

That's Clarice up front and center, enjoying herself at former Chairman of the Defense Advisory Board Richard Perle's annual 4th of July bash in the South of France. Looks like she is having a wonderful time.

That's great Clarice!

Although it does present a bit of a problem for us common folk back in the States.

You see, very serious allegations have been made against Richard Perle (see email below)

The American Thinker thought it was OK to publish Feldman's baseless hit pieces on those who make allegations against her friends.

And if that's not bad enough, American Thinker did not feel obligated to disclose Feldman's conflict of interest. This is deplorable, and should not be tolerated.

From: <redacted>
To: thomas@americanthinker.com
Sent:Tue Jan 14 03:52:33 UTC 2014
Subject: Conflict of interest (Clarice Feldman)

Thomas,

Please tell me how Clarice Feldman's close personal relationship with Richard Perle and his wife Leslie Barr is not a conflict of interest, as it pertains to Feldman's "prerogative" to attack Sibel Edmonds' credibility.

(name redacted)
Writer, American Thinker website

Military.com Covers Edmonds Disclosures, Reports 'Denials' From Several Fingered Bush Officials

Feature article offers comment from Perle, Feith, spokesman for Grossman, as well as information and comment in support of the FBI translator/whistleblower's charges of nuclear treason...

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=7478&print=1

Tasty Food to Celebrate American Freedom in the South of (Clarice Feldman)

http://pjmedia.com/lifestyle/2012/07/26/tasty-food-to-celebrate-american-freedom-in-the-south-of-france/?singlepage=true

American Thinker editor Thomas Lifson still feels he has no obligation to disclose Feldman's close personal relationship with Perle.

From: thomas@americanthinker.com
To:<redacted>
Sent:Fri Jan 10 12:48:05 UTC 2014
Subject: RE: American Thinker's dishonest attempt to discredit

(name redacted),

Clarice does not believe Edmonds, as is her prerogative. I trust Clarice far more than I trust you. You throw around ugly words. I don't know what you think is going on, but your tactics have alienated me.

Please do not correspond any further with me. Such correspondence is unwelcome and may constitute harassment.

Thomas

It is also apparent from Lifson's email response above that he thinks someone's use of ugly words(?) is all the justification he needs to ignore evidence that proves Clarice Feldman's attacks on Sibel Edmonds are based on falsehoods. And that publishing them is unethical.

As for the rest of Feldman's reporting on "Plamegate"......much more to come......

12Jan/140

Plamegate update: Clarice Feldman says Sibel Edmonds misunderstood

Ernie Souchak, Editor-in-Chief

American Thinker contributor Clarice Feldman came up with a stunning justification for her hit piece on Sibel Edmonds' credibility.

After she was criticized for failing to provide any facts or references to support her public declaration that FBI whistleblower Sibel Edmonds is not credible, Feldman finally offered this journalistic gem:

"p to p has no secret info to my knowledge. As I recall the investigation of Sibel's charges was mixed--She was found credible respecting claims of the operation of the FBI's Arabic translation group. Not so with her assertions that a variety of high govt officials were engaged in treasonous stuff with Turkey. As to those things I thing she misunderstood what she had overheard"

So, according to Clarice Feldman, the woman who testified before the 911 Commission and had state secrets privilege invoked on her twice, simply "misunderstood what she overheard" on the FBI wiretap tapes.

Wow, thanks for clearing that up for us, Clarice.

Now if you don't mind, just tell us the correct translation of what is on the FBI wiretap tapes that Edmonds "misunderstood".

And please show us where DoJ Inspector General Glenn Fine says Edmonds is not credible as it pertains to "her assertions that a variety of high govt officials were engaged in treasonous stuff with Turkey" in his unclassified report.

Because we can't find that in the report. Or anywhere else for that matter.

Unless of course Clarice received a copy of the classified report. Well, did you Clarice?

But Feldman is right about one thing: "Plamegate" was a hoax. However, she is not telling the truth about the who, what, why, when, and where of the hoax. Or the more accurate description - disinformation campaign.

And now Feldman is continuing the disinformation campaign by quoting from a new book by John Rizzo, a CIA attorney and self described friend of Patrick Fitzgerald.

Really?

Will get back to you on that one......more to come...

2Jan/140

Valerie Plame lied and people died

Ernie Souchak, Editor-in-Chief

Valerie Plame lied about her cover as a covert CIA operative at front company Brewster Jennings & Associates being blown in 2003 due to an article written by Bob Novak.

And as a result, the U.S. invaded Iraq and people died!

You see, as we now know from documents and sworn testimony of FBI whistleblower Sibel Edmonds, the cover of Plame's CIA front company Brewster Jennings & Associates was blown in the summer of 2001 by Undersecretary of State Marc Grossman.

Grossman exposed Plame as CIA long before the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003 or Plame's husband Ambassador Joe Wilson's infamous trip to Niger in 2002.

In fact, Plame's CIA front company was exposed before the collapse of World Trade Center building 7 (the CIA's second largest complex) on September 11, 2001.

Thanks to Sibel Edmonds we now know that Valerie Plame, Lewis "Scooter" Libby and the White House were all fully aware of the fact that Brewster Jennings & Associates was exposed and shut down in 2001, and that Grossman was selling nuclear secrets at that time.

So, ask yourself this.

If in 2001, Valerie Plame or Joe Wilson would have told the truth about the fact that Marc Grossman (the third highest ranking official at the State Department) exposed Plame as a CIA operative to officials in Turkey and Pakistan, and was selling nuclear secrets on the black- market, would we still have invaded Iraq?

Of course not!

Remember, in 2001 Valerie Plame was purportedly in the CIA's counter-proliferation division. Plame's job was to catch people who were selling nuclear secrets on the black-market. People like Grossman!

And, "Special Counsel" Patrick Fitzgerald was head of special task force unit 49 in 2001, nicknamed the bin Laden unit. Unit 49 was a antiterrorism task force that operated out of the U.S. Attorney's Office Southern Dist. New York. (Manhattan)

Valerie, isn't Pakistan where the A.Q. Kahn network operated out of?

And Patrick, isn't Pakistan where Osama bin Laden operated out of?

Why is it that Valerie Plame and her husband Joe Wilson now refuse to answer any questions about a subject that in the past you could not get them to shut up about?

Why is it that Valerie Plame and Joe Wilson refuse to answer any questions about their friendship with Marc Grossman, the man who exposed Brewster Jennings and Valerie as CIA?

Answer: Plame and Bush lied - people died!

As for former U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald, there is some blockbuster news coming very soon.

16Dec/130

Valerie Plame lied to Congress and Chairman Henry Waxman knew it

Ernie Souchak, Editor-in-Chief

On March 16, 2007 while testifying to the Congressional Oversight Committee, Valerie Plame lied under oath. And Chairman Henry Waxman was fully aware of the act of perjury being committed by Plame.

Long before Congressman Waxman heard sworn testimony from Valerie Plame at a House Oversight Committee hearing, Congressman Waxman was briefed by former FBI translator Sibel Edmonds.

In addition to being briefed by Edmonds.

Congressman Waxman was provided Inspector General Glenn Fine's classified report that contained the fact that Valerie Plame's identity as a CIA operative was exposed in 2001 when Undersecretary of State Marc Grossman was secretly recorded warning Turkish nationals to stay away from Brewster Jennings & Associates because it was a CIA front.

And as Chairman Waxman was well aware, Brewster Jennings & Associates was the CIA front that Plame claims gave her covert status.

Like many in our government, Congressman Waxman thought Edmonds (the most gagged woman in the U.S.A.) would never be heard.

You thought wrong Henry. Oops!

Now, armed with the knowledge that Congressman Waxman was fully aware that Valerie Plame was lying to the oversight committee. And the fact that we also know "Special Counsel" Patrick Fitzgerald's investigation was a sham, and United States v I. Lewis Libby was a show trial.

With this in mind take another look at the despicable conduct of Chairman Waxman as he lies to all of America, and tries (but fails) to discredit an honest witness.

Congressman Henry Waxman, time for you to join Sen. Chuck Grassley up on stage with your pants down.