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?