Joe Wilson Credibility Watch
The New York Times today ended its own news blackout of the Senate report’s findings on Joe Wilson’s credibility, with Washington Post story from the other day. Still, the NYT has finally told its readers that the Senate report refutes Wilson’s claims that he was not recommended for the Niger trip by his wife:
Instead of assigning a trained intelligence officer to the Niger case, though, the C.I.A. sent a former American ambassador, Joseph Wilson, to talk to former Niger officials. His wife, Valerie Plame, was an officer in the counterproliferation division, and she had suggested that he be sent to Niger, according to the Senate report.
That finding contradicts previous statements by Mr. Wilson, who publicly criticized the Bush administration last year for using the Niger evidence to help justify the war in Iraq. After his wife’s identity as a C.I.A. officer was leaked to the news media, Mr. Wilson said she had not played a role in his assignment, and argued that her C.I.A. employment had been disclosed to punish him.
The story is still woefully inadequate. It mentions that Wilson told the CIA that the former Nigerian prime minister had told him “that in June 1999, a businessman insisted that he meet with an Iraqi delegation to discuss expanded commercial relations with Baghdad, according to the Senate report.” But the Times fails to point out that the former prime minister thought the Iraqis’ suggestions of “expanded commercial relations” were an overture to buy uranium. Hence the conclusion of many analysts that Wilson’s report, if anything, bolstered the case that Iraq was seeking yellowcake from Niger.
Meanwhile, the Los Angeles Times continues its own blackout of the Senate report’s findings on Wilson, despite its previous front-page articles trumpeting his allegations. But it does find room in section A for an article about the Bush daughters’ Vogue magazine photo shoot.
Is it possible this coverage will impact the corporate folks at The Tribune Co. who are so concerned about falling advertising/circulation issues? (LAT-related, but NYT basically says the same thing.)
Comment by ARJ — 7/14/2004 @ 10:33 am
Who Lied?
Well, we heard that Bush lied. Then we learned that Joe Wilson did. Who fingered Wilson? The Washington Post, not known for being part of the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy. The news made it through the blogosphere. Check out the trackbacks…
Trackback by Calblog — 7/14/2004 @ 2:49 pm
Trojan Huddle: Victory for America Edition
America’s Constitution is safe and sound, for now, so you can take off your Orange jackets and focus on Orange Alerts once again! If you’re looking for something other than man-on-man action to talk about tonight over cocktails, go check…
Trackback by BoiFromTroy — 7/14/2004 @ 4:24 pm
“But the Times fails to point out that the former prime minister thought the Iraqis’ suggestions of “expanded commercial relations” were an overture to buy uranium.”
That’s not Wilson’s problem. Bush in ‘03 heralded British intel reporting Iraq had “recently” attempted to buy uranium in Africa. Now was there a contact between 1999 and 2003, or does “recently” span all four years after the PM made the assumption?
Most importantly… why isn’t the LAT credited for delving into all this in its report today on Lord Butler’s investigation?
http://www.sltrib.com/nationworld/ci_2375275
“But on the issue of Saddam’s interest in nuclear weapons, the Butler Commission said: ”The British government had intelligence from several different sources” indicating that Iraqi officials sought to buy uranium from Niger in 1999.”
Rework the post and write something about the LAT ultimately succumbing to blog “pressure.”
Comment by steve — 7/15/2004 @ 2:25 am
Wilson’s Fall
Joe Wilson is a fake, a phony, a liar, and a cheap political hack. You’ve been found out, despite the media’s desire not to report your political forgery….
Trackback by The Conjecturer — 7/15/2004 @ 6:53 am
Steve,
Would it make a difference to you to learn that the Times had not yet published their story of today, when I wrote this post yesterday?
You can see my take on today’s story in this post.
Comment by Patterico — 7/15/2004 @ 10:07 am
The CIA had an opening for an assassin. After all of the background checks, interviews, and testing were done there were three finalists - two men and one woman. For the final test, the CIA agents took one of the men to a large metal door and handed him a gun.
“We must know that you will follow your instructions, no matter what the circumstances. Inside this room you will find your wife sitting in a chair. You have to kill her.” The first man said. “You cant be serious. I could never shoot my wife!”The agent replies, “Then you?re not the right man for this job.”
The second man was given the same instructions. He took the gun and went into the room. All was quiet for about five minutes. Then the agent came out with tears in his eyes. “I tried, but I cant kill my wife.” The agent replies, “You dont have what it takes. Take your wife and go home.”
Finally, it was the womans turn. Only she was told to kill her husband. She took the gun and went into the room. Shots were heard, one shot after another. They heard screaming, crashing, banging on the walls. After a few minutes, all was quiet. The door opened slowly and there stood the woman. She wiped the sweat from her brow and said, “You guys didnt tell me the gun was loaded with blanks. So I had to beat him to death with the chair.”
Comment by Jokes — 10/8/2004 @ 4:16 pm