home

Raw Story Cites New Evidence of Hadley as Source

By Jeralyn, Section Valerie Plame Leak Case
Posted on Fri Nov 18, 2005 at 11:16:12 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Stephen Hadley played coy today about whether he disclosed information about Valerie Plame Wilson to Bob Woodward in June.

First, Raw Story announced Hadley is the source. Then White House officials denied it. Today, Hadley refused to say, invoking the latest White House mantra, "there's a continuing investigation."

Referring to news accounts about the case, Hadley said with a smile, "I've also seen press reports from White House officials saying that I am not one of his sources." He said he would not comment further because the CIA leak case remains under investigation. Leaving the room, Hadley was asked if his answer amounted to a yes or a no. "It is what it is," he said.

Today, Raw Story reconfirms that Hadley is Woodward's source and reports that there is a record of Hadley's meeting with Woodward at the National Security Council.

We may know sooner than later. The New York Times reports that the Washington Post editor Leonard Downie, Jr. has said if one of the paper's other reporters figures out who Bob Woodward's source is, the paper might publish it. Also, Woodward is still pushing the source for a full release. It sounds like the source will have a choice of "out yourself" or "get outed."

< Fitzgerald Confirms New Grand Jury Will Continue Leaks Investigation | Scanlon Charged In Abramoff Related Case >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Raw Story Cites New Evidence of Hadley as Source | 3 comments (3 topical)
    Re: Raw Story Cites New Evidence of Hadley as Sour (none / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:15 PM EST
    Two questions come to mind. First, why would this source allow Woodward to talk to Fitzgerald but not to the public? Second, why would this source let others leak an inaccurate denial on his behalf, assuming that he is one of the many "senior administration officials" said by "White House officials" not to be the source? One possible reason is that he simply didn't want to be hounded by the press. For example, if it is Hadley, he could lose his security clearance for inadvertant disclosure of classified information. A National Security Advisor without a security clearance is like a race horse without legs. A second possibility, however, is that Fitzgerald doesn't want the source's identity known, even within the White House, and that he asked the source to put that restriction on Woodward. If others in the White House do not know who is cooperating with Fitzgerald, they will not know how much additional information Fitzgerald has. The longer Fitz can keep them guessing, the greater the chance that someone else will come forward with more information.

    Re: Raw Story Cites New Evidence of Hadley as Sour (none / 0) (#2)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:15 PM EST
    But, but, but, but...... The White House denied it. They DENIED it. Is it possible that..... that.... that... they are not to be trusted?

    Re: Raw Story Cites New Evidence of Hadley as Sour (none / 0) (#3)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:15 PM EST
    There is new information on this topic reported by Time, here. Woodward lays out the sequence of his conversations with his source, which helps to explain why the source went to Fitzgerald when he or she did. Woodward apparently learned from Fitzgerald's press conference that Libby was thought to be the first official to disclose Plame's CIA connection. Woodward therefore called his source, who then said he or she had no alternative but to go to the prosecutor. Woodward asked whether that meant he would be released. The source then released Woodward to talk to the prosecutor, but not to go public. A couple of interesting points about this story. First, Woodward expressly said "he or she" several times when referring to his source. This opens the possibility that the source is Rice. Second, if Woodward is to be believed, it is unlikely that Fitzgerald pressured the source to keep his or her identity secret. Third, why is Woodward giving this story to Time rather than to the Post?

    Raw Story Cites New Evidence of Hadley as Source | 3 comments (3 topical)