home

Armitage is Not Under Investigation in Plame

Several people wrote me yesterday asking why I wasn't covering The Washington Note's report that Bobby Ray Inman suggested Richard Armitage was in criminal jeopardy in the Valerie Plame investigation. The short answer is I don't believe it. I have believed for months that it is Armitage whom Patrick Fitzgerald refers to in Libby pleadings as "an innocent accused." Which to me means that he got immunity for his cooperation with Fitzgerald.

The Washington Note today updates and acknowledges Bobby Ray Inman was wrong. New sources provide opposite information on Armitage, i.e., he's been helping Fitzgerald.

That's the self-correcting nature of the blogosphere at work. Good for Steve.

Background:

On whether Armitage is Bob Woodward's unnamed source:

Another reason I'm going to go with Armitage is that Fitz in the affidavit and other pleadings has said he wants to keep the source secret so he doesn't become an "innocent accused." Hadley would not be described that way since he was a member of the White House Iraq Group. He may not have committed a crime, but he was in the thick of it. Armitage is far more likely to be a person Fitz would want to protect from being smeared.

There's also a criminal investigation going on into who leaked the CIA prison story to Dana Priest that is not being run by Fitzgerald. I haven't followed it closely enough to know whether Armitage is involved in that investigation. But as to Plame, I still believe he is a witness, not a target.

Empty Wheel has more.

< Another Bad New Drug Law Bill | Pres. Bush Supports English As National Language >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Re: Armitage is Not Under Investigation in Plame (none / 0) (#1)
    by cmpnwtr on Fri May 19, 2006 at 09:16:58 AM EST
    What is happening today on a prospective Rove indictment? Any news today? Or is this thing turning out bogus?

    Re: Armitage is Not Under Investigation in Plame (none / 0) (#2)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri May 19, 2006 at 09:22:01 AM EST
    No news on that yet. Keep in mind that no indictment today does not mean Karl Rove will not be indicted. It just means it's not today. Some mainstream media reports in early May said Rove expected to be advised by Fitz as to his status in a few weeks. So if not today, we should be hearing something soon.

    Re: Armitage is Not Under Investigation in Plame (none / 0) (#3)
    by scribe on Fri May 19, 2006 at 09:28:48 AM EST
    All this speculation about Rover has helped to shake more stuff out. Today, it helped confirm TL's position on Armitage. Concur on the self-correcting nature of the blogosphere. And, my Rover Pool bet's still viable!

    Re: Armitage is Not Under Investigation in Plame (none / 0) (#4)
    by cmpnwtr on Fri May 19, 2006 at 10:34:19 AM EST
    Thanks for the response. I am inclined to think that even if nothing happens to day that Rove is still going to face indictment. However, no announcement today undermines the Leopold story and the credibility of Truthout.org. Is it possible the story could be still true but a public announcement is not happening for reasons of legal strategy?

    Re: Armitage is Not Under Investigation in Plame (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri May 19, 2006 at 10:41:44 AM EST
    Also, as posted below, Clemons notes in his own comments section in response to a question regarding Leopold:
    sylvia -- i have not been able to confirm jason leopold's story. all that i have been able to find is that there was quite a lot of activity at patton boggs -- but i don't know whether fitzgerald was there -- or whether this implied rove indictment -- or whether it was about luskin's own role. but the highly specific points offered by jason are things i have been unable to get at. steve clemons Posted by: Steve Clemons at May 19, 2006 11:42 AM
    So it seems something happened at Patton Boggs last Friday. Perhaps everyone was huddling down anxiously deciding what the best treatment options were for Luskin's cat? ;-)

    Re: Armitage is Not Under Investigation in Plame (none / 0) (#6)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri May 19, 2006 at 11:51:38 AM EST
    Scribe... what WAS your bet for the Rover Pool? I seem to recall somebody had May 26... also there was a June 16 in there... Clearly these are prescient folks who should now share their reasoning with the rest of us. What made you ignore conventional wisdom and pick the date you chose?