P R O C E E D I N G S Whereupon, I. LEWIS LIBBY was called as a witness and, after first being duly sworn by the Foreperson of the Grand Jury, was examined and testified as follows: EXAMINATION BY MR. FITZGERALD: Q. And Mr. Libby, if you could state your name for the record and spell your name? A. I. Lewis, L-e-w-i-s; Libby, L-i-b-b-y. Q. And do you have a nickname? A. I do. Q. Okay. And that is -- A. "Scooter". Q. Okay. And can you give us a brief description of how you got the name "Scooter" so no one spends their time thinking about that? A. Are we classified in here? It's -- my family is from the south and it's less, it's less uncommon than it is up here. Q. Okay. Good morning. There's a glass of water in front of you. That's not from a prior witness, so feel free to use it. A. Thank you. Q. Let me just introduce myself again. My name is Pat Fitzgerald. I'm a Special Counsel in this matter, joined by other attorneys with the Special Counsel's Office seated at the table. And this Grand Jury is investigating possible offenses of different laws that include Title 50 of the United States Code, Section 421, which concerns the disclosure of the identity of a covert agent; Title 18 of the United States Code, Section 793, which is the illegal transmission of national defense information; or Title 18, Section 641, theft of government property; or Title 18 United States Code, Section 1001, false statements. That means that this Grand Jury is investigating those offenses. It doesn't mean there's any determination been made whether or not those offenses have been committed. I can also tell you that a Grand Jury is entitled to charge any other offense that they determine has been committed if they learn about that offense during the course of this investigation. But generally the investigation concerns the possible illegal disclosure of classified information. Do you understand the general nature of the investigation? A. I do, sir. Q. I should tell you that you have a constitutional right to refuse to answer any question if a truthful answer would tend to incriminate you. Do you understand that you have that right? A. I do, sir. Q. And you should understand that if you choose to answer questions, any answer that you do give can be used against you by the Grand Jury or in any other legal proceeding. Do you understand that? A. I do. Q. And you should understand that if you choose to answer questions, you could stop at any time and decide not to answer any further questions based upon your Fifth Amendment privilege. Do you understand that? A. I do, sir. Q. In simple terms, just because you answer a hundred questions doesn't mean you have to answer the next question. Do you understand that? A. I do. Q. And you have a right to consult with an attorney, and if you could not afford an attorney one could be appointed by the Court for you. Do you understand that? A. Yes, sir. Q. And in fact, you are represented by an attorney. Is that correct? A. That is correct. Q. And could you just state your attorney's name and spell his last name? A. Joseph A. Tate, T-a-t-e. Q. And is he in the building today? A. He is. Q. And you understand that the Grand Jury will allow you a reasonable opportunity to leave if you need to consult Mr. Tate prior to answering any questions. Do you understand that? A. I do, sir. Q. And, and are you an attorney yourself? A. I am. Q. And do you understand that any testimony that you give is under oath and that if you make any deliberate false statement about a material or important fact, you could be prosecuted for perjury? Do you understand that? A. I do understand that. Q. And what that means is that if someone were to make a false statement they should assume that anything we ask about during the course of today's Grand Jury is something that is material or important to that investigation. You understand that? A. Yes, sir. Q. And because it's critical for the Grand Jury to know all the facts, witnesses may not know the context for a question, so they should assume that it's important to the Grand Jury. A. Yes, sir. Q. And I'll give you a brief example which we discussed prior to your coming in with your attorney, which is that if we were investigating a fatality involving a car, we might want to find out whether it was an accident or foul play, and if a witness knew about a person involved in the accident having an argument just prior to the, the traffic fatality, they should tell the authorities about the argument and not think ahead and think that it puts their friend in a bad light. They should just state the facts and let the authorities decide what really happened. Do you understand that? A. Yes, sir. Q. And you also understand that we may ask questions about state of mind, which is what people thought, believed or understood, and that may be important to the Grand Jury in order to determine motivation? A. Yes, sir. Q. And if, if someone does commit a false statement or commit perjury, they could be prosecuted by up to five years in jail for each such false statement. Do you understand that? A. Yes, sir. MR. FITZGERALD. And I will remind you, as I remind the Grand Jury, that it's important to tell witnesses what the consequences are for perjury so that we make sure that all witnesses understand the seriousness of the proceeding. We are not at all prejudging any witness by telling them what their obligations are and you shouldn't take my advising Mr. Libby of those obligations as any indication by us that we're prejudging whether a witness will be truthful or not. BY MR. FITZGERALD: Q. And I will also tell you, as you were advised prior to coming in, in the presence of your attorney, that based upon your conduct in this investigation and in particular contact with reporters, you, among others, are a subject of the investigation. And that does not mean that anyone has decided to charge you with any crimes, but just is to advise you of the serious nature of the proceeding. Do you understand that? A. I do. Q. And do you have any questions about the nature of the proceeding? A. No, sir. Q. And are you prepared to proceed? A. I am. Q. Okay. Why don't you tell the Grand Jury what your job titles are and then give us a brief explanation of what your duties are? A. I have three job titles at the moment. One is Assistant to the President; one is Chief of Staff to the Vice- President; and the last is National Security Advisor to the Vice President. And as National Security Advisor to the Vice President it's my job to advise him on issues of national security, to meet with and represent him in inter-agency meetings or occasionally meetings with outside parties to describe his views or to learn from them, to gather information to repeat back to him. It's part of my job to listen to what other people in the White House are saying, to, to meet with foreign leaders on occasion and to report those things back to him. It's my job to work with the White House staff, to be -- to develop policy and to implement policy, and to take that information and go back and explain that to the Vice President. Occasionally it's part of my job on his behalf to talk with the press and to relay his positions to the press if he so wishes or to other issues what the White House is doing. Q. Okay. And so in effect, you're an assistant both to the President himself directly and to the Vice President himself? A. That is correct, sir. Q. And can you tell the Grand Jury what security clearance level you have? A. I have a TS, Top Secret, and a secure compartmentalized intelligence clearance, and clearances in numbers of boxes along the way, numbers of compartmented intelligence. Q. Okay. And can you tell us in the course of your daily work how much contact you have with the intelligence community and how much access you have to classified documents? A. Oh, I have a lot of access to classified documents. I meet every morning -- my day usually starts at 7 o'clock in the morning, or sometimes a little earlier, and I'll get an intelligence briefing. I'll sit down with someone from the Agency, usually with the Vice President, and we have a book of intelligence that they provide with this, and he is there to answer questions from us and to take questions that we ask back to the Agency and get us further information. That meeting usually goes 30, 45 minutes. I also receive the product from the Agency that morning which can be -- I usually get a little extra, so it can be anywhere from 20 to 150 pages that I get every morning. Usually it's somewhere in the middle, 30, 40 pages. Then during the day I attend meetings and frequently the Deputy or one of the top officials from the Intelligence Agency will be at that meeting and will discuss policy issues, Liberia, Haiti, Iraq, those sorts of things. I also will occasionally be part of a principals meeting where the Director of Central Intelligence is present. And during the day I will receive other written products from the Agency and go through those. Q. And just so we're crystal clear, I think it's obvious, but when you refer to the Agency, you're referring to the CIA? A. I'm sorry. Central Intelligence Agency. Q. And that's fine. You can keep referring to the Agency. I just want to make that, that clear. And do you, yourself, at times read the raw intelligence reports to see what's behind some of the summaries that you're given? A. Yes. Q. And does the Vice President do that as well? A. Yes. Sometimes they're presented to us by the briefer and sometimes I will show him one that the briefer has shown me. Q. And so is it, is it a practice with the people who are dealing with you on a regular basis to bring with them not just finished product but also to give you sometimes the raw documents behind that because of your interest in seeing them? A. Occasionally. It's not all that common, but occasionally. Q. With what frequency do you have contact with the press in your, in your job? A. It, it goes in spurts. Usually there may be periods when I don't see them. You know, when a reporter is doing a profile of the Vice President, for example, they will call our office. They, they call around to talk to kids he went to high school with, now they're no longer kids. They'll talk to family members, they want to talk to people he works with, they'll talk to other Cabinet officials. And one of the people they often like to talk to is me because I work with him every day. And they'll say, you know, sit down and say, what's it like? Usually these contacts will come through our press person. We have a -- I have an assistant who is charged with being in charge of relations with the press, and so we try and funnel most of those types of requests. In addition, I'll get calls from reporters about things that they're hearing. You know, we hear the President's going to make a trip or something. And they'll call me and usually I'll defer that to somebody else. And then sometimes I am charged to go talk to the press about an issue along the way. Q. And three questions. You mentioned there is someone on your staff who is charged with dealing with the press. And what is that person's name? A. Currently it's a person named Kevin Kellums. Before Kevin Kellums it was someone named Cathie Martin, Catherine Martin, I guess. And before that, it was Mary Matalin. Q. And at what point did Mary Matalin leave and did Catherine Martin take over, approximately? A. Well, Cathie worked as a Deputy to Mary before Mary left. I think Mary took us through the mid-term elections, so that would be November of 2002, and I think Mary left right about -- sometime in that period. Maybe somewhere between then and the New Year, I think, and Catherine just sort of took over. Q. And you mentioned that sometimes you're charged with dealing with the press directly rather than through your press people. And who would tell you to do that? A. Well, Cathie would recommend it usually and then I would talk to them. Occasionally somebody from the press that I know and they'd call, but usually I would have to talk to Cathie. Q. And in your understanding, did you need to check with the Vice President in order to talk to the press and get authorization to talk -- A. I don't need to. Sometimes I do. Q. And have there been occasions when the Vice President has told you that you are to speak to the press rather than other people? A. Yes. Q. And when you deal with the press, what is your understanding of the ground rules of what they can do with the information you share with them? A. Well, there are different ground rules. There's on- the-record, which means they can quote me by name in the piece. So they can say, Lewis Libby said such-and-such. And then there are other gradations after that. One of them is background in which I think they -- this varies by reporter actually, but it usually means, I think, that they can say -- sometimes they call me a senior administration official, because they want to make their piece look important -- so they'll say senior administration official said such-and-such. There's something called deep background, which usually, I think, means they just get to say it as if somebody said it but they don't really tag it. Some people use that to mean a government official, and sometimes these are actually negotiated, you know. The press person will sit down and say here's what you can say about it. And then there's something called off-the-record. When you talk off-the-record it is supposed to not ever be repeated by the reporter to anybody, including their editors. They're supposed to -- it's something you tell them so they can get it in their head and it informs them as to what they can say, what they can ask about, but they're not supposed to go and repeat it to anybody, and they're not -- certainly not supposed to write about it. Q. Okay. A. They're not supposed to even call someone and say, you know, Libby told me in an off-the-record comment. They're not supposed to do that. They're just supposed to say, you know, I'm wondering about this, what about this, without citing it to anyone. Sorry. Q. No. And let me see if I can illustrate that with an example. You mentioned that people may call you to ask if the President's going to be taking a trip. And if the President were in fact taking a trip next week, and you spoke to a reporter on-the-record, is it fair to say that the reporter could say Lewis Libby told, you know, this reporter, quote, the President will be taking a trip to England next week? Is that your understanding of on-the-record? A. That is on-the-record, although I might not confirm it for him, but I might say that's an NSC issue because it's the President traveling. But if I did say to him, the President is traveling, they could then say, Lewis Libby said. Q. And that would be if you had an on-the-record conversation? A. Correct, sir. Q. If you had a background conversation that said -- and it may be that this is a topic that you wouldn't discuss, traveling, just to use as a hypothetical, you said on background the President is traveling to England next week, they could write in the story, a senior administration official said the President is traveling next week. Is that your understanding of -- A. Yes. Q. -- on background? A. Yes. Q. And your understanding of deep background is that they could report in the story that, you know, the reporters have learned that the President is traveling to England next week, but not cite a senior administration official and certainly not quote you? A. Yes, sir. Q. And if it was deep background, the reporter could now know that the President was traveling to England next week, but they would not write that in the story, they could not tell their editors, but to the extent that they informed how they thought about the issues they were writing about, that information would be given to them on deep background. Is that your understanding? A. I thought you asked about deep background just before that. GRAND JUROR. Off-the-record. MR. FITZGERALD. Oh, off-the-record. Thank you. WITNESS. Off-the-record, they could, they could know it in their head but they couldn't call anybody, not just write about it. They couldn't call one of the other government agencies and say, I understand that the President's taking a trip. They can just call -- they might call up and say, you know, what's the President doing next week? But they're not supposed to refer to it to anybody. BY MR. FITZGERALD: Q. Okay. So off-the-record is more even -- more stringently controlled than deep background? A. Yes, sir. That's how I understand the terms. Q. Okay. And do you have ground rules when you talk to reporters about how they would verify any quotes they might attribute to you either as by name or by senior administration official? A. Yes. A, the ground rules may be set in the beginning of the conversation or as the conversation goes along sometimes you say to them, okay, this you can say on- the-record, and this you can't. This is for off-the-record or something else. Often when I deal with them, if you're asking about me personally, I often deal with a reporter and I say up front, everything I say in this conversation is off-the- record. If there's something I say that you would like to put into a question, or write into an article, call back, usually to Cathie Martin, or my press person, or Mary Matalin at that point, and she will then tell you if it's okay for you to use it or not. So usually I'm just strictly off-the-record. Q. Okay. And do you ever have the reporters call you back directly to verify a quote for something you gave them on-the-record or on background? A. It probably has happened over the course of three years. It's not the normal, but it probably has happened. Q. And in this case, one of the matters being focused on in this investigation is a column written by Robert Novak in July 14, 2003. I take it you're familiar with that column as we sit here today? A. Yes, sir, I am. Q. And there's some information contained in that article concerning the employment -- the alleged employment of former Ambassador Wilson's wife at the CIA. Do you know that fact that it's contained in the article? A. Yes, sir, I know it's contained in the article. Q. And were you a source for Mr. Novak about -- in that article about the employment of Mr. Wilson's wife at the CIA? A. No, sir. Q. Were you a source for any information for Mr. Novak in that article? A. No, sir. Q. Do you know if you spoke to Mr. Novak at or about the time the article was prepared? A. I have, I have a recollection that I did speak to Mr. Novak once in that general time frame, but my notes indicate, notes that you have, indicate to me that in fact that was a week and a half or so after the article appeared. Q. Do you have any recollection of speaking to him before the article appeared? A. Maybe a year and a half before the article appeared, but not any time near the article. Q. And to the extent that the Grand Jury is familiar with the, quote, sixteen words, closed quote, that have caused controversy since then, were you involved in either the drafting or vetting of those sixteen words? A. No, sir, I don't think I was. It may have been in a draft that I saw, but I don't think so. Q. And there's a document known as the NIE, the National Intelligence Estimate, that concerned in part efforts by Iraq to obtain uranium. Did you review the NIE at some point in 2002 or 2003 concerning Iraq and efforts to get uranium? A. Yes, sir. Q. And do you recall whether or not there were any doubts expressed in the, in the NIE about the allegation that Iraq had tried to get uranium from Niger? A. The NIE has a fairly clear declarative sentence in the section on uranium and Iraq, and it says something like, Iran (sic) began vigorously trying to procure uranium, something like pretty close to that. And that is unqualified in the section on uranium. There are some sections towards the back, and I'm sorry I haven't reviewed the document, and I'd be happy to look at it if you like, there are some sections towards the back in which State Department expresses some doubts about uranium. I think it had to do with whether or not someone could actually procure, actually get the uranium as opposed to trying to get uranium, if you follow what I mean. And I think they had some doubts -- well, that were unrelated about the rockets or the about the centrifuge tubes, whatever they proved to be. So that's my recollection. I could look at the document and tell you. But I recall that there was something in the back of the document, not in the section itself but way in the back. Q. Okay. And do you know if that was -- just going from memory, whether the part in the back was in text or in a footnote, do you remember? A. It's not a footnote in the sense that you or I use the term where there's a little -- you know, a little -- small little number six, and you go to the six at the bottom. I think it was in a blue box, if I recall, but I haven't looked at this in awhile. It might an appendix actually. I'm not sure if it was in the text or an appendix. Q. And for the record, the document is not in front of you so we're just asking you your memory. One clarification. In describing the NIE report you referenced Iran making efforts to get uranium. Did you mean to say Iraq? A. Excuse me. Q. Okay. Your testimony is -- what your recollection is concerns Iraq, not Iran? A. My, my apologies. Q. Okay. Let me direct your attention then forward to May, 2003, and in particular to an article that appeared in the New York Times on May 6, 2003 written by an author named Kristof, K-r-i-s-t-o-f. Do you recall that article being published in or about that time? A. I do, sir. Q. And do you recall how you first learned of it? A. Someone came in and told me about it or I saw it flipping through the paper. I, I don't really recall. Q. And do you recall reading it at or about the time it was published? A. Yes. MR. FITZGERALD. And why don't we put a copy of that article in front of you in case you need to refer to it? And for the record, that is Grand Jury Exhibit 3. BY MR. FITZGERALD: Q. And is it fair to say that in that article, the article is critical of the administration in terms of stating that, for example, one quote, "It's disingenuous for the State Department people to say they were bamboozled because they knew about this for a year," close quote? A. That sounds critical. I haven't seen anything -- one insider said? Q. Yes. A. Yes, so he is quoting somebody else, yes, sir. There is a not very nice statement in there. Q. Okay. And is it fair to say that according to this article, the White House and State Department kept citing documents which proved to be a forgery? A. Can you -- you're asking me what's in the -- Q. Yeah, well, let me ask you. Do you remember whether or not -- without reading it for a moment, whether this was an article that was very critical of the administration? A. The article -- the bulk of what they were saying in the article is critical. Yes, sir. Q. And do you recall they're criticizing, according to the article, and I'm not saying this is true or false, but the premise of the article was that the White House and the State Department had actual knowledge that documents that had been forged and kept citing them to the public, and that this was disingenuous on the part of the administration? A. I, I don't actually recall whether this article said, said that, but I don't dispute it. I just don't recall it. I haven't read it recently. Q. Do you recall any reaction that you had to the article when you read it at the time? A. Yes. I recall -- can I just glance at it for one second? Q. Oh, yes. You can read -- take a moment and read the whole article. A. I mean, my major reaction to this article had to do with this passage about being told that a person involved in the Niger caper more than a year ago -- told the -- the person involved in the caper, the caper more than a year ago said that the Vice President's Office asked for an investigation of the uranium deal. That, that, either at the time, or subsequently caught my eye. Q. And the article contends, for example, at a certain point, quote, "There are indications that the U.S. government souped up intelligence, leaned on spooks to change their conclusions and concealed contrary information to deceive people at home and around the world." Do you see that in the third paragraph? A. There are indications that the U.S. -- yes, I see it. And that's not good stuff. Q. And then the sixth paragraph, is that a reference to what you were recalling, "I'm told by a person involved in the Niger caper that more than a year ago the Vice President's Office asked for an investigation of the uranium deal, so a former U.S. ambassador to Africa was dispatched to Niger. In February, 2002, according to someone present at the meetings that envoy reported to the CIA and State Department that the information was unequivocally wrong and that the documents had been forged." Is that, is that what stuck in your mind about an allegation that the Office of Vice President had -- A. Right, because that had to do basically with us. I do recall that. Q. And who did you discuss this article with once you read it and saw that there were allegations that attacked the credibility of the President, the Vice President, State Department and basically the administration? A. I discussed it with my Deputy, probably discussed it with the Vice President. I don't specifically recall discussing this back then. The article was a little bit of a sleeper from my point of view in the sense that it came out, I noted it, I didn't pay much attention to it for a while, and then it sort of built momentum as it went along. So the day or two that it came out, I don't recall talking about it all that much except I talked to my Deputy about it. Q. And as you sit here today, you don't recall whether or not you talked to the Vice President within a couple of days after the article came out? A. I, I don't recall. It's -- I don't recall. Q. And did the Kristof article, as you say, gain momentum over time? A. Yes. Q. Okay. And can you tell us what happened as it gained momentum over time in terms of who you spoke to? A. Well, the, the content of it sort of kept coming up. It didn't go away readily. At some point in June Walter Pincus was thinking -- was doing -- was calling our office, calling probably Cathie Martin at that point, and wanted some -- to ask questions about the article. Well, about the substance of it. And so Cathie talked to me about it at that point, and at some point around then I talked to the Vice President about how we would respond to this. I also talked to -- at some point in this time frame I talked to our briefer, our Central Intelligence Agency briefer, to ask him if in fact we -- he had any record of us asking about this, and I talked to the Vice President about that fact somewhere in there too. Q. And what's the name of your briefer? A. Craig Schmall, at that point. Q. And do you know how to spell the last name? A. I think it's S-c-h-m-a-l-l. Q. And do you know if during this time between the Kristof article in early May, and the Pincus article, which will eventually come out on June 12th, if you spoke to Marc Grossman from the State Department about the events described in the Kristof article? A. I don't, I don't recall it. Secretary Grossman attends interagency meetings that I'm at, so I see him in that period, throughout that period probably once a week or more, but I don't recall a discussion with him about it. Q. Do you recall if you ever asked Secretary Grossman whether or not the State Department had sent the former ambassador in response to a request from the Vice President? A. The State Department had sent him? Q. Yes. A. No, I don't recall that. Q. And do you recall whether or not Mr. Grossman ever told you that he understands that Wilson was claiming that the Vice President had sent him on this trip? A. That was the claim in the Kristof article, if I recall, but I don't recall Mr. Grossman repeating it, or saying that he knew it of his own -- I just don't recall a conversation with Secretary Grossman about this. Q. And do you know -- do you recall any conversation with Secretary Grossman about who was responsible for sending Wilson on this trip to Niger? A. I, I don't recall a conversation with him about it. Q. And do you know if you ever discussed with Secretary Grossman whether Wilson's wife worked at the CIA? A. No, I don't recall ever discussing that. Q. And is that something that you would remember if you had that conversation? A. I, I don't recall the conversation. I, I just don't recall the conversation. Q. You mentioned that there came a time when you talked to the Vice President about Walter Pincus' article. And can you tell us who was present when you talked to him and what was said? A. I talked to him on the phone. I don't think it was anyone present when I spoke to him on the phone. He was relaying to me some information that he had learned in the first part of the conversation. And in the second part of the conversation he gave me instructions as to what I should, what I should say to reporters, and from the time frame I'm pretty sure we were talking about -- specifically about the Pincus article. Q. And why don't you tell us, first, what information the Vice President told you he had learned, and then what he told you to do with it? A. Okay. Well, I had some notes that I took down at that point. But my best recollection sitting here is that he had been speaking to someone who was either from the CIA or it was someone who had spoken to someone from the CIA, and he was relaying to me what the CIA had said about how this came about. And it says something like -- my notes about it say something like, he was sent at our request, our behest or something, and then it says something about it being a functional office. So he told me that, that they had said that the person was debriefed in the region, if I was -- if I recall correctly, and that had made maybe -- hadn't made a written report, made an oral report, but there was a report, something along those lines. There are notes of this which I think you all have. Then he switched -- so he told me that. And in the course of describing this he also said to me in sort of an off-hand manner, as a curiosity, that his wife worked at the CIA, the person who -- whoever this person was. There were no names at that stage so I didn't know Ambassador Wilson's name at that point, or the wife's name. And I made a note of that also. He then went on to say, here's what we'd like you to say to the reporters, I think it was Pincus, as I said before, and he gave me three points. The first point was that we did not request a mission to Niger. The second point, as I recall, was that we had not gotten a report back from the mission to Niger until -- or we hadn't seen any such report until after the State of the Union, when these newspaper articles started. And there was a third point which is that -- I think, was that he had seen the National Intelligence Estimate and that that's what he took to be authoritative. I think those were the points. I remember this from my notes more than actual recollection but I looked at the notes in connection with this inquiry. He then said to make these several points and I asked him if he also wanted me to make an earlier point which he had made in the first half of the conversation, which I think I omitted to tell you, which was that the Office of the Vice President, the State Department and the -- some other bureaucracy, maybe Defense Department, had asked questions about this -- about an earlier report about Niger, that it wasn't just the Office of the Vice President asking questions. And I asked the Vice President -- I went ahead and numbered, I sort of numbered these as he was talking to me, and I remember numbering that one the fourth point and saying, do you want me to -- excuse me, should we say, when I talk to the press that we were not the only office asking this question? And he quite rightly said, no, we shouldn't say that, that should be said by the Agency because we didn't know that. That was all we knew was what we had asked, and it would be better to get the State (sic) Department spokesperson, who at the time was I think Bill Harlow, to be the one who would say that to the press. And that's about what I recall from the conversation, according to the notes. Q. And we'll go through the notes in a moment. You just referred to Bill Harlow as the State Department spokesperson. A. I mis-spoke, I'm sorry. Central Intelligence Agency spokesperson. Thank you. Q. Now, in -- you referenced that you recall the Vice President told you something about a functional office. Can you explain what you understood a functional office to mean? A. The State Department and the agency, to my understanding, have regional offices, that is an office which focuses in a given region of the world such as the Middle East or Europe. They also have some offices which look globally at a type of problem like proliferation. Maybe there's one for ecology or something, I don't know. But anyway, one of the -- a functional office, for instance on counterproliferation which is the one I think that was involved here, would have a global look at the problem. There might be a terrorism office, for example, that would look at terrorism globally. It would not be limited to Middle East or Southeast Asia, or Northeast Asia. Q. And did you understand, when he told you that this former ambassador's wife worked at the CIA, do you have an understanding or whether or not she worked in that functional office? A. Well, that's interesting. I'd have to look at the note. I think -- my recollection is that I knew she worked in the function -- is that the note indicates I knew she worked at the functional office. Q. And we'll come back to the note in a minute. Before we look at your actual notes, how certain are you from memory that the information about the wife working in the functional office at the CIA, the wife of this former ambassador, was information that Vice President Cheney imparted to you as opposed to information that you imparted to Vice President Cheney? A. Oh, I'm pretty certain of that. Q. And what makes you certain? A. I sort of remember him saying it, you know, in an off sort of curiosity sort of fashion. That's my recollection of it anyway. Q. Okay. And since we weren't there -- A. And also since I wrote it down like that, it would indicate to me it was something I was taking down as he was speaking. Sometimes I make my notes as he speaks. Sometimes it turns out I didn't need to write it down, but I don't want to make him -- you know, he is the Vice President. I don't want to make him take time to repeat himself, so I try and get some stuff and then if I figure it's not important, I can get rid of it later. Q. And what was it about the way he discussed that fact with you that sticks in your mind or lets you know it was a curiosity or off-hand? A. It came out of order. You know, he was going through the order, and as I recall, it came in later. And tone of voice, as I recall it. I think I'm recalling accurately. Q. And what, what was different about the tone of voice? A. Sort of the way -- it wasn't like the other tone of voices which was much more matter of fact and straight. It was just a little bit of a curiosity sort of thing. Q. And not to mince words, but when he was curious, was he curious about it in a sort of a negative way? Did he think that was sort of odd that a former ambassador's wife worked in the functional office at the CIA? A. I wouldn't say negative, but I would say it was a fact that, you know, it wasn't -- not everybody's wife works there, so it was a new fact, that's all. Q. Did you take it -- have any understanding whether or not Vice President Cheney thought that that fact might have played into his selection as the envoy for this trip? A. No, we didn't, we didn't discuss that. It was just -- he just said what he said. Q. Did you take -- get any indication from the Vice President -- A. You talking about in that conversation? Q. In that conversation. A. Yeah, I don't recall that. Q. And any indication in that conversation that the Vice President thought this might be sort of nepotism that she worked at the Counterproliferation Division and the envoy went on this trip? A. I, I don't recall that. Q. Now, let me -- before I show you the notes, let me go back in time to a conversation you said you had with the briefer. A. With the what, I'm sorry? Q. With the briefer, Craig Schmall. A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you recall whether that took place before or after the conversation you just described with the Vice President? A. No, I think I have a date in my notes. I don't recall. Q. Okay. And was that an in-person meeting with the briefer, your daily meeting? A. I meet daily with him. Whether I passed this question to him in the briefing or over the phone, I'm not sure. Q. Okay. And do you know if the Vice President participated in this conversation or not? A. I would think not. If it was, if it was in person, usually I don't take his time with questions. And my -- so my guess is that I would either do it on the side or before he got there in the morning. I don't usually ask the briefer questions and make him sit there while I ask a question. So my recollection of it would be that normally I don't do it that way. Q. Okay. Let me show you a note that is Bates Stamped either 2307 or 2921. And -- MS. KEDIAN. 2307. MR. FITZGERALD. 2307 -- MS. KEDIAN. We're going to mark this as Exhibit 51. BY MR. FITZGERALD: Q. I'll ask you to look at that Exhibit, 51, and ask you if that's a note reflecting your conversation with the briefer, Craig Schmall, about your inquiry, your question? A. Yes, sir. Q. And is that your handwriting? A. Yes, sir. Q. And a couple of things. This is the first one of your notes we're taking a look at. Is it fair to say that you have your own little shorthand? A. Yes, sir, my apologies. Q. And yourself, you refer to yourself as SL? A. Yes. Q. And you refer to the Vice President in your notes with a Y with a line on the top of it? A. Yes, sir. Q. And some of your notes have a date. Can you tell the Grand Jury what the date is of these notes? A. It looks like 6-9, June 9. Q. And also, you refer at times to OVP in your notes? A. Yes, sir. Q. And what does OVP mean? A. Office of the Vice President. Q. And before we get into the substance of this note, what do you do with these notes after you, after you write them? A. It depends. I have different types of notes that I treat differently. Q. These types of notes, what would you do with them? A. This type of note, looks like a note that I wrote to save -- so I probably wrote down the note -- Q. I'm going to put a different document -- I'm sorry -- I'm sorry -- A. This looks like a note that I wrote to save, I wrote and put in some file or something. Q. And any particular reason you would do that? I'm trying to understand which -- what would cause you to write a note in your daily practice? A. Normally what I do is I, I have -- as I say, I have different types of notes. One type of note I have are sort of action items that I'm going to take up with the Vice President that day. It may tend to look like a list and it can have anything on it, all sorts of different subject matters would be covered. So I could cover something -- as my Chief of Staff job I may have something about his residence, you know, there's a leak in the roof. Or I might have something about Iraq, or I might have something about tax policy, or Congressional, or an old friend of his. So it's just anything that I need to talk with him about that day, and I'll put all those down. Those notes I tend to throw out. But if I -- if there's something on there, written on there, that I think I need to save, I will copy that material or write it on a different sheet of paper and then save that page and then throw the other notes out so I don't have to struggle through all those old notes again. Q. So for example, putting aside any personal matters you might have, like fixing a leak in the house, if you had a discussion about an upcoming trip overseas and it was in your list of things to sort of cover with the Vice President, if you covered that topic with the Vice President, would you cross it off? A. Usually. Q. And if you -- A. Or sometimes I cross it off if I didn't cover it, but I don't think it's worth covering. Sometimes I write them down and decide, ah, it's not worth bothering with. Sometimes I don't get to talk to him about everything and a day or two might pass when I didn't get to that point, and then I'll just cross if off, you know, it's no longer important to raise with him. So crossing off is my way of saying to myself, I don't have to read that line again. Q. Okay. A. More than -- that he -- than I have discussed it with him. Q. And if one of the things you do on a given day is then have meetings with the Deputies or principals meetings, will you take notes at those separate meetings? A. Yes. Q. And will you keep those notes? A. Yes, sir. Q. And this is a note that you kept from June 9th, 2003. Anything about the topic that made you want to keep the note for your file? A. Well, it was in the press at this point that we had purportedly made a request for this mission, and so I checked with my CIA briefer and he told me there was no OVP request about this, so I wrote down what he told me so I'd have a record of it in case I forgot and wanted to check, I'd have something to check. So -- Q. Okay. And just transliterating this note, it says, Craig -- and that would be a reference to Craig Schmall? A. Correct. Q. It says, "No OVP request re uranium procurement." Is that your handwriting? A. Correct. Q. Is that what it says? A. Yes, sir. Q. And then above "uranium procurement" it says -- is that year after yellowcake? A. No, that's Iraq and Africa yellowcake. Is that what you're asking? Q. Okay, yes. A. I apologize. I will apologize repeatedly today for my handwriting and my little symbols. Q. Okay, so that Q is Iraq? A. Yes, sir. Q. And the A -- A. It's an AFR for Africa. Q. Africa yellowcake? A. I think so. Q. And then below it, it has a dash. Is that SL -- is that Scooter Libby or the Vice President -- A. That's correct, yes. Q. And then below that it says, was DR request in 3-03? A. There was a -- DR is Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, and that he apparently -- according to Craig he had made a request in March of '03. Q. And so does this indicate to you that it was on June 9th that you made the request for the briefer, Craig Schmall, to find out whether or not the Vice President's Office was responsible for this request for a mission? A. Maybe. Let me -- if I can explain? Q. Sure. A. If I took this note directly, that would indicate it was on June 9. If, what I did, is I wrote this note down in my list of action items, then June 9 might be the date that the action item -- the date of the listing in the action items. MR. FITZGERALD. Okay. Now, let me show you what is -- we have the Bates Stamp No. 3079. MS. KEDIAN. And this will be marked Exhibit 52. BY MR. FITZGERALD: Q. And for the record, some of the copies we're showing you have an unusual marking at the top that's not an official classification which is being addressed, but I can assure you there's no -- nothing sensitive in here that the Grand Jury can't see. So -- A. Thank you, sir. Q. -- that shouldn't be a distraction. Okay. And if you look at that document, is that also dated June 9, '03? A. It may be one thing on this sheet actually which -- Q. Well, I'm not going to show it to anyone but you. We're not going to put it on the screen. A. Thank you, sir. Q. Okay. A. Yes, it says June -- 6-9-03 and -- Q. And does this have Q next to June 9-03? A. Yes, it has what you probably think is a Q. Q. Okay, what is it? What is next -- the thing that looks like a Q, what is it? A. It's a little symbol that means I may want to later come back and make a note about that. Q. Okay. And we're not going to talk about any of the entries other than those relating to -- A. Yes, that would be best, I think. Q. Okay. If you go down, the fourth entry, the fourth tick mark, do you see the same reference there, Craig -- A. Yes, I do, sir. Q. -- no OVP request for uranium procurement? A. Yes, sir. Q. And under that does it say, "Scooter" Libby or Vice President? A. Yes, sir. Q. And under that, was DR request in 3-03? A. Yes, sir. Q. And above uranium procurement, what does it say above uranium procurement? A. I, I think it says -- this one is less clear than the other one. I think it's the symbol for Iraq, but I'm not sure, and Africa yellowcake. Q. Okay. And does that -- looking at that entry, just that entry on the page, does that mirror the entry on the document -- A. Yes, sir. Q. -- Exhibit 51? A. This is one I copied over. MR. FITZGERALD. Okay. And we will deem marked but not put before the Grand Jury this page, and deem it as 52 for the record. We'll keep that separate so that the only entry that's in the record is that particular entry. BY MR. FITZGERALD: Q. And is there a reason you would copy it over onto the Exhibit 51 in exactly the same format with the -- in terms of indents and punctuation? A. Yeah, the indents mean something to me. I mean, it tends to indicate to me -- it's why I write on unlined paper. It tends to indicate to me something about how the content is in the order and what it means. Q. Okay. So looking at 51, does the Iraq or Africa yellowcake written above the line have some relevance to -- the lines written above the line? A. I think it has to do with another re. And I think what happened here was this was the first time I wrote it down probably and I wrote Africa yellowcake, and then I also wanted to make clear Iraq, so I put the Iraq. And as you'll see, it's really trivial, and I apologize, but it's directly over the re, and it shouldn't be, so I think I wrote that second. I think I wrote Africa yellowcake, and then I went back and put in the Iraq directly above the re on the, on the note sheet. Q. And do you have a practice at times of taking things off the list of what's deemed marked 52 and recreating a separate sheet -- A. Yes. Q. -- in the identical format? A. Yes, sir, because then normally I would discard the sheet. Q. And the sheet then being what has been deemed marked as 52? A. Yes. The ones that are sort of action item lists I would normally discard when I was done with it after I had made sure to take down anything I thought -- take down separately anything I thought I needed to keep. Q. Okay. And looking at June 9, '03, the first check on that item on that page, does that indicate the President was interested in the State of the Union and the Kristof article? A. Yes. Q. And do you recall what the occasion was that, that you came to learn that the President was interested in the Kristof article? A. I, I don't. It could be something that somebody said to me that I -- it doesn't mean that I observed it. It may be something someone said to me and I wrote it down. Q. Any recollection of discussing with the Vice President the interest of the President in the Kristof article? A. I don't, I don't have a recollection of it. Q. Did you ever recall talking to the President himself about the Kristof article? A. No, I don't, I don't think so. Q. And do you ever recall Vice President Cheney talking to you about the President's interest in the Kristof article in particular? A. Specifically that? I don't, sir. The way this note is written, I take it to be something that someone told me that I wanted to mention to the Vice President, not something the Vice President said to me. Q. Okay. And do you have any recollection as to who would have told you that? A. No, sir. It could have been a senior staff meeting, it could have been 15 or 20 of us gathered. It could have been somebody saying something. Q. Now, have you come to learn, back to 52, have you come to learn that there was a report prepared by the Bureau of Intelligence and Research at the State Department commonly known as INR on about June 10th of 2003? A. Yes, sir. The FBI told me about it. Q. Okay. And when you say the FBI told you about that, that would be some time after October 1st of 2003 when the investigation began? A. Yes, sir. Q. Prior to that time had you ever heard of the existence of an INR report concerning the trip to Niger and the role played by former ambassador Wilson? A. Yes, sir. Q. Okay. And tell us how you learned of it. A. At the end of September there was a meeting in the Situation Room underneath the White House, Classified Meeting Room, and it was a very long meeting that covered several subjects. Towards the end of the meeting, we were in a very small group which included the Secretary of State, and the Secretary of State in that meeting alluded to the fact that there was a memo from the State Department -- so this was like September, late September of '03, that there was a memo from the State Department written much, much earlier which talked about a meeting in which this assignment came about, I guess the origins of the assignment, Ambassador Wilson's assignment. Q. And was that -- did that meeting in the Situation Room occur at a time after the investigation had become public in the Washington Post? A. I -- if I recall, it became public in the Post on September 28 or so? Q. Yes. A. Is that correct? So it was a couple days after that. Q. Prior to Secretary Powell mentioning that document, had you ever heard of the existence of the INR report prior to that date? A. I don't have any recollection of an INR document prior to that date. Q. And do you recall going back to June 10th, assuming the document -- have you, have you since read that document by the way? A. No. No, sir. It was handed to me -- during my interview with the FBI and my lawyer said, if you haven't read the document, you shouldn't read it now, and so I gave it back. Q. Okay. When looking at the document did it look like something you had read before in the brief time that you had it? A. No, sir. Q. And did it -- do you recall during the time period prior to June 10th ever asking Secretary Grossman questions about what role, if any, the Office of Vice President had played in causing this mission, this trip to Niger by the former ambassador? A. I -- you referred to this before. I really don't recall a discussion with Secretary Grossman, who is from the State Department. And my understanding was that it was the Central Intelligence Agency mission and so I don't, I don't recall a discussion with him about whether the State Department had a role in it. Q. And -- but you did understand the person who went was a former ambassador? A. Yes, sir. Q. And in the Kristof article, there was a claim that the former ambassador reported to the State Department what his findings were. Correct? A. Actually, I had forgotten that. Maybe that was on my mind at the time. Q. As you sit here today do you know whether or not you ever spoke to Secretary Grossman about having him find out information about what caused this former ambassador to be sent to Niger? A. I don't recall it. Q. Do you know if you spoke to anyone else at the State Department about that, about that question of who was responsible for sending Ambassador Wilson to Niger? A. I don't recall a discussion with people from the State Department about it. Q. And do you recall discussing it with anyone else at that time, any other agency? A. Well, the discussion with Craig Schmall, and I, I may have tried to speak to -- I tried to speak at some point during this period to John McLaughlin who is the Deputy at the Central Intelligence Agency which would have been the people to send him. Again, during an interview with the FBI agents they raised an incident which I spoke to Bob Grenier who works for McLaughlin, or is a Deputy for McLaughlin, for John McLaughlin. And I don't -- I recall talking to Bob Grenier about something and it could have been this inquiry, but I don't, I don't really recall the discussion in detail. Q. And do you recall ever having a discussion with Marc Grossman before, during or after a Deputy's Committee Meeting where Marc Grossman told you that he had learned the former ambassador's wife had worked at the CIA in the Counterproliferation Division? A. No, I don't. Q. Do you recall any conversation at any time when Secretary Grossman told you that the former ambassador's wife worked at the CIA? A. I, I don't recall. Q. You have no memory of that whatsoever? A. Sorry, sir, I don't. MR. FITZGERALD. Now, why don't we look at the notes from your, from your conversation with Vice President Cheney, and I think their page references are Bates Stamp No. 2919 or -- MS. KEDIAN. This has previously been marked as Exhibit 6. BY MR. FITZGERALD: Q. Okay. And is this a note, is this a note you referred to as -- A. Yes, sir. Q. -- your notes of the conversation? A. Yes, sir. Q. And starting in the upper left corner it has a date. What do you read the date to be? A. Well, it's a little -- it gets a little confused. I read it to be 6-12-03, but over the 12 is a symbol that I use which means that I don't know that it's a 12. It's on or about the 12th, or it's a guess basically. MR. FITZGERALD. Okay. And we might -- do we have the original document here? MS. KEDIAN. We do. BY MR. FITZGERALD: Q. Oh. But looking ahead to -- what's the first entry to the right of the date? A. A "T" for telephone. Q. And then what is the -- why don't you interpret for us what the first line says? A. It says that I was -- this, this was a note that I took after I took the note, sometime after I took the note, and it's putting down that this was a note of a phone call between me and the Vice President about uranium and Iraq, the Kristof New York Times article. Q. And then continue down to the next entry which seems to have something written before the parenthesis? And we'll put in front of you the original document. A. Yes, it's just a bullet -- Q. Okay. A. -- that's before it. What happened with this document is I wrote the -- I took the note without the heading is my recollection. And I went back later and added that heading -- MR. FITZGERALD. Well, why don't we turn that off for the moment -- MS. KEDIAN. Okay. WITNESS. Sorry. MR. FITZGERALD. -- because I don't want you to look up. WITNESS. So I took the note without this, this heading on -- about the telephone and what it was. I made this up later is my recollection of it. And so the note for some time read just like that, without the top line. And I went back later and added the top line when I came across the note. And that's my recollection anyway. And what, what it says after that is, I am writing down here something that the Vice President had told me someone had told him, although it doesn't reflect that which he usually would, that's what this is. And it says, took place at our behest, dash, functional office. And then -- BY MR. FITZGERALD: Q. Go ahead, I'm sorry. A. And then below that it says, debriefing took place here, meaning D.C., I assume. And then it says, and there was a meeting in the region. And then initially when I first wrote it, this four was not, was not there, and the box was not there. I wrote down OVP and Defense and State expressed strong interest in issue. Q. Okay. A. And at some point, as I recall, I went and -- from the spacing, esoteric, but from the spacing I, I recall that I went back and wrote in, because at some point, I think after he initially said it, he told me, I guess Counterproliferation, which I think the CP is, and then his wife works in that division. Q. Okay. A. And then he switched from debriefing me about what someone had told him to giving me the points that he thought I should make in talking to the press. Q. Okay. A. And he said, didn't know about the mission, didn't get a report back, oh, and didn't have any indication of a forgery. This is a mixed line. Didn't have an indication of a forgery, was from CIEA. I guess I had -- it should say, didn't have any indication of a forgery until the IAEA or the first indication of a forgery was from the IAEA, but I just mixed it up when I was writing it. Q. Okay. And then above the three ticks down below, one, two and three -- A. Uh-hum. Q. -- there's something crossed out. Do you know what that says? A. I don't. Q. Now, you mentioned that at first you didn't write four, or put it around the brackets -- A. Yes. Q. -- but on the day of this conversation did you put the brackets and the four around it -- A. Yes. Q. -- at some point? A. Yes. Q. And was that because you were suggesting that in addition to the three points dictated below that the Vice President wanted you to make, that you might also want to make the fourth point? A. Yes, sir. Q. Okay. And then the arrow next to it attributes something to the Vice President. If you could tell us what that says? A. It says, hold, get the Agency to answer that. So as he went through his points I made these notes, one, two and three to clarify in my mind what it was I was doing, and then I wrote down point four and suggested should I also -- or said, should I also say OVP, and Defense and State -- it wasn't just us, it was several offices asking about this? And he quite rightly said, no, you should get the Agency to say that. Q. Okay. Looking back up at the top, do you know what was under the 12 when you wrote it in terms of -- is the two correcting something, if you can tell? A. I might have written 18 and then switched it to 12 when I realized it wasn't the 18th. That's a guess. I can't really tell without a microscope or something. Q. Okay. And forgetting the top line which starts with June 12th, '03 and ends with New York Times article -- A. Yes. Q. -- is there anything below that other than stamps and Bates Stamps No., but all the blue ink below that, that was written during the conversation that you had with the Vice President? A. Yes, sir, I think so. Q. And that was a telephone, telephone conversation? A. Correct, sir. Q. And does that -- do you know whether you were in the White House at the time? A. I don't, sir. Q. Do you know whether the Vice President was in the White House at the time? A. I don't, sir. Q. Okay. And as far as the top line goes, aside from the correction to the date, where it says, telephone, Vice President re uranium and Iraq, Kristof, New York Times article, do you know when that was put on the page in blue ink? A. I think I wrote it at the same time that I, I did, at least the first of the dates -- Q. Okay. And do you know whether that was during the conversation or at a later time? A. No, I think that was a later time. Q. And do you know how much later? A. I don't. My -- I have a -- my recollection of it is I came across the note which because it was in the middle of a conversation I didn't take the time to write the heading, and then I used it, set it aside, and then I came back to it. And when I came back to it, I realized there was no heading on it. I didn't want to have to puzzle out twice what it was, so I wrote a header on it. Q. Okay. And so do you know if that was added in June, July, August, September or October? A. I don't know. It might have been in June but I don't know. Q. Okay. And do you know, was this added before or after the investigation began? A. I think it was before the investigation began. Q. Do you know if you -- did you add anything in terms of notes, the dates or what it concerned when there was a request to review documents? Did you go back and add anything? A. No, I don't think so. Q. So to the best of your recollection, this would have been added, the entry date, some time after your conversation with Vice President Cheney but before this investigation began? A. Yes, sir. Q. And do you know if you went back and reviewed it again to change the date from June whatever it was to June 12th? A. I'm sorry? Q. Do you know what, what caused you to go back and review the date and change it? A. I think what happened was I initially wrote it and then realized that wasn't the right date and that it would be inaccurate because this was for my discussion with Pincus and the Pincus discussion was before his article. So the one thing I think I know about June 12 was that it wasn't the 12th because the article appeared on the 12th, and it would have been before that. Q. And so this was a conversation you had with Vice President Cheney in the context of figuring out what to say to Mr. Pincus who was writing a piece following up on the Kristof article? A. It was, it was to prepare to say something to the press and I think it was with Pincus in mind. Yes, sir. Q. And as you sit here today, is it possible that you're the person who had learned that the former ambassador's wife had worked in the functional office in Counterproliferation and that you had told Vice President Cheney that on this date? A. I don't think so, sir. Q. And is that from your -- first of all, is that based upon your memory? A. Yes, sir. Q. And anything about the document that would indicate that it was Vice President Cheney who told you the information rather than the other way around? A. Well, the way the, the way the line is drawn, and then it doesn't say SL saying this, it looks like him saying it. I wouldn't normally write down something I said because I said it. I don't -- I wouldn't need to. Q. Okay, so the -- A. So I think in this case, usually when I wrote something down that I say, I put SL colon, and then the statement. So I was hurried here because I was trying to not hold him up and get down everything that he said accurately, and I think that's what he said. And I, and I have this recollection of him saying it, so -- Q. And you have -- and your recollection about that was that he said it in a -- how would you describe -- A. Offhand, sort of curious, curiosity-type manner. Q. And did you respond in any way to that, to that fact? A. I don't think so. Q. What did you think of that fact at the time? A. Curiosity. Doesn't -- might mean nothing, might mean something, I don't know. Q. And do you know if on or about June 12th Marc Grossman from the State Department had had a conversation with you about Wilson's wife working at the CIA? A. I don't recall anything about a Grossman conversation, sir. Q. And do you recall if you ever had a conversation with Mr. Grenier in which you discussed Wilson's wife's employment? A. I don't think I discussed Wilson's wife's employment with, with Mr. Grenier. I think if I discussed something it was what they knew about the request about Mr., about Mr. Wilson. I don't recall the content of the discussion. Q. And do you recall if there was an urgency to the conversation when you spoke to Mr. Grenier? A. I recall that I was reaching Mr. Grenier -- I was trying to reach Mr. McLaughlin and couldn't, and spoke instead to Mr. Grenier. And so if I did that instead of just waiting for Mr. McLaughlin, it was probably something that was urgent in the sense that my boss, the Vice President, wanted, wanted to find something out. Not, not necessarily in the real world, but he wanted an answer and usually we try and get him the answer when we can. Q. So it is fair to say in looking at the document that the three points the Vice President wanted you to make were that -- he didn't know about the mission, there wasn't a report given back, you need to look at the -- A. Thank you. Sorry. Q. That he didn't know, the Vice President didn't know about the mission, that the Vice President's Office didn't receive a report back, and that there wasn't an indication that the documents were a forgery until the IAEA so indicated? A. Yes, sir. Q. And that your suggestion that you pointed out the trip took place at the behest of other agencies as well was, was rebuffed by the Vice President who thought the better course was to have the Agency, CIA, come out and say that themselves? A. Yes, sir. Q. Now, did you talk to Mr. Pincus at the Washington Post? A. Yes, sir, I did. Q. And did you talk to him prior to the article on June 12th? A. Yes, sir, I did. Q. And do you recall what you told him? A. I told him that I didn't -- that the Vice President didn't request the mission. I think I told him that we did not get a report back from the mission. And I assume from this note that I also told him about the IAEA. There is an article which eventually comes out. Looking at that might refresh me about whether I told him other things but -- MR. FITZGERALD. Okay. Why don't we get out the June 12th Pincus article. MS. KEDIAN. That's part of Exhibit 3. BY MR. FITZGERALD: Q. Let me take a moment and read the article and see if it refreshes your recollection as to anything else that you may have told Mr. Pincus. GRAND JUROR. Since it's almost noon, is this line of questioning going to take much longer? MR. FITZGERALD. No, we'll wrap it up shortly in time for lunch. WITNESS. I don't mean to hold everybody up, but there is a part where he talks about us -- do you know where that is in the article? BY MR. FITZGERALD: Q. No, but why don't we just take a moment and read, read the article just to see if anything else rings a bell. A. My, my apologies. (long pause) I don't know where he -- we could be the source for some of this, I don't know if I -- it doesn't refresh me as to what I said to him. Q. Okay. Can we just -- two questions. In there it indicates in one paragraph, "Cheney and his staff continue to get intelligence on the matter but the Vice President, unlike other senior administration officials, never mentions it in a public speech." Do you know if you told that to Pincus or not? A. I might have. It's, it's true, he did not talk about it in a speech. The "Continue to get intelligence on the matter" is causing me to stumble a little bit in that I don't, I don't think after -- a few days after -- it was the Vice President who asked the question, and a few days after he asked it, we got sort of a temporary answer from the Agency. And then I don't, I don't know that we got anything until the National Intelligence Estimate came out which had a very definitive statement, that they had begun to buy uranium. So I don't -- when it says "on the matter," I don't know that we got anything more about Ambassador Wilson's trip, not at my level in any case, or the Vice President's level. There was continued intelligence about Iraq and uranium, so that looks like phrasing that -- it doesn't look like the way I would have said it anyway. Q. Okay. And the last question is, the next sentence, do you know who the source for the quote -- source for the information that says, "he and his staff did not learn of its role in spurring the mission until it was disclosed by New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof on May 6th --" A. Yes. Q. "-- according to an administration official --" A. That, that could be me, which would be consistent with the first of my bullets, that I didn't know, we didn't know about the mission and we didn't in fact know that we had had a role in it because it was the CIA's initiative it turns out, and that could have been -- I could have said that to him. MR. FITZGERALD. Okay. Why don't we break for lunch. GRAND JUROR. We'll be back at 1 o'clock. MR. FITZGERALD. Okay, 1 o'clock. GRAND JUROR. Thank you. MR. FITZGERALD. You can step outside, and wait at the door, and we'll take care of the documents, and we'll just come back at 1 o'clock. Thank you. WITNESS. Thank you. (Whereupon, the witness was excused at 12:02 p.m.) (Whereupon, the witness was recalled at 1:15 p.m.) GRAND JUROR. I'll remind you, you're still under oath. WITNESS. Thank you. BY MR. FITZGERALD: Q. Mr. Libby, I mis-spoke when I invited you back in. In your conversations with Mr. Pincus prior to the June 12th article, did you understand from, from your conversation with Vice President Cheney whether or not there was any problem with you telling Mr. Pincus that Wilson's wife worked at the CIA? A. No, he was not telling me to mention that part and I didn't understand that to be part of what I was supposed to talk to Mr. Pincus about. Q. And did you think there was a reason you couldn't tell Mr. Pincus that Wilson's wife worked at the CIA? A. No, it just wasn't a particularly powerful point compared to the other points. I didn't understand it to be a point worth mentioning in that context. Q. The Vice President obviously thought it was important enough to share with you, or interesting enough to color the background. Fair enough? A. Yes, sir. Q. And you thought it interesting enough to write in your notes. Correct? A. Just a slight emendation of that. I -- as I said, I often take my notes as he's speaking because I don't know what is going to later be important. So I took the note because he was saying it. But it was not a point that I even considered as something that I was going to be discussing with Mr. Pincus. Q. And when you wrote your note it was something that you recalled as sort of the change of tone when the Vice President told you about it as being curious. Fair, fair to say? A. Yes, sir. Q. And did you think that might help elucidate Mr. Pincus' view of what had happened here? A. It was not one of the points he was giving me to, to discuss with Pincus and the points with Pincus seemed on their face directly in line sufficient and that's, that's what I did. So that's, that's what I covered with Mr. Pincus. Q. Did you limit yourself to the four corners of exactly what was written in the three bullet points in your notes when you spoke to Mr. Pincus? A. Within the boundaries of that pretty much, I think. Q. Did you consider there to be any sort of prohibition when you're just discussing the fact that the ambassador's wife worked at the CIA when you spoke to Mr. Pincus? A. No, sir. Q. And in terms of telling the story to you in context, the Vice President referenced that fact in telling you. Did you see any reason why you shouldn't reference that fact in giving the context to Mr. Pincus? A. No, sir. Q. Do you know if you talked to Mr. Pincus about Wilson's wife? A. No, I, I believe I did not, sir. Q. Can you rule out the possibility that you told Mr. Pincus about Wilson's wife during that conversation? A. I have no recollection of having discussed it with Mr. Pincus and I don't think I did. Q. Can you rule out the possibility that you did, in your mind? A. I don't think I did. Q. And I understand that it's very clear that you don't think you did. I'm just saying, can you rule out that you didn't do that when you spoke to Mr. Pincus? A. I don't quite know what to say, sir. I don't think I did. I have no recollection of doing it. It's not what I set out do. I don't believe I did. Just "rule out the possibility" is an odd phrasing to me. I'm, I'm reasonably certain I did not. Q. Let me give you an example. The President of the United States called you in and said, this is super-super secret that we can't even tell you the clearance level this is at, and this involves the most sensitive intelligence gathering matters ever to be conducted by the United States. And you went and had a meeting with a reporter afterwards, and we said, do you recall telling that person that information. You could say, not only do I not remember, there's no way I could have done that. And I guess, now I'm asking you here, you indicate that the information about Wilson's wife you didn't understand to be a prohibition on it. So I'm simply asking that, even though you think you didn't talk with Pincus about it, is it possible that you did? A. Well, I didn't think it was under the super-super secret categorization. So in that part of the analogy, it was nothing like that about what he said. But as I say, I don't think I talked to Mr. Pincus about it. Q. Is it possible you did? A. Best of my recollection of the conversation, no. I did not talk to him about it. Q. Now, this conversation you had with the Vice President was prior to your speaking to Mr. Pincus. Correct? The conversation -- A. Yes. Yes, sir. Q. And you spoke to Mr. Pincus before he printed the June 12th article? A. Yes, sir. Q. So the conversation with the Vice President was some time before June 12th. Correct? A. Yes, sir. Q. And was that the first time you had heard from anyone, as far as you can recall, that Wilson's wife worked at the CIA? A. Yes, sir. Q. And you have a recollection of this being a new fact as you heard it? A. Yes, sir. Q. And so that based upon your recollection, not your notes, that you recall that that's the first time that you heard about the former ambassador's wife working at the CIA? A. Yes, sir, although my recollection is not perfect. That was my recollection. MR. FITZGERALD. Now, if I could show you a document that Ms. Kedian will tell us what it's marked -- MS. KEDIAN. Grand Jury Exhibit 53. BY MR. FITZGERALD: Q. And again we will deem it marked, but not make it -- just make the full text available to you, and then if we need to show it to the Grand Jury at some point, we'll redact it. Are those notes that you made? A. Yes, sir. Q. And are they dated June 3rd, at least in the upper left corner of the page? A. Yes, sir. Q. Okay. And do they indicate that one of the things that's on this -- is this the notes that consist of your things to do with the Vice President that you make each day? A. I have things to do with the Vice President and I have things to do on my own. This is probably things to do with the Vice President, but they look alike, they look alike. Q. Okay. I'll point you to one entry. A. Yes, sir. Q. It says on there, talk to VP about Walter Pincus article. A. Yes, sir. Q. Does that indicate to you that -- at least as of June 3rd, you had a note to yourself that you should talk to the Vice President about the article that Walter Pincus was preparing to write? A. Not quite, sir. It indicates to me I was going to talk to him about a Walter Pincus article. But there could have been a prior Walter Pincus article that said something -- There were Walter Pincus articles in May, towards the end of May, and it could be that what I want to talk to him about is something that was in a prior article. It, it, it could mean, but it doesn't necessarily mean, the article that he was preparing for June 12th, that eventually appears on June 12. Q. Okay. Did you, between June 3rd and June 12th, did you talk to Walter Pincus to provide information as regards any article other than the June 12th piece he wrote? A. No. But this mark here might just be something that in an article -- if we were to go back and look at his articles before June 12th, I might see something that, that I -- caught my eye back then and I wanted to talk to the Vice President about. Q. Right. And I understand. The bracket is -- A. I did not talk to Walter Pincus about any drafting -- his drafting any other article. Q. So this item refers to talking to the Vice President, looking forward to the article that would appear on June 12th or refers to something that had appeared before June 3rd that was already written and published that you wanted to call the Vice President's attention to or discuss? A. Yes, sir. Q. And as you sit here today, I realize it's awhile back, do you know if this -- does Pincus -- does an article by Pincus prior to June 3rd stick in your mind? A. There were some articles by Pincus in May, towards the end of May, third week, fourth week of May where Director Tenet was talking about the intelligence from the war, it's is my recollection anyway. So there are some articles from Pincus, you know, he writes periodically and there were some articles from Pincus in that period. But I don't know what this refers to. Q. Okay. And as you look at this entry now, do you have a belief as to whether or not this was looking backward to a past article, or looking forward, or you don't know? A. I don't know. My recollection is that the Pincus article was around for awhile. When I say that I mean to say that I had heard from Cathie or someone that he was doing this article for awhile is my sense of it. So it could be either. Q. And now, there came a time -- did there come a time when you spoke to a David Sanger of the New York Times? A. Yes, sir. Q. Okay. And did you speak to him in early July? A. From reviewing my notes I have seen that it was July 2nd. Q. Okay. And independent of your notes fixing a date, do you have an independent recollection of sitting down with Mr. Sanger and speaking to him? A. Very vague actually, but yes, I have some recollection. Q. Did you meet with him in person or did you speak by telephone? A. In person and he had someone with him as I recall. Q. Do you know if it would be James Risen, R-i-s-e-n? A. Yeah, I think that sounds right. From my notes that sounds right. Q. Okay. And had you ever sat down with David Sanger before? A. Yes, he was at a dinner I was at. It's not a common occurrence for me but I had met him before. Q. Was that the first time you sat down with him as an official source for an article? A. It's not common for me to sit with him. It could be the very first, I'm not sure. Q. And do you recall from your discussion with Mr. Sanger if you had any conversation about Ambassador Wilson, either by name or by description as the former ambassador, or his wife in that meeting? A. I don't. I have looked -- we have some notes of that conversation, and in looking through the notes of it, I don't recall anything about the wife. I can't recall if there's anything about, about, about the Ambassador Wilson trip as I sit here, but it would be in the notes. I recall that he was -- my impression is that he was primarily interested in the Colin Powell presentation, the presentation of Secretary Colin Powell had made to the U.N. in February of '03. Q. And did you provide him information about your recollection of how the Colin Powell presentation was put together? A. Yes, sir, that's my recollection of it. Q. And have you looked since that time at an article on July 8th by David Sanger? A. I suspect I did. I don't recall it. Q. In that article the relevant sentence I wanted to -- sentences I wanted to call to your attention. Let me pull out a copy. One indicated that Wilson had said that he reported back, that the intelligence was likely fraudulent, indicating that the intelligence by Iraq trying to get uranium, and it said, White House officials say his warning never reached them. Do you know if you would have provided information to David Sanger indicating that the warning by Wilson never reached the White House? A. I, I actually -- I don't know that Ambassador Wilson actually warned that the documents were fraudulent. There is, to my knowledge, all I had seen was one memorandum which may or may not still be classified in which is a report about Ambassador Wilson's trip. And in that report -- may I continue? Q. Sure. A. In that report there are denials from the Niger government -- this is actually in Director Tenet's July 11th statement about it, there are -- public statement so it's not classified -- there are denials in the first part of the report from the Niger government that they ever provided uranium. But there is also an assertion from a former Nigerian, I think prime minister, that in fact an Iraqi delegation had come to Niger seeking to open relations and the Niger government, the prime minister, interpreted that to mean they were interested in purchasing uranium. So in fact, within Ambassador Wilson's -- within the report of Ambassador Wilson's trip and his finding was evidence that Iraq was trying to acquire uranium and that's what the CIA eventually puts into the NIE which is also unclassified now. As to the fraudulence of the documents, I don't think Ambassador Wilson as I have seen later, had ever actually seen the documents. I don't know if he opined on whether they were fraudulent or not. Q. Let me draw your attention ahead to July 6th -- A. Yes, sir. Q. -- when three things happen. First, there is the Op-ed in the New York Times by Joseph Wilson. Secondly, he appears on Meet the Press with Andrea Mitchell as the host. And third, there's a piece in the Washington Post talking about his Op-ed in the New York Times and giving some further information. Do you recall which of those two articles you read that day and whether or not you saw Wilson on Meet the Press? A. I don't think I saw Wilson on Meet the Press with Andrea Mitchell on cable, you know, on television. I don't know if I read the articles that day. It was Sunday and often I take the day off, but I think I read them -- I read them subsequently. Q. And what was your reaction when you read the Op-ed piece by Joseph Wilson? A. I recall that it was, you know -- here was this guy saying it was him who had done it. He was saying that we had -- he was saying that, that he thought that he had sort of definitively proven in his trip that there was no attempt by the Iraqis to purchase uranium in Niger. And that's not what his report actually proved. He was saying that we had asked for the trip, or he said that the next day on television, I've forgotten which, and that was not the case. He was saying that because we had asked about the trip, the Vice President must have gotten a report back about his trip and that was not the case. He was saying, because his report was definitive, which it wasn't, and because the Vice President had asked, which he hadn't, the Vice President must have gotten a response, which would have convinced the Vice President that, that Iraq had not tried to buy uranium, and therefore the Vice President must have twisted the facts, or other people must have twisted the facts. And as I was indicating, the premises were wrong, we didn't get his report. What we did get was intelligence from the CIA, not that one piece but the considered judgment of the CIA that in fact Iraq had tried to buy uranium. The Vice President had not asked for someone to go on a mission to Niger, so therefore he didn't get that report back. So there were a lot of things in there that were wrong. There was a place later in his article where he said, if I'm wrong about my report, if they discounted my report for some reason, then I have no complaint, although I'd be interested in knowing why they say that. And that made me hopeful that when it was explained to him that in fact his report didn't disprove it, and the CIA took his -- did not find his bit of intelligence as definitive, you know, we thought that that was hope that he'd then withdraw his accusation. Q. Now, is it fair to say that the article was viewed as an accusation by many, including the administration? A. Yes, sir. Q. If you accepted the premises of his article, his Op- ed, as being true, it would indicate that the Vice President knowingly allowed the President to lie to the American public and the world about what the United States government believed about Iraq's activities with regard to uranium. Fair to say? A. Not quite. Because he, he is straight forward in saying, all I know about is my report. And if they have other, other evidence then there's other evidence. But if they're relying on my report, then it's not, you know -- then it would be improper to say what he said assuming my report is right, but it may not be. That's what he said. Q. But it's fair to say that most people took away from that article as reported as an assertion by Wilson that the government misled the American people, not as a I'm not sure what happened and I want an answer? Is that fair to say? A. I, I don't -- if you look at his article, I think he does say in there, I may -- if there's other information, there's other information, he was pretty careful about that. Maybe people read it too quickly, as you say, and took away a different interpretation of it. MR. FITZGERALD. Sure. Why don't I give you a copy, which is Exhibit -- MS. KEDIAN. Three. MR. FITZGERALD. -- 3. And does it start with Joseph C. Wilson -- oh, this is the Washington Post. Do we have the Op-ed piece? MS. KEDIAN. Yes, I'm sorry. MR. FITZGERALD. Are you reading the New York Times or -- MS. KEDIAN. I'm sorry, I handed you -- WITNESS. I have a July 6 New York Times piece. MR. FITZGERALD. Oh, then you can keep reading. I'll read the same thing you're reading. BY MR. FITZGERALD: Q. Doesn't the second paragraph say, "Based on my experience with the administration in the months leading up to the war I have little choice but to conclude that some of the intelligence related to Iraq's nuclear weapons program was twisted to exaggerate the Iraqi threat." A. Right, some, "some of the intelligence," yeah. Q. Are you, are you telling me -- well, what was your reaction when you read this article? Were you angry? A. It's a, it's a bad article. And I don't mean to pick words with you. I'm just saying, within his article, as we go on, he does say that all he knows about it is what he knows about so -- Q. Well, let me ask you -- A. Just giving him credit for that. I'm trying to give him credit for that. Q. Were you angry were you read the article? A. Yes, because -- well, angry? I was concerned because it didn't seem to me an accurate portrayal of the facts. But I was also confident that when the facts came out it would be -- you know, it's, it's hard to counter a false accusation even with clear facts. But I was confident that the facts were quite clear, that in fact his cable was not definitive, that we had not asked for the report, that the report did not in fact reach the Vice President or me prior to the State of the Union, and we were not the people who were putting it into the claim. So the underlying facts I thought were quite solid, saying this was wrong, but it's disturbing to have something like this out there. Q. Was it fair to say you were upset when you read the article? A. There were a lot of articles to come out that, that, that say bad things about the administration and I guess I've gotten a little bit inured, inured to them. But I didn't like -- I did not like the article. Q. Were you upset? A. I guess I was upset. I was disturbed by the article, didn't like the article. Upset's a fair word, I guess. Q. And did you discuss it with the Vice President? A. Yes. Q. Were you uncertain -- A. I'm just trying to think about when. See, he was in -- I didn't discuss it when I first got it, but I'm sure I did shortly thereafter. He was in Wyoming, I think, over the July 4 weekend. So I probably didn't see him until, you know, Monday or Tuesday, I've forgotten when it was, after that, and I would have discussed it shortly thereafter. I didn't see him on -- if I read it on Sunday, I did not see him on Sunday. Q. Do you know if you discussed it by telephone with Vice President Cheney? A. I don't think I spoke to him by phone that weekend. Q. And can you tell us about the first time you discussed the article with Vice President Cheney? A. You know, I don't remember it in any detail. It was the same claim that we had had around since May. It's just now it had a name of it. Now we knew it was Ambassador Wilson. And there was this, you know, accusation of twisting the facts directly by somebody by name. So it was a concern. Q. Do you recall any reaction, whether he was upset? A. I'm sure he was upset. I don't recall the conversation all that clearly, but I'm sure he was upset. Q. And in terms of accusations against the administration, putting aside the truth or falsity of it -- A. Yes, sir. Q. -- we understand your view and as we said, the Grand Jury is not here to determine what the truth or falsity of particular assertions are -- A. Yes, sir. Q. -- this as an accusation was a direct accusation that the Vice President was dishonest, if you followed the inferences that Mr. Wilson made, that the President was dishonest and that the country was misled into war. Is it fair to say that that was the -- perhaps the most serious attack on the administration's credibility thus far in the Presidential term? A. It was a serious accusation. I'd, I'd have to go back, back over the administration to evaluate it compared to other attacks, but it was, it was a very serious attack. Q. Well, as you sit here now, can you think of any other time in the administration where someone directly came out by name and accused the administration of deliberately exaggerating and twisting intelligence with regard to specific facts? A. Well, the sixteen words had been around. That the sixteen words were false and shouldn't have been in there, had been around for awhile, and I can't remember exactly when the -- what level of attack came from what. But this -- that was certainly -- this realm of issue reminds me, comes to mind, as a very serious attack from it. I don't recall sitting here whether there was anything in tax policy or any other policy that quite amounts to this. Q. And given that the sixteen words were believed to have been part of a speech setting up the administration's case for war against Iraq, is it fair to say that this was a very, very serious matter during the week of July 7th through the 14th at the White House? A. Yes, sir. Q. And was it a discussion of -- that was -- was it a topic that was discussed on a daily basis? A. Yes, sir. Q. And it was discussed on multiple occasions each day in fact? A. Yes, sir. Q. And during that time did the Vice President indicate that he was upset that this article was out there which falsely in his view attacked his own credibility? A. Yes, sir. Q. And do you recall what it is that the Vice President said? A. I recall that he was very keen to get the truth out. He wanted to get all the facts out about what he had or hadn't done, what the facts were or were not. He was very keen on that and said it repeatedly. Let's get everything out. He wanted to get it all out. That, that I recall. Q. Do you recall if you ever discussed a copy of the article with Vice President Cheney -- in front of you when he talked about? A. Physical copy in front of him? I don't recall that. He often cuts out an article and keeps it on his desk somewhere and thinks about it and I subsequently learned that he had such an article from the FBI agents who talked to me. Q. And had you seen that copy of the article before the FBI showed it to you during the course of the investigation? A. I, I don't recall it. It's possible if it was sitting on his desk that, you know, my eye went across it. I don't, I don't recall him pulling it out and saying something to him, but we talked about the article a fair amount. MR. FITZGERALD. And let me show you a copy of the article with handwritten notes on it. MS. KEDIAN. Grand Jury Exhibit 8. BY MR. FITZGERALD: Q. And in looking at Grand Jury Exhibit 8, can you tell us if you recognize the handwriting at the top, top of both pages? A. Yes, sir. It looks like the Vice President's handwriting. Q. Okay. And I take it you're familiar with his handwriting? A. I am. I couldn't necessarily pick it out from similar handwriting, but this looks like his handwriting to me. Q. Okay. And is it fair to say that there's various items underlined in this copy? A. Yes, sir. Q. Does that include the sentence, "I have little choice but to conclude that some of the intelligence related to Iraq's nuclear weapons program was twisted to exaggerate the Iraqi threat?" A. Yes, sir. Q. And does it also include handwriting at the top of the page that says, that reads, "have they done this sort of thing before?" A. I'm sorry, are you asking me if that appears at the top of the page? Q. Yes. A. Yes, sir, it does. Q. And does it say beneath that, send our -- "send an ambassador to answer a question"? A. Yes, sir. Q. And does it say below that, "do ordinary send people out pro bono to work for us?" A. It does, sir. Q. And does the top of the page have a note that continues over to the second page, "or did his wife send him on a junket?" A. Yes, sir. Q. And do you recall ever discussing those issues with Vice President Cheney? A. Yes, sir. Q. And tell us what you recall about those conversations. A. I recall that along the way he asked, is this normal for them to just send somebody out like this uncompensated, as it says. He was interested in how did this person come to be selected for this mission. And at some point after we learned that his wife worked at the Agency, you know, he -- that was part of the question. Q. Okay. And is it fair to say that he had told you back in June, June 12th or before, prior to the Pincus article, that his wife worked in the functional office of Counterproliferation of the CIA. Correct? A. Yes, sir. Q. So when you say, that after we learned that his wife worked at the Agency, that became a question. Isn't it fair to say that you already knew it from June 12th or earlier? A. I believe by, by this week I no longer remembered that. I had forgotten it. And I believe that because when it was told to me on July 10, a few days after this article, it seemed to me as if I was learning it for the first time. When I heard it, I did not think I knew it when I heard. Q. Okay. So let me back up a moment. We'll get to the July 10 conversation. A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you recall when the Vice President told you do we ordinarily send -- or did the wife send him a junket, when you had that conversation? Do you know when that was in relation to the July 6 article? A. I don't recall that conversation until after the, until after the Novak piece. I don't recall it during this week of July 6. I recall it after the Novak conver -- after the Novak article appeared I recall it, and I recall being asked by the Vice President early on, you know, about this envoy, you know, who is it and -- but I don't recall that early on he asked about it in connection with the wife, although he may well have given the note that I took. Q. And so your recollection is that he wrote on July -- that you discussed with the Vice President, did his wife send him on a junket? As a response to the July 14th Novak column that said, he was sent because his wife sent him and she works at the CIA? A. I don't recall discussing it -- yes, I don't recall discussing it in connection with when this article first appeared. I recall it later. Q. And are you telling us under oath that from July 6th to July 14th you never discussed with Vice President Cheney whether Mr. Wilson's wife worked at the CIA? A. No, no, I'm not saying that. On July 10 or 11 I learned, I thought anew, that the wife -- that, that reporters were telling us that the wife worked at the CIA. And I may have had a conversation then with the Vice President either late on the 11th or on the 12th in which I relayed that reporters were saying that. When I had that conversation I had forgotten about the earlier conversations in which he told me about -- reflected in my notes that we went over this morning, in early June, before the Pincus article, when he had told me about that the wife worked at the CIA. I had just forgotten it. Q. And just fix the, the person -- who did you speak to on July 10th or 11th that you recalled learning again, thinking it was for the first time, that Wilson's wife worked at the CIA? A. Tim Russert of NBC News, Washington Bureau Chief for NBC News. Q. And so we'll come back to that conversation in a moment. A. Yes, sir. Q. Is it your testimony under oath that you don't recall discussing Wilson's wife working at the CIA between the July 6th date when the Wilson's Op-ed appeared and your conversation with Tim Russert? A. That's correct, sir, but my -- I don't really -- I don't recall discussing it. What I do recall is being surprised when I talked to Mr. Russert on the 10th or the 11th, and I am inferring from that surprise that I hadn't talked about it earlier in the week. I simply do not recall any discussion early in the week about Mrs. Wilson. What I do recall is that I was surprised when I heard it from Mr. Russert. Q. Let me ask you this. Do you recall going to lunch on July 7th with Ari Fleischer? A. I do, sir. Q. Okay. And do you recall what you discussed over lunch with Ari Fleischer? A. Yes, it had been scheduled for some time. Ari was leaving the White House. He was a friend, is a friend. And we had decided we would get together for lunch before he left as sort of a good-bye lunch. And we discussed the Miami Dolphins, because we're both Miami Dolphins fans; we discussed his plans for the future, what he was going to do, work in New York, I think it was, or start a consulting-type firm if I recall; and you know, it had been fun to work together; and we probably also discussed the uranium business because it was a very hot topic at that point. I don't recall it as clearly as I do the Miami Dolphins and his plans for the future because that was the point of the lunch. Q. And in the discussion, discussing the uranium issue, do you know if you discussed Mr. Wilson? A. I don't recall it, but I suspect we did because it was a very -- you know, that was just -- now, but I don't recall it. Q. And on July 7th, do you recall if at the 6:45 briefing in the morning you and the Vice President asking Craig Schmall about Mr. Wilson and the circumstances of his trip? A. I don't, but it makes sense because the article had come out the day before. Q. And do you recall if at the senior staff meeting at 8:45 that day whether or not Karl Rove and others discussed that we needed to get a message out about Mr. Wilson, which is that the administration and the Vice President in particular, did not send him to Niger and that his report did not resolve the issue? A. That sounds right. There was a day -- I recall a day or maybe two when Karl spoke about it at the senior staff meeting. In one of them, I made some notes about it. I don't recall the date, but that would -- it was right in that day -- it was within a day of that, if it wasn't that day. Q. And are you aware that at 9:22 that day Cathie Martin, the Press Secretary, e-mailed Ari Fleischer with four talking points to get out -- the talking points concerning the Vice President's position which included the fact that the Vice President didn't send Wilson to Niger? We can show you that e-mail, I believe, as an exhibit, and see if that refreshes your recollection that the Vice President's press person was addressing this issue to Mr. Fleischer that day. MS. KEDIAN. Grand Jury, Grand Jury Exhibit 54. BY MR. FITZGERALD: Q. And I'll just read into the record, July 7th, 9:22, response to Joe Wilson. Four bullets. The Vice President's Office did not request the mission to Niger. The next bullet: The Vice President's Office was not informed of Joe Wilson's mission. Next bullet: The Vice President's Office did not receive a briefing about Mr. Wilson's mission after he returned. Final bullet: The Vice President's Office was not aware of Mr. Wilson's mission until recent press reports accounted for it. A. Yes. Q. Do you, do you recall if you were aware of those talking points at the time, on July 7th? A. I don't know that I saw this e-mail, but those were our basic talking points that we tried to get out, and I recall that Ari some time that day, it might have been at the 1 o'clock, made a statement which covered these types of points. And so therefore, it's quite likely I talked to him about it at the lunch as well. Q. And I believe if we checked, it might be at 9:36 that morning that Ari Fleischer, in a press gaggle, made the points that the Vice President did not request the trip, or know about it, or get briefed on the results. A. That actually sounds right, sir. Q. And thereafter, after the 6:45 briefing with the CIA briefer, and the senior staff meeting, and then Cathie Martin's e-mail, and Ari Fleischer's press gaggle, you then went to lunch with Mr. Fleischer about noon? A. Yes, sir. Yes, sir. Q. And do you have any recollection as you sit here now discussing Mr. Wilson with Ari Fleischer? A. I don't, I don't recall it, but it's pretty -- it -- you know, it makes sense and it's pretty likely. I just don't recall that, that part of the discussion with, with Ari. I think, if we were -- as we were discussing uranium in that period what I would be particularly concerned about was the NIE and what the, what the NIE had actually said because we were still in a stage before, as I recall, before Ari Fleischer came out and said it was a mistake to have the claim about uranium in the State of the Union. It was a big issue as to whether that -- this was a much bigger issue than the Wilson trip as to whether or not it was a mistake to have it in the State of the Union. And there was this NIE which had this assertion about the uranium. So I suspect that would have also been my focus for a discussion with -- Q. And -- A. Sorry, sir. Q. Do you recall if you discussed Mr. Wilson's wife during the lunch with Ari Fleischer? A. I don't recall discussing the wife. Because I was surprised at the discussion a few days later with, with Tim Russert, I would think that we did not discuss the wife. I just -- but I don't recall. Q. And as you sit here today, you do recall that that was the day that Ari Fleischer addressed some questions about Mr. Wilson's article at the press gaggle. Correct? A. I've seen the transcript since then, so that's what I recall really. Q. And you recall that some time that day, but not by lunch time, Mr. Fleischer, or some time after lunch either that day or the next, Mr. Fleischer issued a statement indicating in effect that the President didn't stand behind the sixteen words. Is that correct? A. I recall from looking at the record that it was the 7th that he made that statement, and that was the day I had the lunch. Q. And you recall that you had lunch with Mr. Fleischer? A. Yes, sir. Q. And you recall discussing Mr. Fleischer's future. Correct? A. Yes, sir. Q. And you recall discussing the Miami Dolphins. Correct? A. Yes, sir. I recall all that quite clearly. I had a lot of conversations during this period about this other stuff and I just don't recall it as distinctly as I only had one conversation about the Miami Dolphins in that period, so -- Q. Do you recall telling Mr. Fleischer that Wilson's wife worked at the CIA in the Counterproliferation Division? A. No, I don't. Q. And is it possible that you told Mr. Fleischer during that lunch that Wilson's wife worked at the CIA in the Counterproliferation Division? A. It's possible -- well, I don't recall it and I recall being surprised by Russert. So I tend to think I didn't know it then, but that's all I actually recall. Q. Isn't it a fact, sir, that you told Mr. Fleischer over lunch that this was "hush-hush" or "on the q.t." that Wilson's wife worked at the CIA? A. I don't recall that. Q. Do you recall discussing Mr. Wilson's wife's name with Mr. Fleischer? A. No, I don't think I knew it until the Novak article. Q. And what do you recall Mr. Wilson's wife's name to be? A. From the Novak article, Plame. Valerie Plame. Q. And how would you pronounce it, in a hard A or in a French way? A. I guess just what I said, Plame, like blame, I guess. Q. Rhyming with blame? A. I guess, yeah. Q. And as you sit here today do you recall whether or not you discussed whether or not Mr. Wilson's wife worked in the Counterproliferation Division? A. I do not recall discussing Mr. Wilson's wife at all with Ari. All I recall is -- from that week is the Tim Russert conversation. Q. So as you sit here today, it's your testimony that prior to your conversation with Tim Russert you neither discussed Wilson's wife's employment with either the Vice President or with Ari Fleischer, following the July 6th article? A. I'm sorry, my mind wandered. You're asking about -- could you repeat it? I'm sorry. Q. Sure. From July 6th up until the point when you spoke to Tim Russert, but not after, is it your testimony that you have no recollection of discussing Wilson's wife's employment at the CIA with either Vice President Cheney or Ari Fleischer? A. Yes, sir. In that period I have no recollection, that's correct. Q. And do you recall discussing with Cathie Martin between July 6th and July 10th the fact that Wilson's wife worked at the CIA? A. No. As I say, when I heard it from Tim Russert, which was on the 10th or the 11th, I was surprised by what I heard, and that's all I really recall from that week. So I don't recall any other discussion earlier in that week about it. Q. Prior to your conversation with Tim Russert, do you ever recall telling Cathie Martin that Wilson's wife worked at the CIA? A. No, sir. Q. Prior to your conversation with Tim Russert on July 10 or 11, do you ever recall a conversation where Cathie Martin told you that Wilson's wife worked at the CIA? A. No, sir. Q. And do you recall an occasion on or about July 8th where Cathie Martin came into the Vice President's Office with you present, and the Vice President, and indicated that Wilson's wife worked at the CIA, that she had learned that? A. July 8th? Q. Yes. A. I -- again, sir, I don't, I don't recall. What I recall -- all my recollection on this point is hinged on my surprise when I heard it from Tim Russert and I'm inferring the rest from that. I don't recall much about the -- anything about that subject in the week. What I recall from that week is being concerned to get the statement -- a clear statement out from the CIA, the Agency, from Director Tenet, and there was a lot of discussion during that week, as you've probably seen in my notes, and I was very much focused on getting the main part of the case out about whether -- about what the CIA had told us in October and subsequently about uranium, and I don't recall these discussions that you're referring to. Q. And is it fair to say that this reason this became such a hot issue that week was the sort of the firestorm that came as a result of the July 6th Wilson Op-ed piece? Correct? A. Yes, sir. Q. And just so we're clear, I understand what you recall about your conversation with Russert, but the time period before that, are you telling this Grand Jury you have no recollection of having the conversation on any day that week in which Cathie Martin told you in the, in the presence of the Vice President that Wilson's wife worked at the CIA? A. I have no recollection of that conversation. My first recollection is Tim Russert telling me that. Q. Now, do you recall a conversation in which Cathie Martin told you and the Vice President that Bill Harlow, the public affairs person at the CIA, had been receiving calls from Andrea Mitchell and David Martin about the controversy about the State of the Union address? A. I recall that there were -- that the CIA was receiving calls from -- yes, I recall something about that. I don't recall the Cathie Martin part, but it makes sense that it was Cathie that told us. Q. And do you recall being instructed by the Vice President that you should call Andrea Mitchell and David Martin? A. It sounds right, sir, yes. Q. Do you recall calling Andrea Mitchell? A. Yes, I recall calling Andrea Mitchell and I recall calling David Martin. Q. And do you know how many times that week you spoke to Andrea Mitchell? A. My recollection is that I talked to her once about an incorrect report, and then after my phone call with Tim Russert I spoke to her again. I think on the second conversation, I'm not sure whether it was that week, or early the next week or some time the next week. Q. So you have two conversations with Andrea Mitchell. One before your Russert conversation and one after your Russert conversation? A. That's my general recollection, sir. Q. And do you recall the subject matter of the conversation you had with Andrea Mitchell before you spoke to Tim Russert? A. Yes. She had said something incorrect in one of her television appearances, and I was trying to correct that. Q. Do you know what it was that she said that had been incorrect? A. There were two things being -- in that period that people were saying incorrectly that touched on the Vice President's Office. One had to do with Halliburton. I think this had to do with the Wilson claim that we had sent him, but I'm not sure. I'd have to see what -- if I looked at what she said that week I might be able to figure it out. MR. FITZGERALD. Okay. And why don't we show you the July 8th transcript of Andrea Mitchell speaking at 6:40 p.m. MS. KEDIAN. Exhibit 55. (Long pause while witness reading) WITNESS. I think I see something here. BY MR. FITZGERALD: Q. Are you finished reading the article? A. Yes, sir. Q. Something ring a bell when you read it? A. Yes, it says towards the bottom of the page here it says, "the White House blamed an October CIA report for ignoring Wilson's information and not requesting the original documents in which the charge was based for more than a year." And this was not -- two things, it was not right. I don't think anybody blamed the CIA for ignoring his information. In fact, I think he -- the CIA had looked at his information, had found that it, as reported in the NIE in October, had found -- in fact, far from ignoring it, they looked at it and found that it did not contradict the claim, and in fact supported the claim that Iraq was trying to buy uranium from Niger. So -- but phrased this way, that we blamed -- that the White House blamed an October CIA report for ignoring the information, quite to the contrary. I think it was argued that the CIA had properly taken everything into consideration and it still concluded, as they said in the October NIE, which was six months after Ambassador Wilson's report, had still concluded that there was good grounds, and in fact had concluded flat out that Iraq had begun to try, vigorously trying to procure uranium. So there wasn't a criticism of the CIA for ignoring Ambassador Wilson as she said. I think thought the CIA was right in how they evaluated it. But phrased like this, it would likely be a subject that got the CIA upset. Q. And is it fair to say that earlier in the transcript that Ms. Mitchell, who had been the person to interview Mr. Wilson on Meet the Press just two days before, had discussed Joseph Wilson in that brief TV segment, and also played a news clip from his Sunday TV appearance? A. Yes, it shows that here. Q. And do you recall, looking at that transcript, whether regarding his discussing Joseph Wilson and playing a clip, when you talked to Andrea Mitchell before you spoke to Russert, you talked to Andrea Mitchell about Joe Wilson? A. I'm sorry, sir, I was -- I was trying to look at the clip that you were referring to and I didn't hear your question. I'm sorry. Q. In your conversation with Andrea Mitchell, the first conversation that week which you recall happened before you spoke to Mr. Russert, do you know if you spoke to Ms. Mitchell about Ambassador Wilson? A. I think if I, if I spoke to her earlier that week this probably was the subject that I was speaking to, speaking to her about. I would have to be sure I -- it would be better if I looked at everything she said that week, but I think this was probably it. It could also have been the Sunday show because I don't, I don't have the benefit of knowing what day I spoke to her on that -- did you say it was the 8th or -- Q. Well, she had -- her appearance on TV was the 8th. And I believe if we look at some notes, we might be able to locate, that the Vice President -- there's an indication that the Vice President told you to speak to Andrea Mitchell on the 8th. A. Well, that would have been before this broadcast then most likely. And this is a 6:30 -- am I reading this right, it's a -- Q. Yes, it's a 6:30 broadcast. A. So if it was during the day that day, maybe he was referring to an earlier thing, that's all I'm saying. I don't know. Q. Do you have any recollection of discussing Ambassador Wilson with Andrea Mitchell in that conversation you had, the first conversation that week? A. There was something Andrea said earlier that week that I think I discussed with her and I think that it was probably Ambassador Wilson, that was wrong. And it may not have been this one actually. This may be the one that I -- I also complained to Tim Russert about something she had said, and maybe that's what this is, and maybe I was complaining about something earlier. Maybe it was the Sunday show, I don't know. Q. And do you know, do you have a recollection of whether or not you discussed Ambassador Wilson's wife when you spoke to Andrea Mitchell during the conversation that week that occurred prior to your speaking to Russert? A. I, I do not believe that I spoke to her about, about Ambassador Wilson's wife prior to my conversation with Tim Russert. Q. And is that because it's your testimony that you don't believe you remembered at the time that you had learned about Ambassador Wilson's wife the month before? A. Yes, sir. And I have no recollection of talking to her about that at that point. She's a member of the press. Not somebody in the White House, and that would have a separate impact on me and I just don't believe I did talk to her about that. Q. And so you would have a more specific recollection if you spoke to a press person -- A. I think -- Q. -- than if you spoke to someone in the White House? A. -- I think, yeah. Q. Do you remember Bob Novak calling you on July 8th? A. Calling me? Q. Yes. A. No, sir. Q. Do you know if you spoke to him at all prior to the July 14th column appearing under Novak's byline? A. No. I remember I had one conversation with Bob Novak in this period. My recollection of it is that when I spoke to him he had all of the basic facts that we have in our case, by which I mean the type of facts that Cathie Martin gave to Ari Fleischer that morning that the Vice President didn't request the mission; the Vice President was not informed of his mission; that we did not -- that the Vice President did not receive a briefing about the mission after he returned, the Vice President nor I at the higher levels; and that the, the Vice President was not aware of the mission until later on, and what we saw was actually the NIE. I recall that that type of points Mr. Novak had. I have a note in my notes, which is dated in late July, that I spoke to Novak or something about Mr. Novak regarding uranium, and so I tend to believe that was when I had my conversation with Mr. Novak. But I don't recall -- other than that, I can't fix the time of my conversation with Mr. Novak other than to think I had only one, that's all I recall, and I have no recollection of talking to him about the wife -- Q. Okay. Why don't I -- A. -- Ambassador Wilson's wife, excuse me. Q. -- why don't I show you the July 14th column by Mr. Novak which is marked as Exhibit -- MS. KEDIAN. One. MR. FITZGERALD. -- 1. WITNESS. Thank you. MS. KEDIAN. You're welcome. GRAND JUROR. Excuse me. Is it possible in a few more minutes we can do a bathroom break? MR. FITZGERALD. Sure. Is 2:15 okay? GRAND JUROR. 2:15 okay? That will work? GRAND JUROR. Yeah. GRAND JUROR. Okay, all right. BY MR. FITZGERALD: Q. Take a moment and read the column. (pause) While you're reading I'll tell you the questions I'm going to ask so I don't -- A. Thank you. That would be helpful. Q. In reading this column, could you look to see if you believe you're the source for anything in the column which would indicate that you spoke to Mr. Novak before July 14th. A. I was not the source for Mr. Novak, but I will read it as you instruct. Q. And I just meant the source either about Mr. Wilson's wife or anything else in the column. (Long pause while witness reading.) BY MR. FITZGERALD: Q. Having read the column, anything in there remind you of anything you -- any conversation you might have had with Mr. Novak prior to July 14th? A. No. There's at least one thing in here that's wrong but it doesn't remind me of a conversation I had with him. You know, in here he says there was a 1988 Iraqi delegation. I understand that to be a 1999 Iraqi delegation, not '88. So much later. So I think that that fact in here is wrong. There's something else in here that strikes me as wrong but I don't -- GRAND JUROR. Could you speak up? WITNESS. I'm sorry. GRAND JUROR. I'm having a hard time hearing you. WITNESS. I thought that there is something in the column which I believed to be wrong in that Mr. Novak reports that there was an Iraq -- that Ambassador Wilson reported that in 1988, Mr. Novak says, an Iraqi delegation had gone to Iraq (sic) to ask about uranium, and in fact my recollection of it was that it was 1999 that that delegation went, much closer to the period of the war. And then there was something else in here that struck me as wrong, but I don't believe I was the source for any of this so -- BY MR. FITZGERALD: Q. Do you have any recollection of speaking to Mr. Novak prior to July 14th about the substance of the State of the Union address, Mr. Wilson or his trip to Niger? A. I don't. If I could repeat what I said before. I recall that I talked to Mr. Novak -- I recall it as one time. I recall it as having covered the basic points that were quiet useful, that you just took away, but the four points, I think, that were in that exhibit that you showed me before. Q. Okay. A. And I recall that he had all of those points. He basically talked to me is what I recall, more than my saying anything to him. He had all of this stuff. But I don't know when that was except there were some e-mails and things which lead me to believe, and my note leads me to believe that it was more like somewhere between, you know, July 25th and 28th. So 10 days to two weeks after the column, after this column appeared. MR. FITZGERALD. Okay. Why, why don't we take the break that we promised the Grand Jurors. So if you want to walk out first, Mr. Libby, and then we'll make sure that we can get you -- WITNESS. Sorry. MR. FITZGERALD. -- out the door. (Whereupon, the witness was excused at 2:16 p.m.) (Whereupon, the witness was recalled at 2:31 p.m.) GRAND JUROR. I just want to remind you that you're still under oath. WITNESS. Thank you, sir. GRAND JUROR. You're welcome. BY MR. FITZGERALD: Q. Now, sir, when we broke you had read the Novak piece and your recollection was that to the best of your memory you had spoken to Novak about the uranium, uranium/Niger controversy July 25th to 28th, making reference to some notes you made about Novak. Is that correct? A. It -- it's only the notes, sir, that give me a sense of when I spoke to him. I don't, I don't know otherwise. I know I talked to him once during this period. My note -- I do have a note somewhere around the 25th or the 28th which indicates something about Novak and uranium, and there is subsequently some e-mails that I've seen so that indicates that to me that was the time, because I only remember one conversation. Q. Okay. If you spoke to Mr. Novak during this period, the time frame from July 4th -- July 6th to July 14th, would that stick out in your mind? A. Well, one conversation does stick in my mind. That's, that's all. So one, one does. Q. The conversation you described? A. Yes, I described a conversation and I don't know when it was in the period is what I'm trying to say. Q. Okay. Have you been a source for Novak in the past? A. I, I don't know -- I don't think I was a source for Novak on this one, but I have not been -- he's not somebody who calls me regularly. I see him sometimes at -- you know, they have these humongous dinners in Washington where everybody comes and I'd see him sometimes at those. I saw him once in '02, but he's not somebody who calls me regularly. He does occasionally call. Q. And have you at times given him information off-the- record or on background to use in his column? A. I've talked to him at times off-the-record, but not, not -- my recollection is not frequently, and I don't know -- I don't think I've ever intended to give him something for his column. You know, if you talk to him at a, at a social event, I'm not trying to give him something for his column. I don't think I've ever called him, you know, as I will, as we'll be discussing later on, to -- here's a message that we think America needs to know type of thing. Q. Have you -- so we're clear on that, have you ever had a conversation with Mr. Novak in which you wanted him to report something in a column that you gave him? A. I don't, I don't recall that. I don't recall doing that ever. Q. Have you ever had a conversation which Mr. Novak asked you for information that he wanted to put in a column and you gave it to him? A. Not -- I don't think I've had one where he said this is for a column. I think he has called me from time-to-time and presumably he was looking for something like that. And I'd seen him at these social events when he will sometimes talk about an issue of the day. I've always assumed those to be off-the -- or said off-the-record to him on that stuff, so I've not intended to be a source for him on a column, that I recall. Q. Putting aside a social occasion where you see him at dinner and he says what do you think of X-topic, has he ever called you at your office asking for information where you understood that he wanted it for his column? A. Well, there were these calls that the e-mails reflect in July, and there probably were some calls earlier on. He's not someone I normally try and reach out to or I normally try and deal with. Q. And my, my question was sort of the other way around. Not that -- did you ever reach out to him but -- A. He has -- Q. -- did he reach out to you in a non-social context asking you questions about what's going on in the hopes that you will give him information or confirm something? A. Yes, sir, he has called sometimes. I don't recall exactly how frequently to talk to me and I have talked to him a few times. I don't think I talked to him a lot. Q. Have you ever provided information to him knowing that it would appear in a column? A. I don't think I've ever intentionally provided information for a column. Q. And I could show you -- A. I think I've only talked to him off-the-record, for example, which is not supposed to appear in a column. MR. FITZGERALD. I'll show you a phone bill which indicates on -- I believe July 8th and July 11th Mr. Novak called you during that week. MS. KEDIAN. This is Exhibit 56. BY MR. FITZGERALD: Q. And since you know your number better than I, do you see your number? Do you see your number appearing on the phone bill? A. I see one here from the 8th for one minute at 4:46. Am I reading this correct? Is that what you -- Q. Yes. A. I don't know what 2369 is. That's not my number, is it? 456-2369, it's not my main number. And 833-899 is not my number. Q. We're looking at the four -- A. Yeah, I see two calls here. One -- I should let you ask me. I'm sorry, sir. Q. Okay. Do you see any calls to your telephone number on the bill? A. The only number I recognize as mine is 456-9000 and I see them for July 11 and July 8, and they each look to be one minute long if I read this properly. Q. And do you know if you called him back in response to either of those calls? A. I don't think I did, but I don't know. As I say, I know there was one phone call with Mr. Novak. It was a call where I returned the call from him and I don't know when that call was, but I was assuming it was from the other period because that's when my note is. Q. Do you recall ever discussing with Mr. Novak providing him a time line of events regarding the State of the Union address which would discuss how the, how the process worked in preparing the State of the Union, State of the Union? A. Time line? Q. Either in writing or orally describing to him the time line in which events worked, describing how the State of the Union and other speeches were prepared? A. I don't. Q. Is it possible you talked to Mr. Novak about providing a time line of what happened, in what order, in order to better explain how the State of the Union came to pass? A. In this time frame? Q. At any time frame. A. I don't recall any such discussion. I certainly don't recall it during this week when we were working intensively on what Director Tenet would say in his statement or National Security Advisor Rice, although it ended up being a Director Tenet's statement. And I don't recall discussing with him a time line. It's a sort of -- generally sort of harmless subject that I guess I could have and not remember but I can't recall it. Q. Do you recall talking with anyone else in the administration about your seeking to provide information for a time line about the process by which the State of the Union came about? A. Oh, that could be. You mean someone in the administration? Q. Telling them that you -- whether you should do this for Mr. Novak. A. Oh. I don't, I don't recall discussing it with regard to Mr. Novak. Somebody else's phone call to Mr. Novak perhaps? Q. No, I'm saying whether you discussed, whether you, Mr. Libby, should give Mr. Novak an outline of a time line by which the State of the Union was created? A. I don't recall that, but you know, it, it -- I don't recall it. It could be but I don't recall it. Q. Let me show you what has been marked as Grand Jury Exhibit 7. First, I'll ask you if you recognize the handwriting on those notes? A. It's not my handwriting. It, it might be Cathie Martin's handwriting. It's, it's in that ball -- that type of writing. I don't know for sure. Q. You can assume for purposes of this that it is Cathie Martin's handwriting. A. Yes, sir, I will. Q. And assuming that these are notes prior to July 14th, do you see the reference to Bill Harlow? A. Yes, sir. Q. And assuming there are notes from July 8th or prior, "CIA and DCI talked to VP about it today." And then down below, "Harlow, don't know anything on ambassador. We had stuff sensitive source," an arrow, and then what appears to be charge in Baghdad. You'll agree with me that charge is a French word for State Department-type person, ambassador official? A. Yes. That's a fair description, sir. Q. And then beneath that, "married to a CIA agent"? And I asked you -- looking at this, does this refresh your recollection as to whether or not Cathie Martin was discussing with you in periods prior to your conversation with Tim Russert the fact that the person who was involved in Iraq in this trip to Niger is married to a CIA person and whether or not it refreshes your recollection on whether or not that was brought to the Vice President's attention during that week prior to your conversation with Mr. Russert? A. It doesn't. May I finish reading the page? Q. Sure. (Long pause while witness reading.) A. Do you know what this word, "CIA --" Q. Folks? I would read it as folks. A. Folks? Orally -- bottom lines goes something in a report? Q. Goes out -- A. "Goes out in a report." Quite right. It doesn't. I don't know about the "charge in Baghdad" line if that's what that is. Q. Is it fair to say that Ambassador Wilson had been a charge in Baghdad back in the first Gulf War and had attained some fame for the fact that -- A. Yes, sir, that's right, yeah, that's correct. Q. And looking at a "sensitive source" who reported that Niger official had nothing to do with the report, arrow, charge in Baghdad, married to a CIA agent? A. Niger official had nothing to do with report. There are a lot of Niger officials referred to in his piece. The one time he refers to a Niger official sort of uniquely is when the guy was saying that there was an attempt to purchase uranium. But this does not -- I, I don't know when, if at all, she communicated this to me, but it doesn't change my -- what I said to you before that. I don't recall any discussion with Cathie prior to when I heard it from Russert, and my recollection that I was surprised when I heard it from Russert. That's -- this doesn't change my recollection on that. Q. Do you remember speaking with a reporter named Judith Miller on July 8th? A. Yes, sir, I do. Q. And is she a reporter who had been imbedded with the forces over in Iraq? A. She was in Iraq. I don't recall if she was imbedded or not, but she was in Iraq doing reporting in Iraq. Q. And at the time in June of 2003 there was some controversy in the press about whether or not her journalistic credentials had been compromised by some people criticizing that she was a mouthpiece of the administration, to put a blunt word on it? I'm not saying that's true or not, but was that criticism being made? A. I don't recall. I don't recall that but I'll take your word for it. Q. Do you know if she did columns with her byline that stopped appearing in June, July of 2003 for some time? A. I don't really. I did not notice that. Q. Do you know what occasioned your meeting with Judith Miller on July 8th? A. Yes, I believe I had met with Judith Miller once before, or this was the first meeting, but I think she may have come to my office once before. She's a very -- from my point of view, responsible reporter who has had a long interest in the biological warfare issue. She wrote a book about it called "Germs" with another fellow, Steve Engleberg, who I know. They had actually talked about me a little bit in that book, but I had never met her. I talked to her, Steve Engleberg, and so I wanted to meet her because I think she's -- she cares about the issue and really tries to understand what's going on with the biological threat, you know, that the threat that someone would use a biological agent to attack America or other places. And so I had wanted to meet her. In -- as we started to go through the week of July 7, after the Wilson report, the Vice President thought it was very important that the NI -- what was in the NIE become known publicly because the National Intelligence Estimate, the NIE, came out in October of '02, as I mentioned earlier, six months after Ambassador Wilson's trip and had concluded that Iraq had tried to buy uranium from Niger, and this -- the NIE is the consensus document of the committee, and this section of the NIE is quite straight-forward, Iraq vigorously began trying to procure uranium. So flat out statement which supports what the President said in the end in the State of the Union. And so we thought it was important that the NIE come out. There was also another document, and I guess I need your guidance as to whether I can talk about that document. Q. Is it dated January 24th? A. That's correct, yes. Q. Just describe the January 24 document generically. A. Okay. The January 24 document had the exact same content as the NIE, word-for-word as the NIE, and also saying that Iraq had vigorously begun trying to procure uranium from Niger. And it listed a couple of examples, not just Niger but two other examples. And one of the examples, as I recall, is the 1999 delegation, or seems to be the 1999 delegation that went to Iraq that Ambassador Wilson himself told the CIA about, according to this cable. So both in October of 2002, and in January 24, three days before the State of the Union, the CIA in writing sent to the White House this consensus language which said Iraq had tried to buy uranium from Niger, the exact point that the President was making in the State of the Union. That's what the Vice President had seen. It's the only thing the Vice President had seen after the -- Wilson went out on his trip six months after, and that at least was the primary thing he had seen. I don't know of anything else. And it was pretty definitive against what Ambassador Wilson was saying, and that's the way Director Tenet reports it on July 11 when he issues his public statement. So we thought it was important that Judy Miller, or somebody, report this. Now, I was unaware that she was actually not writing in this period and the Vice President instructed me to go talk to Judy Miller, to lay this out for her. And I said, that's a problem, Mr. Vice President, because the NIE is a classified document. And the Vice President said that he would talk to the President and get the President's approval for us to use the document. I had previously spoken to our General Counsel, David Addington, and our General -- and ask our General Counsel, does the President have the ability if he wants to take any document and say it's declassified, go talk about it? And Mr. Addington had told me, as our Counsel, that if the President says to talk about a document to the press, or publicly, it is declassified as of that moment, he has that power to do that, and he cited a case to that effect. The first time he told me the case name, I forgot it. But I made a note and talked to the Vice President before July 8 and told him about this -- that I could talk to her about the NIE, but he would have to get the President to declassify it in effect before I could talk about it. Now, the NIE is -- becomes officially declassified by the CIA and is actually disseminated publicly, I think on July 18 or some time during that next week. But this was in advance while they were still working that process. The President came back to the Vice President and said, yes, it would be okay, or I should go talk to somebody, and I selected Judy Miller because I know her to be a responsible reporter. It was, I guess, a poor choice if she wasn't actually writing in that period. But that was my -- that was who I went to talk to. The Vice President told me to talk to her. I forgotten exactly what day. I did not accomplish it right away. He came, he came back and said, you know, wait on that a -- you know, a bit, and I waited. He then came back again from meeting with the President and said, go ahead and talk about it. And so I called Judy Miller up and went and had a discussion with her. Q. And just so we're clear and so the Grand Jury's clear, to the extent I referenced that there were, there were at least press reports indicating that she was not writing under her byline and some people had criticized her for her lack of objectivity, that's not all a statement that we're either one, interested in determining her objectivity or commenting on her credentials. A. I understand. Q. Here's my question now. When -- you indicated that there was efforts to declassify the NIE. Correct? A. Yes, sir. Q. There was efforts at times to declassify the January 24th report as well? A. The exact same content, so I don't, I don't know how that technically works when it's the exact same content. But the Vice President was of the view, and I was of the view, that both documents should -- the public should have all of the documents basically because they were all useful for the public to have. Q. And was there also an effort to declassify the reports concerning the Wilson trip? A. There's only one report that I knew of which was the -- report, I guess I should say that the CIA had issued, and yes, we also wanted that to be declassified. And I was told that that was declassified by the CIA although I don't know that he's ever actually -- they've ever actually issued it. Q. And when you had this conversation with Mr. Addington, do you recall where that conversation took place about the law of declassification? A. I think actually it was in the corridor outside my office the first time, although I'm not sure. I went back -- after he told me the fact and the case name, I later went back to him to get the case name again, just to make sure he was sure, and he gave me the case name and I wrote that down in my notes also. Navy versus Egan, I think it is. Q. Did you ever read the case? A. I did subsequently. Q. Did it appear to say what you thought Addington said that it meant? A. Within reason, yes, sir. But Addington is very solid on these things. Q. And just so we're clear, David Addington is the General Counsel to the Office of Vice President? Correct? A. Correct, sir. Q. And does he have experience particularly in intelligence matters? A. Yes, he does, sir. He worked on the -- if I recall, on the Intelligence Committee, and I think he was Counsel -- a Counsel at the CIA at one point, and he was, I believe, General Counsel of the Defense Department at one point. So he has -- his specialty is national security law. Q. And can you recall what -- in your conversation with Mr. Addington about declassification, do you recall if you discussed any other topics with Mr. Addington at the time? A. Yes. I also discussed in that conversation or close to that conversation, the question of whether there was a contractual obligation for Mr. Wilson. You know, whether it was normal for somebody as an agent of the -- someone going out on a mission for the Agency to be able to just talk about the mission, which he had done, or whether there was some -- you had to sign some agreement of some sort that you wouldn't be talking about it. And he told me that it takes all sorts of different forms. Q. And did you have a discussion with Mr. Addington in which the topic came up as to whether the President could declassify a matter if the Director of Central Intelligence decided not to do so? A. Mr. Addington said that the President has the absolute right to declassify whatever he wants to declassify. Q. And did the issue of whether or not he could in effect overrule the Director of Central Intelligence and declassify something come up? A. No, he never told me that that was a qualification on the President's right to declassify. Q. And maybe you misunderstood me. I'm not saying there is. A. Oh. Q. Did you ask him whether or not the President could declassify, if the Director of Central Intelligence refused to declassify? A. I said, does the President have the right to declassify no matter what? And he said, yes. That -- those are not my words, but the point was, that the President had the absolute right to, to declassify something if he wanted to declassify something. Yes, sir. Q. And did you have concerns during the week of July 7th as to whether or not the statement that Director Tenet would ultimately issue, which came out on July 11th, would be adequate to serve the interests of explaining the administration's position? A. Yes, sir. Q. And did you -- and in light of those concerns were you concerned about whether or not the July 11th statement, or the Tenet statement, was inadequate, whether or not an effort would be made to declassify more materials by going to the President? A. Could you repeat the question? I didn't get it straight. Q. Did you discuss with Mr. Addington whether or not it might be necessary to declassify additional materials beyond whatever George Tenet would put in his statement? A. No, we didn't discuss it in that context. At that point in the week it was my, my understanding that they were -- the CIA was looking at declassifying all of this stuff. Q. And do you recall the circumstances of your conversation with Mr. Addington? Was it something that was -- you considered especially sensitive to discuss this with Mr. Addington? A. No, but it was -- he understood it to be a serious question that required him to give a correct and serious answer. But it was, it was not somehow -- it was nothing super-secret, as you said earlier, about it. Q. Do you know if you discussed it with him in a hallway or in an anti-room? Do you have a, do you have an office at the White House yourself? A. Yes. Q. Okay. What do you use as an office at the White House? A. I have an office, it's 236 or something. It's on the second floor. I have -- I have one in the West Wing, a very tiny little office, and I have a bigger office in the Executive Office Building. Q. And where did this conversation with Mr. Addington take place? A. I don't recall the -- where the first conversation took place. The second one, when I went back to him to get the case name again, I guess there were three in that sense. The first time I raised it, and then he either answered me -- he answered me right there, I think. And then the conversation where he gave me the case name was in the corridor. But we had already discussed it. It was just that I wanted to get the case name. Q. Do you ever recall telling Mr. Addington to lower his voice, or to shush, or not to speak too loudly about this? A. Could be. No, I'm sorry, I don't, I don't recall specifically telling Mr. Addington to lower his voice. Q. You said it could be though. Do you have any recollection of telling him -- A. Actually, he's not that loud spoken a guy, so -- but I don't recall it. Q. Now, getting back to your conversation with Judith Miller, did you talk about Mr. Wilson with Judith Miller, and his trip? A. I don't recall specifically discussing about Judith -- with Judith Miller about Mr. Wilson, but I did -- I do recall specifically discussing the NIE and as it relates to uranium, and therefore I'm pretty certain that I did discuss Mr. Wilson's trip at the same time because of how it fits in. I just don't recall the details of it in that way. Q. And do you know if you discussed Mr. Wilson's wife and her employment with Ms. Miller? A. I do not believe I discussed Mrs. -- Mr. Wilson -- Ambassador Wilson's wife in this conversation with Ms. Miller. Q. And is it also your testimony that your belief was at the time of the Judith Miller conversation you did not recall what you had learned about Wilson's wife working at the CIA? A. It is, sir. But I recall this was, this was a couple days before I talked to Tim Russert and I recall being surprised by what Tim Russert told me. Q. And do you recall on July 9th, which would be the Wednesday following the Novak, Novak -- Wilson Op-ed appearing, do you recall a morning meeting that was chaired by Stephen Hadley at the White House? A. There are many -- I don't recall July 9th in that sense. Could you give me more about the meeting? Q. Do you recall that -- A. He chairs lots of meetings, I'm sorry. Q. Do you recall a circumstance in which Mr. Hadley was angry that some White House officials had evidently spoken to Andrea Mitchell and to David Martin and he indicated that George Tenet was very upset by what had appeared on the TV the night before in terms of David Martin's broadcast and Andrea Mitchell's broadcast? A. Yes, sir, I do recall that. Q. And do you recall him looking at Claire Buchan and Cathie Martin during that conversation as if -- his belief that they might be responsible? A. It's -- I don't recall that, but it's possible. Q. And do you recall -- was that the day following your conversation with Andrea Mitchell? Had you spoken to Andrea Mitchell and David Martin the day before Mr. Hadley expressed his concern about their press coverage? A. It could be. I don't know the dates. I did speak to them. I don't remember the dates on which I spoke to them, or, or what the details were. Q. Do you remember when Mr. Hadley was angry about people speaking to those reporters, if you recall sitting there at the time thinking, I just spoke to those reporters? A. That could be. Yes, sir. I, I do recall a conversation like that. Yes, sir. Q. Do you know if you told Stephen Hadley, the Deputy National Security Advisor -- Deputy in charge of NSC, that you had spoken to Andrea Mitchell or David Martin? A. I don't recall if I told him. I don't, I don't know that I told him. Q. And do you recall whether or not Cathie Martin came to the Vice President's Office and told him in your presence that Stephen Hadley was angry and thought that she had been the one speaking to the reporters, Mitchell and Martin? A. I, I think I do recall that. Yes, sir. Q. Okay. What do you remember about that? A. About that, that she was -- that there was this conversation, that Hadley was upset, reporting that Secretary -- that Director Tenet was upset. This rings a bell with me. Q. And do you recall having to take any action as a result of the fact that Hadley was upset with Claire Buchan or with Cathie Martin? A. No. Q. Were either Claire Buchan or Cathie Martin excluded from any contacts with the Agency that week? A. Cathie Martin -- I don't know about Claire Buchan. Cathie Martin was restricted from it -- I don't recall it being for that reason, but the state -- the Tenet statement became very close hold as it was being worked, and the boss kept it very small. Q. And do you recall on July 9th Steve Hadley indicating at a meeting that we need to do something about Wilson now, we need to discredit him? A. To discredit him? Q. Yes. A. I don't recall that particular phrase, but I'd have to look in my notes. I was at meetings, there were a lot of meetings in that period and I'd have to check my notes. Q. Forgetting whether the word "discredit" was used -- A. Uh-hum. Q. -- do you recall the concept coming across from Stephen Hadley that we need to do something about Wilson now, or we need to discredit him, forgetting what words he used? A. Yes, we definitely were interested in getting the Tenet statement out to refute what Ambassador Wilson was saying. So if you had said "discredit what he is saying," there was lots of effort to get a statement out to discredit what he was saying. I just don't recall whether Steve Hadley used, used words about discrediting him personally as opposed to what he was saying. We were definitely trying to get out a statement. As I say, there was a debate whether it would be from Dr. Rice or from Director Tenet to discredit what he was saying because the record was actually quite good that what he was saying was not accurate, so we wanted to get that out. MR. FITZGERALD. Let me show you what has been Bates Stamped as 1747. MS. KEDIAN. This will be Exhibit 58. BY MR. FITZGERALD: Q. And we'll deem that an exhibit again, just to make sure the classification level is correct. A. Thank you, sir. Q. And if you look down -- I'll point to you on the page. A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you, do you see what appears -- is this your handwriting? A. Yes, sir, it is. Q. Do you see -- A. Or most of it is. Some of it is not. Q. -- senior staff? A. Yes. Q. That say, uranium story? A. Yes. Q. Can you -- why don't you just read that line across? A. Uranium story is becoming a question of the President's truthworthiness (sic). Lead all new. Probably, "leads all the news" is what I was saying. It's turning to a process story is what the thought was, I believe. And then it has Mr. Rove at the senior staff meeting saying, "now they have accepted Joe Wilson as credible expert?" "We're one day late with getting CIA write response," I think that's what it -- Q. Okay. Fair to say at the senior staff meeting, there was concern expressed that this is a question going to the trustworthiness of the President at this point? A. Yes, sir. Q. And there's a question here that's leading all the news, and Rove is complaining that Mr. Wilson is being taken as a credible expert? A. Yes, sir. Q. Fair to say that there was an effort to undermine his credibility as an expert? A. I don't know about that. My view was that we could get the facts out about what he had done, that would be more than sufficient because the record was very clear about what he had done and hadn't done, and that the CIA had not accepted what he had done as, as refuting the point. So I don't know that there was an effort to undermine him as a credible expert for what he did. But that -- Q. Well, in the effort to undermine the story were people going around saying, let's undermine his story but let's be very careful not to hurt him? A. I never heard that. Q. And is it fair to say that there was a considerable degree of frustration at this point -- we're now in day -- this is, I believe, July -- MS. KEDIAN. I think it's the 8th -- MR. FITZGERALD. -- the 8th -- MS. KEDIAN. -- I believe. BY MR. FITZGERALD: Q. -- or the second day in on that week -- A. Yes, sir. Q. -- two days of the Wilson story out there, Rove says we're a day late in getting responses to the story. This is going right to the President's trustworthiness and people want to set the President's record straight. A. Yes, sir. Q. Now, do you recall an effort being made to push back against Wilson's credibility that week? A. Yes, I recall the effort being made to get -- we made a lot of effort that week to get the CIA Director or Dr. Rice -- as I say, it was initially not clear how it would be done, to issue a statement which would set the record straight about what Ambassador Wilson had said, and what he had found and not found, and the Agency had not found it to disprove the President's statement, and in fact found it to support the President's statement. The irony to all this was that if you read Ambassador -- when the CIA read Ambassador Wilson's cable, they thought the first part of it, as Director Tenet made clear at the end of the week, didn't disprove much at all. The first part of Ambassador Wilson's cable, he had -- the cable about what he had said -- Ambassador Wilson had gone to the government of Niger and said, I'm going to tell the United States government what you tell me. Did you in effect sell uranium to the number one enemy of America in the world which might use it to make an atomic bomb that might be used to threaten America? And a Nigerian official said, why no, we didn't do that. And I think the CIA found, as Director Tenet said on the 11th, that there's only so much credibility you can add to that because it would be amazing if they said, yes, we did do that. The second part of what Ambassador Wilson's report said was that in fact a delegation had come from Iraq to talk to the Nigerians, Nigerians, I think it's pronounced, as -- to see if they would sell uranium to Iraq or that's how the Niger official interpreted it. So, in fact, his cable was not taken by the CIA to disprove that Iraq had gone, as Director Tenet himself says on July 11th when he finally issues his statement. And in fact, there was evidence in the cable, which was directly contrary to what Ambassador Wilson was saying he had -- to telling America he had found which was there was no attempt to procure uranium. And so if you could just get that story out, maybe said better than I just said it, it would be pretty clear that Ambassador -- what Ambassador Wilson was saying didn't hold water in that he hadn't disproved it and his report wasn't definitive, and the CIA had considered it and had still, six months later, issued an NIE, highest level of intelligence they have, which said Iraq did not try to procure uranium. So there was a strong attempt by us to get that -- get those facts out. Q. Is it fair to say though that the sound bite you took away from Karl Rove is they're now accepting Joe Wilson as a credible expert? Correct? A. Yes, sir. Q. And is it fair to say that many would think that if Joe Wilson were hired because of nepotism, because of a contact he had at the Agency, that might undermine his credibility as an expert? A. Some people may have taken it that way. That was never -- what I took out of it, the wife working there, Ambassador Wilson's wife working there, because what he did he was perfectly competent to do. What he did was he went and he sat down with the people from Niger and said, hi, I'm here, I'm going to talk to the United States government, as he says in an article, he sat down and had tea with them and asked them what they had done or hadn't done, and ambassadors do that all the time. So I thought he was very competent to do that mission. Q. Sir, are you telling us under oath that you never thought that Mr. Wilson was hired because of nepotism? A. I didn't know why he was hired and I did not know at this point, I think I had forgotten exactly how he came -- or I don't think I knew how he came to be hired at this point. I think that came out with the Rove report. What I, what I had known but forgotten at that point was that his wife worked at the division, but I didn't know at that point that his wife had anything to do with hiring him as far as I can recall. And on this day, July 8, as I've, as I've tried to make clear, the best of my recollection is that I was surprised when I learned from Russert that his wife worked there. So I think I had forgotten it. That's what I, what I think. But the, the -- I'm sorry. Q. I just want to talk -- I'm, I'm focused on what you thought of Mr. Wilson and not something else. A. Yes, sir. Q. And you're clear in your mind that you weren't telling Ari Fleischer over lunch the day or two before that look, here's some information that's hush-hush or on the q.t., Wilson's wife works at the CIA? A. I'm, I'm -- I don't recall discussing that with, with Ari Fleischer at lunch. I'm sorry, I just don't recall it. Sorry to keep saying this. But all I recall is that I, I recall being surprised on the 10th when I spoke to Tim Russert. Q. And we'll, we'll get to that conversation in a moment. A. Yes, sir. Can I just say one more thing about this note? These are short -- my shorthand notes. It, it doesn't mean it's exactly what he said. He probably spoke in some greater length. This is just what I took down as a flavor of it to relay back to my boss, to the Vice President. MR. FITZGERALD. Let me show you a document Bates Stamped 2906 from, I believe, July 10th, and I believe they're your notes, but I'll show them to you to check. The originals if you have them. MS. KEDIAN. The originals, sure. MR. FITZGERALD. I can find it. BY MR. FITZGERALD: Q. Looking at what we'll deem marked as Grand Jury Exhibit No. -- MS. KEDIAN. Fifty-eight (sic). BY MR. FITZGERALD: Q. -- 58, those are your notes from July 10th? A. Yes, sir. Q. Does that indicate -- MS. KEDIAN. Excuse me, 59. BY MR. FITZGERALD: Q. -- 59. Does that indicate a meeting between you, the Vice President and Stephen Hadley? A. Yes, sir. Q. And then down below, is that an attribution, the first one, to Stephen Hadley? A. Yes, sir. Q. And then "SH", and then it has a colon, and it has "MCL". Is that referring to McLaughlin? A. Yes, sir. Q. And is that Hadley quoting Deputy Director of Central Intelligence John McLaughlin? A. Yes, sir. Q. Colon, quoted GT. Is that McLaughlin quoting George Tenet? A. Yes, sir. Q. Okay. So is it fair to say that you're with the Vice President -- A. Yes. Q. -- and Stephen Hadley? A. Yes. Q. Hadley is reporting back to you guys what McLaughlin is saying that George Tenet is saying? A. Full credit, sir. Q. Okay. And then during this time you guys are trying to get Tenet to make a good statement that will sort of take this issue out and restore the President's credibility? A. Absolutely, sir. Q. Fairly tense time? A. Yes, sir. Q. Okay. Now, it says, "Wilson is declassified"? A. Yes, sir. Q. Is that to you an indication that the report on Wilson was declassified? A. Yes, sir. Q. And then what does the next sentence say? A. "We haven't started to declassify NIE." And then Steve Hadley started to say something which I didn't have time to write down. Q. And the next attribution is that Hadley quoting Condi Rice? A. Yes, sir. Q. Okay. And what does that say? A. "Spoke to President, he's comfortable." Q. And does that indicate despite the stress of the time that the President is okay with -- so far with how things are going? A. It's not clear to me what. There's a space missing there -- Q. Okay. A. -- and I probably didn't write something down. I left a space to go back and I probably never got -- I never got back to it. So -- these things look sort of like a transcript but they're not really because there could be long moments when I don't write anything down. So she was saying the President was comfortable about something, but I don't know what the antecedent was to -- Q. And the next line? A. Says -- this is Steve Hadley saying, no question, it's better if we leak the NIE. Q. What does that mean? A. Steve Hadley is saying that it would be better if we got the NIE out, and "leak" means telling it to -- giving it to a reporter to say, you know, here's something you can write about. It's like an exclusive or something like that. Q. And had the NIE been declassified at that point? A. It had in the sense that the President had told me to go out and use it with Judith Miller. I don't, I don't know that Mr. Hadley knew that at that point. Q. Okay. And did anyone decide to leak the NIE that week? A. Well, the President had told me to use it and declassified it for me to use with Judith Miller. I don't think Mr. Hadley was told to go out and talk about it. I think Ms. Rice had talked about the NIE in general earlier in the week on television. Q. And so -- A. Well, some time. I'm not sure when it was. Q. -- so prior to July 10th you had talked to Judith Miller about the NIE? A. Correct, sir. Q. And your understanding is that even though it was a classified document the President had authorized you to talk to her about it? A. Definitely, sir. Q. And then -- and do you know if anyone decided to share the NIE -- did you tell Mr. Hadley at the time that you had already in effect leaked the NIE by -- with the President's approval by telling -- Judith Miller? A. I -- yeah, I don't know if it's leaking once it's declassified and you're told to do it. I had talked to Judith Miller about the NIE at the President's, you know, at, at the President's approval relayed to me through the Vice President, and I did not tell Mr. Hadley at that time. Q. And was there any reason why you didn't tell Mr. Hadley that you had told Ms. Miller about the NIE? A. I was sitting with the Vice President. The Vice President knew it and chose not to tell Mr. Hadley and so I didn't change what he had done. Q. Now -- A. And then there's a comment below it from the, from the Vice President. Q. Yes? A. Should I read that for you? Q. Sure. A. He says, "anything less than full and complete disclosure is a serious mistake." And Steve Hadley says, "I will -- I told that to George Tenet." So the Vice President is pushing it. He does on a number of these things, get all of this stuff out. Let's have every -- it's a good story, tell it all, get all these documents out to the public. Q. Okay. And I'll deem this marked, and we'll take back custody of it. Fair to say that you went through the notes and there's a number of times where the Vice President during that week has said you need to get everything out? A. Yes, sir. Q. Tell the whole story. The whole truth has to get out. Anything less than that is a big mistake? A. Yes, sir. That's exactly what we wanted to do. Q. And that was a constant thing that week? A. Yes, sir. Q. And the Vice President, to be, to be blunt, was frustrated that it wasn't all getting out there and it wasn't sort of putting the story to rest, and he was sort of getting ticked off that we needed to resolve this issue? A. I'm not sure I would use the word "ticked off", but he was frustrated. Yes, sir, that's a fair, fair statement. And this -- the statement from Director Tenet was supposed to come out -- first it was going to be, I think, Tuesday night, and then it was going to be Wednesday night. It took a long time to get this statement out. It was useful when it did come out, but it took too long to get it out. People were saying, you know, "get it out". Q. Now, tell me about the circumstances of your conversation with Mr. Russert. A. Chris Matthews, who is an NBC correspondent, had been -- has a TV show at night, and he is a rather outspoken fellow. And he was saying on this television show that the Vice President sent Joe Wilson out on this mission, that the Vice President got a report back from Joe Wilson on this mission, that the Vice President therefore knew that the uranium report was false and should have stopped the President from putting it in the State of the Union. And I believe he said it both on the night of the 8th, the night of the 9th, and he was saying this even though the White House Spokesman had come out, the Office of the Vice President had come out and the CIA spokesman had come out, all of them had come out on the public record and said, the Vice President did not ask for this mission, he did not get a report back, the report wasn't definitive and the intelligence was actually the other effect. So Mr. Matthews was saying these things on national television, ignoring the public record, and not even referring to the public record. It would be one thing if he says, now, the White House has denied this, and the CIA has denied it, and the Office of the Vice President has denied it, but I'm telling you nonetheless that the Vice President asked for this report, but he wasn't doing it. He was just saying flat out that, that the Vice President had known this, and should have told the President. Otherwise -- and me also, me by name. And so this was frustrating to us and we wanted to get him to acknowledge that the public record was other than he was -- as he was saying. This wasn't the first time Chris Matthews had said something negative about, about the White House, and I had prior discussions about this with Mary Matalin who was for the first two years, as I mentioned, lo these many hours ago, had worked for the Vice President as our communications person. And so I called Mary to find out what she thought we could effectively do to try and get Mr. Matthews to acknowledge the public record and to stop saying these things in such an unqualified and incorrect fashion. I reached Mary by phone and she had her own view of where we were and relayed to me in depth her view of where we were. And -- but also in the course of it said, look, the thing for you to do is to call Tim Russert and she gave me his phone number which I wrote on my notes which I turned over to you guys. And so I called Tim Russert. Want me to continue? Q. Yes. Actually, before we -- yes, continue. A. Okay. So I called Tim Russert. I can't recall whether I got him on the phone right away or whether he had to call me back. When I eventually spoke to him -- this note with Mary Matalin is dated on the 10th, and I think I called Mr. Russert sort of lateish on the 10th, either late afternoon or early evening and went through -- I, I got him on the phone, we had some -- we have mutual friends in common, I'd known him a little bit over the years, and then I, I didn't want to take up much of his time, and I turned to our issues. And I said, I had two things that were bothering me. One is that some things that Andrea Mitchell was saying, and I think that may have been the comment on the 8th that we referred to before, but it might have been something earlier, but I said that, I'm not really calling you tonight about what Andrea Mitchell is saying. I'm calling you about what Chris Matthews is saying. And then I ran through for him what it was that Chris Matthews was saying and why it was wrong and on the public record wrong. That it seemed to me good reporting, he at least had to say that the White House has denied this, the CIA has denied this, the Vice President's office has denied this. And Mr. Russert said -- after he got the facts about it, I am unclear, I apologize but I'm unclear as to whether he then said, I'll have to call you back, but I think he said, I'll have to call you back. And I think then there was a delay and then a second phone call with Mr. Russert. What I'm about to tell you is either in the second phone call, or if there was one phone call it was in the first phone call, I just don't recall. I -- my sense of it is that there was a delay, a sort of longish delay which I was uncomfortable with. I think the second phone call was on the -- that there was a second phone call and it was on the 11th because it was a long delay. In any case, it was longer than I anticipated it would be for him to get back to me is my recollection. In any case, one of these two times we had a fuller conversation in which he told me, you know, he understood what I was saying, that there wasn't much he could do about what Chris Matthews was saying. He understood that it was not complete given that the public record was the other way. And then he said, you know, did you know that this -- excuse me, did you know that Ambassador Wilson's wife works at the CIA? And I was a little taken aback by that. I remember being taken aback by it. And I said -- he may have said a little more but that was -- he said that. And I said, no, I don't know that. And I said, no, I don't know that intentionally because I didn't want him to take anything I was saying as in any way confirming what he had said, because at that point in time I did not recall that I had ever known this, and I thought this is something that he was telling me that I was first learning. And so I said, no, I don't know that because I want to be very careful not to confirm it for him, so that he didn't take my statement as confirmation for him. Now, I had said earlier in the conversation, which I omitted to tell you, that this -- you know, as always, Tim, our discussion is off-the-record if that's okay with you, and he said, that's fine. So then he said -- I said -- he said, sorry -- he, Mr. Russert said to me, did you know that Ambassador Wilson's wife, or his wife, works at the CIA? And I said, no, I don't know that. And then he said, yeah -- yes, all the reporters know it. And I said, again, I don't know that. I just wanted to be clear that I wasn't confirming anything for him on this. And you know, I was struck by what he was saying in that he thought it was an important fact, but I didn't ask him anymore about it because I didn't want to be digging in on him, and he then moved on and we finished the conversation, something like that. Q. How did the -- just focusing on your complaint about Chris Matthews' coverage, how was that resolved in -- A. Oh, it was -- sorry. Q. -- the second conversation, if there was a second conversation, or the latter part of a long conversation? A. He said, you know, there's nothing I can really do, you're going to have to talk to his producer. And so in short, I struck out trying to get Mr. Russert to intercede. As the Bureau Chief for NBC News I was hoping he would intercede with Chris Matthews and say, you know, this isn't right, and this is NBC, you know, we have our standards and you shouldn't say these things if there's public denials on the record. You should at least report them and I was hoping he would intercede with Mr. Matthews and get him to hopefully stop saying it at all, but at least put out our denials, the White House, and the CIA's, and the Vice President's denials, but he was unwilling or unable. In any case, he didn't do that. He said we should call his producer. Q. And I assume when you said his producer, you mean Chris Matthews' producer? A. Yes, thank you, sir, yes. Q. And did he give you the name of the producer? A. He did, yes. Q. Do you remember what the -- the producer's name? A. I have a note somewhere. I think it's Shapiro, I think. Q. Did you actually call the producer? A. Not that night, no, sir. Q. Okay. What happened? Did you eventually call the producer? A. I think -- I did not. I think we asked someone from the White House Press shop who knew the producer to call the producer. Q. And do you know who that person was from the Press shop that called -- A. I think it was Adam Levine we asked to call. Q. And did he achieve success, Mr. Levine? A. No, I don't think he did. This conversation, as I recall it, was as I say, was late the 10th or I think more likely the 11th. The 11th was the day that George Tenet's statement came out and I had some, turns out vain hope, that when Director Tenet came out and said Vice President Cheney didn't know about this report, we didn't circulate a report to him, the CIA on its own initiative was the one who asked for the mission, and that the report that we got back from Ambassador Wilson was not definitive, and in fact that there was evidence in the report that Iraq had sought uranium from Niger. I thought all those facts, I was hoping, would temper what Mr. Matthews was saying. I think the very -- that was on Friday night. The following Monday night he was still saying the same thing, and so I think -- against what we hoped. So on Tuesday, I think, we spoke to Mr. Levine and asked him to call, but I don't think we had any luck. GRAND JUROR. Mr. Fitzgerald, just five minutes, if we could stand up and stretch a little bit? MR. FITZGERALD. Okay, sure. GRAND JUROR. Okay? MR. FITZGERALD. Can it be two minutes? Just a -- GRAND JUROR. Two? Okay. Two and a half, five? MR. FITZGERALD. I mean, do you need five minutes to stretch or do you mean, in five minutes to stretch -- GRAND JUROR. Well, can we stretch now for five minutes? MR. FITZGERALD. Sure. GRAND JUROR. Okay. A little water, whatever. MR. FITZGERALD. Okay. If you could just step out and we'll step out for five minutes. (Whereupon, the witness was excused at 3:29 p.m.) (Whereupon, the witness was recalled at 3:40 p.m.) GRAND JUROR. I just want to remind you, Mr. Libby, that you're still under oath. BY MR. FITZGERALD: Q. 2907, and -- A. Thank you. Q. No problem. MS. KEDIAN. Exhibit 60. BY MR. FITZGERALD: Q. And again, we'll deem that as an exhibit, and if we need to -- deem it marked as an exhibit. If we need to place it before the Grand Jury, we'll verify that all the sections are appropriate. A. Yes, sir. Q. Is that -- are those are your notes from July 10th and a telephone conversation you had with Mary Matalin? A. They are indeed, sir. Q. Okay. And you mentioned earlier that she had given you Russert's telephone number. Would that be listed at the top of the page? A. Yes, sir. Q. And what's under MM, is that the time of the call? A. No, I think that says not, 6:15 to 7:15. And I think what she's telling me -- she's telling me not to call somebody between 6:15 and 7:15. I think it's actually probably Russert that she's telling me not to call in that period. And if that's the case, I wrote it in the wrong place, but that's what I think it is. It might be her but -- Q. Okay. And below that does it say, re Niger, Niger - - A. Yes. Q. -- and go broad? A. Yes. Q. There was other evidence -- A. No, I'm sorry, other countries. Q. Countries? A. Yes. Q. And is that H is a bad guy? Is it Hussein? A. Yes. Q. Does it say something -- well, why don't you just read that sentence? A. Yes. It says, "go broad, there were other countries, Saddam Hussein is a bad guy, this is feeding into the Democrats' case that Bush's credible -- credibility something, keep saying our story." And she says, "we need someone who can sum it up, Tenet-like" If I can editorialize for a second? Q. Sure. A. She, she did not know at this point that we were working on the Tenet statement very hard trying to get a Tenet statement out, and I don't tell her in this conversation, I don't believe. So she's saying, we've got to get somebody out there and while she's saying that we're struggling mightily to get this statement out, but I didn't tell her that because I didn't know if I was supposed to, as I recall. Q. If you could skip to the first box -- A. Yes, sir. Q. -- and just transliterate what's there? A. She says -- this is Mary Matalin again saying, "get the New York Times, Sanger or someone, to expose Wilson's story, give it to them." Q. And the next box? A. "Story has legs. Fits the Democrats theory for the campaign," similar to what she said above, "will not go away," the Democrats and then something that doesn't -- I didn't finish. Q. And then the next sentence? A. "Need to address Wilson motivation." Q. And the next sentence? A. "We need to get cable out declassified, President should wave his wand." This is referring to the notion that he could declassify anything he wants, if he says so, that's what she means by wave -- he should wave his wand, meaning he should use his power to declassify anything. Q. And the next sentence? A. "Call Tim. He hates Chris." That refers to Chris Matthews. "He needs to know it all. He needs to know the whole story and that Chris Matthews is not getting it right." This is in relation to my request to her which is what spurred the phone call. How do we get Chris Matthews to stop saying these things without at least reporting our denials and preferably just stop saying these things because they're wrong? Q. And then there's two parentheticals down below, one and two. Could you read what one says? A. One says, (Redacted) Q. And the second one? A. The second one says, "consider judgment of the intelligence community was that they," meaning the Iraqis were looking -- I didn't finish it, but for uranium is what it's saying. Q. Okay. A. And then it says, "eventually it will come out." That all this stuff will come out, we need to get it out. Q. So Matalin's advice is, let's get the Wilson story out there, we need to address his motivation, Tim needs to know it all, and part of that she says that REDACTED? A. Yes, she's, she's colorful. Q. And I'll take that -- we'll take that back as marked but not before the Grand Jury until a later time. Now, in your conversation -- and as you sat there do you recall whether or not when you spoke to Mary Matalin you knew that Wilson's wife worked at the CIA? A. As I -- this was before my call with Tim Russert and at the time of that conversation I don't believe that I knew that his wife worked at the CIA. Of course, I had written those notes a month earlier or so, but I had forgotten them, as best I recall. Q. And if Mr. Grossman had told you about that as well, you did not remember that conversation when you spoke on this date with Ms. Matalin? A. Correct. Q. And if you had discussed this with the Vice President earlier in the week, you did not remember discussing that at the time of this conversation? A. Correct, sir. Q. And Mr. -- if you had discussed this with Mr. Fleischer over lunch you did not remember that fact at the time of this conversation? A. As best I recall, when I had this conversation, I didn't recall that fact. The reason I believe that is because of my conversation later that night with Tim Russert. Q. And when you -- A. Or the next day with Tim Russert. Whenever he said -- Q. And the, the relevant conversation with Tim Russert where you tell us that he told you about Wilson's wife, you're clear that that happened either the 10th or the 11th? A. Yes, I believe it was in, in the Chris Matthews' phone call. The notes with Mary show that I was talking to her on the 10th and looking to call Russert later that day. And as I say, I think it was in a second phone call that it happened, so it would have been the 10th or the 11th. Yes, sir. Q. You had testified before the break that there was one call and maybe a second call to follow up, although perhaps it could have been a single call with, with Russert on the 10th or 11th? A. Yes, sir. Q. And then a later call after the 14th to complain again? A. To -- not to Russert but -- Q. Okay. A. -- yes. Q. Spoke to his producer, not to Russert? A. That's when, I think, Adam Levine, at our request, may have called Chris Matthews' producer. Yes, sir. Q. Okay. You did not talk to Russert again about -- A. No, sir. Q. -- the Wilson matter after these one or two calls on the 10th and 11th of July? A. To the best of my recollection, no, sir. Q. Now, when you called Mr. Russert, were you calling him as a source? A. No, I was off-the-record. I was trying to get his help to intercede with Chris Matthews. Q. And you were calling him in his capacity as a Bureau Chief, as a supervisor, not as much as a reporter? A. I was calling him as a person who might have influence on Chris Matthews. In my sense he had some responsibilities as a Bureau Chief. Yes, sir. Q. When you met with Pincus before the June 12th article, you were going to him as a reporter to give him the administration's point of view. Correct? A. Yes, sir. Q. When you met with Judith Miller on July 8th you went to her as an administration official talking to a reporter to give her the background of the full story? A. Correct, sir. Q. When you called Russert, were you calling him as manager or as a reporter? A. I was not trying to get him to write a story. I was trying to get him to exercise influence on Chris Matthews. I don't know technically whether he is the manager of Chris Matthews, but he's got a lot of -- he's a respected figure in the news industry and I thought moral persuasion from Tim Matthews -- from Tim Russert would have some influence but he chose not to exercise it as far as I can tell. Q. And when he told you the name of the producer you recall that might have been the name Shapiro that you had to call, do you know if you wrote it down? A. I don't know if I wrote it down. There is a sheet where I have that name written down. I'm not sure whether it's the sheet -- a sheet I had when I was talking to Tim Russert. I might have just remembered it at that point. I did at some point write down that name and -- but whether it was with Russert or not, I don't know, sir. Q. Okay. Now, when he told you -- and, and what's your best recollection of the words Russert used concerning Wilson's wife, what he said? A. Did you know that his wife, or Ambassador Wilson's wife, Wilson's wife, whatever he said, did you know that his wife works at the CIA? Q. And you said? A. No, I don't know that. Q. And his response? A. Yeah, all the -- something like yes, yeah, all the reporters know it. Q. And your response? A. No, I don't know that. I wanted to be clear that I wasn't confirming anything. Q. And why were you so concerned that you didn't confirm anything to Mr. Russert about something you weren't providing him? A. I just -- because sometimes reporters will call you with something that you don't know and try and get you to confirm it. Sometimes reporters will call you and try to get you to confirm something. You may or may not know what they're calling you with is true or not. For example, before the President took a trip to the Azores before the Iraq war there were rumors among the press that he was going to go to the Azores and some reporters called me and said, "hey, we hear the President's going to the Azores, doesn't that mean everything's falling apart?" And I had to be very careful in talking to them to say, I can't -- I don't know anything about whether he's going to the Azores, I'm not confirming anything about whether he's going to the Azores, that sort of thing. I wanted to make sure that they didn't play off what I said to be, you know, confirmation they could then go out and print something, and I didn't want him thinking any -- that I was in any way confirming something about the wife because at the time I didn't know it. Q. And at the time did you think there was anything sensitive about whether his wife worked at the CIA that you wanted to make sure that you weren't a confirming source for that fact? A. Not sensitive in the sense of a classified factor or anything. I didn't know it. I didn't -- I had forgotten what I knew, and I didn't know if it was true or false or anything. I didn't want to be a confirmation of that. Q. And as you sit here today, do you have a specific recollection of remembering that you had forgotten that you knew that Wilson's wife worked at the CIA? A. As I sit here today I have a specific recollection that I was surprised when Tim Russert said it, and I thought during that conversation -- when I said, "I don't know," I thought I was actually being truthful. I was being truthful, I didn't know as I sat there. Q. And again, if Marc Grossman had told you in the past that Wilson's wife worked at the CIA, your testimony is you had forgotten that as of the time you spoke to Tim Russert on July 10th or 11th? Is that correct? A. Correct, sir. Q. And it's your testimony that to the extent that the notes show that you had a conversation where Vice President Cheney, had told you some time prior to the Pincus article that Wilson's wife worked in the functional office of Counterproliferation, that you had forgotten that as of the time of the July 10th or 11th conversation? Correct? A. Yes, sir. Q. And as you sit here today if Cathie Martin had discussed with you prior to July 10th that Wilson's wife had worked at the CIA, your testimony is that you had forgotten that fact by the time you spoke to Tim Russert on July 10th. Correct? A. I'm sorry, repeat that one again. Q. If, if Cathie Martin had told you about Wilson's wife working at the CIA prior to July 10th, it's your testimony that you had forgotten that fact when you spoke to Tim Russert on July 10th? A. My testimony is I don't remember Cathie doing that, and I was surprised on July 10. I don't mean to say that if she told me, that I forgot it in those two days, I just don't recall her telling me that at all. And -- yes. Q. And it's your testimony that if you had discussed Wilson's wife with Ari Fleischer over lunch that Monday, July 7th, that you did not recall it at the time that you spoke to Tim Russert on July 10th or 11th? A. My recollection is that I was surprised when Tim Russert told me this fact, and told me that all the reporters knew that. And from that I think I wasn't knowledgeable about it earlier in the week, just because I didn't remember it when he told me on July 10th and those were only a few days earlier. And that's just -- that is what I -- what left, what left the impression with me was when Russert said it, and I don't recall those earlier, those earlier conversations. Q. And what did you do after -- and did Russert tell you who the reporters were, any of the reporters were, who were saying that Wilson's wife worked at the CIA? A. No. No, sir. Q. And did you check with the Press Office to tell people, hey, have you guys heard what all the press are saying, that Wilson's wife works at the CIA? A. No, sir. Q. Had anyone told you from the Press Office that we've been getting calls from the press calling up to find out if Wilson's wife works at the CIA? A. I don't recall any discussion with the Press Office about that. Q. And what did you do as a result of the fact that Russert told you something that you believed, you believed at the time was new to you, the fact that Wilson's wife worked at the CIA? A. I don't believe I really did much of anything, but there were subsequent events that I can describe for you if you wish. Q. Did you tell the Vice President about Russert informing you this curious fact that Wilson's wife worked at the CIA? A. I don't recall if I told the Vice President at that time what had been told to me. I'm not sure if I saw him at that time and had a chance to tell him. I don't, I don't recall telling him at that time. Q. What's the next conversation you recall where you discussed Wilson's wife's employment with anyone? A. On what I believe to be the 11th, so I think later the same day I heard from Tim Russert. We were still waiting for Director Tenet's statement to come out and that was holding us up from getting our story out because once, once Director Tenet's statement came out we would have on the record that the Vice President hadn't asked for the mission, and didn't get the reports, etcetera, etcetera, so we were waiting for Director Tenet's statement to get out and it was still taking shape even as we went through the day of the 11th. Towards the end of the day I went to see Karl Rove to tell him where I thought we were on getting Director Tenet's statement out which would be a very useful thing that we were all waiting to get out. And I went up to Karl Rove's office and told him about where we were on Director Tenet's statement, that I thought we were going to get some useful stuff out of Director Tenet's statement, I wasn't sure that we were going to get everything that we would have wanted out of Director Tenet's statement. And during this conversation Karl Rove said to me that he had had a conversation with Bob, Bob Novak. And I thought that -- my sense was that it was recent, although I didn't -- I don't know what gave me quite that sense. And he told me that Bob Novak had told him that -- Bob Novak had told -- Karl Rove told me that Bob Novak had told Karl Rove that he was going to be writing about Ambassador Wilson, my sense was that weekend, and that he had run into Ambassador Wilson in the Green Room. A Green Room is, in case, like me -- you know, if people don't know what that is, is the room that people sit in when they're waiting to go out on a television show, like the Chris Matthews show. They give you fruit and coffee and you sit there waiting for your turn to go on the air. And Karl Rove told me that Bob Novak had run into Ambassador Wilson in a Green Room at some point and, you know, had a bad taste in his mouth after running into Ambassador Wilson. I've forgotten exactly what it was, but somehow Ambassador Wilson sort of turned him off. And that he also -- that, that Bob Novak had concerns as to how Ambassador Wilson came to be chosen for this mission because Ambassador Wilson, in Novak's view, as related to me from what Karl had taken away from his phone call, Ambassador Wilson had -- might not be a fair and impartial reporter of all this, might have an axe to grind. And then the third thing that Karl told me was that Novak had told Karl that Ambassador Wilson's wife worked at the CIA. So this was confirmation of a sort, from what I had heard from Tim Russert that all the reporters know that Ambassador Wilson's wife works at the CIA. This was on the 11th, as I understand it. I told Karl that I had heard from Tim Russert that Ambassador -- the same thing, that the ambassador's wife works at the CIA and that, that he -- that Karl -- that Tim Russert had told me that all the reporters know this. I don't remember the exact order of this conversation, but that's the sum and substance of what, of what we talked about with regard to that. Q. First of all, do you know where the conversation took place? A. Karl Rove's office. Q. And if July 6th was a Sunday, so the 9th would be a Wednesday, the 10th is a Thursday and the 11th a Friday -- A. Correct. Q. -- do you know which day of the week it was, which day or date? A. It was after my conversation with Tim Russert, so I believe it was on the 11th, but I'm not -- it was certainly after my conversation with Russert on the 10th. I believe it was on the 11th. Q. And whatever day it was, you recall it being in the evening? A. I tend to believe it was late in the day but, you know, in the West Wing everything feels like evening. There are not a lot of windows and I just don't -- I don't recall for sure. What I recall is being towards the end of the day because I had a pretty good sense of where Director Tenet's statement was coming out, but it wasn't yet out, but I had a feeling that, you know, we're not going to get everything that we'd hoped to get. Q. Whatever -- it was either after the -- it could be afternoon or evening but it wasn't the morning as far as you recall? A. I don't. This is pushing my memory, sir, but I don't, I don't think -- my sense was it was later in the day, but I don't have anything -- Q. And did you tell Karl Rove how you had responded to Tim Russert when he told you the fact that Wilson's -- that he believed that Wilson's wife worked at the CIA? A. I don't -- you mean, when I said that I don't know? I don't think so, I don't know, I don't think so. Q. Did Karl Rove tell you what, if anything, he had said to Mr. Novak when Mr. Novak told him that he believed Wilson's wife worked at the CIA? A. No, Karl, you know, was animated that -- Rove was animated that Novak was animated about this. Novak's got a thing about this, he's writing about it sort of thing. He didn't tell me what he said back to Mr. Novak. Q. Did he tell you one way or the other whether he told Novak, I know that too, or I didn't know that? A. No, he didn't say anything like that. Q. And what was Karl's reaction to the information and the fact that Mr. Novak was writing a column? A. That Mr. Novak was -- I'm sorry, sir? Q. Was writing a column about this? A. He didn't give me a -- it was a fact. Novak's going to write about it. Q. You had been sort of beaten up all week, the administration, both the President and the Vice President, about all the allegations stemming from the Wilson story. Was there a sense of relief that finally somebody is going to write something that will sort of respond to this? A. He didn't use any words about that. He didn't seem distressed that he was writing about it. I think he thought it was a good thing that somebody was writing about it. But it was more body language and the tone in which he said things rather than any words he used, as I recall. And the more important thing to me was that the Tenet statement was about to come out, and the Tenet statement was going to have, you know, directly on the facts rebut the things that Ambassador Wilson had been saying. Q. And were you pleased that a story was coming out that weekend or thereafter about Wilson's background? A. It didn't seem to me to be a key element, as key as the Tenet statement. I was really focused on the fact that the Tenet statement -- I hoped it would be a little better than it looked like it was going to be, but I was -- it was good enough, I thought, and I was eager to see it come out. Unfortunately, it still wasn't out when I talked to him, which as I say, I think was afternoon, and I was afraid that by the time it came out it would miss the evening news. Now, there's a timing to these things. If things don't come out at a certain time of day you end up just getting in the overnight newspapers. The overnight newspapers would be the Saturday papers which are probably the least attended to papers of the week. And so the timing was -- it was great to get the Tenet statement out but it looked like it might actually miss the evening news that night and we were eager to get it out, get the truth out. Q. Putting the Tenet statement aside, were you happy that Mr. Novak was going to write a column responding to Mr. Wilson's allegations? A. Well, I didn't know what Mr. -- I didn't know what Mr. Novak was going to say in his column, so if he said the right things, I'd be happy about it. I was glad somebody would be out there saying -- if he was going to address the merits. There were plenty of merits at this point including that we had all denied that the Vice President had sent him out. If that was in the column, that would be good. The stuff about the Green Room, I didn't see how that would, you know, I -- if, if, if Mr. Novak wrote a column which basically went at it the way Karl was saying, which is to go after the arguments about, you know, why did they pick this guy, I actually thought that would be something of a distraction because the real argument was here, was not so much why they picked him, it was the facts were clear that we didn't ask for it, no report came back to us. The report that came back, the NIE, and the January 24 document, were clear that Iraq was not seeking uranium from Niger. So there was no need to get dancy on this point and come around the sides. The straight ahead, here's what the facts are would be the better story. That's what I most wanted to come out. Q. But sir, if people are saying the Vice President sent Wilson to Niger, and he didn't, isn't it fair to say the logical common man on the street question is, well, if the Vice President didn't send him, who did? A. Yes. Q. And if the story comes out, it's his wife who sent him, doesn't that make it more powerful an argument to say see, we told you Mr. Cheney had nothing to do with it? A. If it came out that way, but I don't think I knew at that point that it was his wife who sent him. All I knew is his wife worked at the CIA. Thousands of people work at the CIA. The, the point about it was his wife who suggested it, I don't think I knew until the 14th when the column appeared. Q. And what was it -- A. If you had told me that, if somebody said, yes, it was going to be clear in the column that it wasn't us, that it was the CIA who sent him, that would have been a good fact. Yes, sir. Q. What occasioned you and Mr. Rove to talk about the fact that the two reporters knew that Wilson's wife worked at the CIA? A. Well, as I say, I came up to his office to tell him about the Tenet statement. That the Tenet statement was about to come out, you know, it was something we were waiting for. You know, it was in our interest to get that statement out to the press, the statement might come out too late for the evening news and it might be some need to try and get the statement out over the weekend to make sure people paid attention to it, so I went up to talk to him about that. And it was in that context that, that we talked about this other -- Q. And did you know if you told Rove about whether or not Mr. Novak had called you that week? A. I don't, I don't -- no, I did not tell Mr. Rove that I had -- Mr. Novak had called me that week. I don't know that I had spoken to Mr. Novak that week and, you know, my recollection is hazy on when I spoke to him, but I'm still sort of persuaded by my note that I didn't talk to him until later, but I don't know. Q. And did you talk to Andrea Mitchell during this time frame about Wilson and his wife? A. I talked to Andrea Mitchell some time after I spoke to Tim Russert. I don't know exactly when it was other than it was after I spoke to Mr. Russert. I noticed later that NBC put out a statement about Andrea Mitchell and said that, that whoever she spoke to about this, she spoke to after the 14th. But I don't know -- I don't recall when I spoke to her. Q. When you did speak to Andrea Mitchell, do you recall discussing Wilson's wife with her? A. What I recall for sure is an awkward moment in that I was talking to her about all this, and I remember sort of being concerned about talking to her about the wife because Tim Russert had told me about it, and he had said all the reporters know. And as I was talking to her, I realized that I didn't know if Andrea Mitchell knew, and if Andrea Mitchell didn't know and I told her that, that I had heard this, and she asked me where it was, I didn't want to lie to her and I didn't want to tell her -- it's a little bit convoluted -- I didn't want to tell her that Tim Russert had told me it if in fact Tim Russert had not told her because I didn't want to get her mad at Tim Russert for not having shared something with her that he had shared it with me, and that's what I most recall about it. I may have gone on to talk to her about -- that part I don't really recall -- but I recall this sort of dilemma about, about -- Q. So do you know whether or not you discussed Wilson's wife with her? A. I don't recall whether I discussed Wilson's wife with her. I -- but I -- what I recall is this dilemma about not wanting to, to get her mad at Tim Russert and therefore get Tim Russert mad at me. Q. So -- and let me make sure I understand this. So either you talked about it with her and you were worried as you talked about with her that you may reveal to her that Tim Russert had told you, or you didn't discuss it but you had the concern as the conversation was going that if it came up you might reveal that Tim Russert had told you? A. Correct. I had the concern, yes, that's correct. Q. Now, would that in your mind fix the conversation with Andrea Mitchell before July 14th when Novak's column would have printed that Wilson's wife worked at the CIA? A. No, I don't, I don't know when it was. It was some time after Russert, I'm sure of that. It may have been, it may have been before the 14th. The only thing that fixes is the NBC statement that Andrea Mitchell didn't talk about this until after the 14th. But I don't, I don't know. Q. Well, if Novak had already published in the newspaper that Wilson's wife worked at the CIA, why would you be concerned that you might tip her hand that you knew something? A. I was afraid that she might ask me, you know, is this true, or when did you learn this, or something like that, that's all. Q. And why couldn't you just tell her, I can't comment? A. I could, but I don't usually like to obfuscate in that way, but I, I could. I just was concerned about -- Q. Let me see if I have this correct. You don't know whether the Mitchell conversation was before or after the Novak column, but you know it was after the Russert conversation? A. Correct, sir. Q. And you don't know whether you discussed -- A. I know it was after -- I'm sorry. I know it was after the Russert conversation because I remember having this dilemma about what I talked about with Tim Russert. Q. And do you remember thinking about the dilemma, that you're concerned that you may reveal to Ms. Mitchell that Russert told you what reporters know about Wilson's wife? A. That's, that's what stuck in my mind. Yes, sir. Q. And, and as you sit here today you don't know whether you discussed Wilson's wife with Ms. Mitchell? A. I, I don't recall whether I discussed it with her or not. What I recall for sure was this dilemma about it. That's what I recall. Q. And as you sit here today you're obviously saying that as of that time you didn't recall learning this fact from the Vice President even though that it had happened earlier. Correct? A. Correct. Yes, sir. Q. And you don't recall any conversation with either Grossman, or Fleischer, or Cathie Martin concerning Wilson's wife. Correct? A. Correct. Q. But you do recall having a thought during a conversation with Andrea Mitchell that if this comes up, it could put me in an awkward position because I learned this from Russert and not from any of those people that I may or may not have talked to. Correct? A. Correct. Q. Now, did there come a time when you took a trip on Air Force Two on July 12th? A. Yes, sir. Q. And was that for the purpose of going down to the christening of the USS Ronald Reagan? A. Yes, sir. Q. And were you accompanied on that trip by your family? A. Yes, sir. Q. And was it your son's birthday? A. Right, sir. Q. And at that time were there -- reporters had been calling about various stories during those few days? A. Yes. Q. And was there an outstanding request by a reporter named Matthew Cooper? A. Yes, sir. Q. And is he with Time magazine? A. Yes, sir. Q. And were there other reporters who had made outstanding requests at that time? A. Yes, sir. Most of these go to Cathie Martin, but there were a number of calls in during this period that she would know about. Often when reporters call for me, they get -- my assistant will just refer them directly -- either take a message and refer them to Cathie Martin, or refer them directly to Cathie Martin so that they can -- she can deal with it. And I think I was not talking to any press, or generally not talking to press in that period until we could get the Tenet statement out. So there, there were -- my impression was that Cathie had a number of calls. The Time magazine one that she wanted to address. Q. And you recall that the 12th was a Saturday. Correct? A. Correct. Q. And is it fair to say that on Air Force Two flying down that you sat up front with the Vice President and your family on the trip down to the USS Reagan? A. No, sir. I sat with my family on the flight. Q. Okay. And did you do any work on the way down? A. My recollection is no, we did not do work on the way down. Q. And you didn't do any work other than being there at the christening of the Reagan? A. Correct, sir. Q. On the way back did you address -- on the return flight on Air Force Two, begin to address how to respond to Mr. Cooper and others? A. Yes, sir. Either on the return flight or actually when we had landed at the return, but it was in that period. Q. And did you have a conversation with Cathie Martin about what it was that Cooper wanted to know? A. Yes, sir. Q. Okay. Do you recall reviewing an e-mail that came from Mr. Cooper raising certain questions? A. I recall that there was an e-mail. Yes, sir. Q. And did you -- and when you, when you discussed this with Cathie Martin is it fair to say that you were in a part of the plane away from the Vice President? A. Yes, I, I think so, sir. Q. And -- copy of the e-mail -- did there come a time when you went forward to see the -- let me just show you the e-mail first. Well, we'll come back to the e-mail. Did there come a time you went forward to talk to the Vice President about how to respond to Mr. Cooper from the Post? A. Yes, sir. Q. Okay. And did you go forward with Cathie Martin or alone? A. I don't recall. I think I was alone but I don't recall. She may have been with me. Q. And did you discuss with the Vice President what it was that you were to say to the press? A. Yes, sir. It was actually just a -- to give a fuller answer to your question one or two ago, I went forward to talk to the Vice President about what we were going to do about getting the Tenet statement out, answering the Time -- the questions from Time. But it was more -- it was broader than just the Time magazine questions. It was the whole issue of now the Tenet statement was out, what would we do? Q. And did you have a discussion with the Vice President about what would be said to the press, in what language, and who would be the person to say it? A. Yes, sir. Q. And what do you recall the Vice President telling you? A. Vice President was -- dictated to me what he wanted me to say to the press. He specifically said he wanted me to make the statement on-the-record to Time magazine because he wanted it, he wanted it, he wanted it to draw -- he wanted it to get some attention. And he felt if I put my name on it, it would get more attention than just a senior administration official, or however else they wrote it up. So he dictated things for me to say and he instructed me to say it -- with Time magazine, to give it basically word-for-word quote that he dictated, some background material that he wanted me to use, and for me -- with regard to the quote to use my name, which I don't usually do. Q. And did you actually write down word-for-word what it is that he wanted you to say? A. I did, sir, on a card that I turned over to you all. MR. FITZGERALD. Okay. Why don't we jump to that. MS. KEDIAN. Okay. MR. FITZGERALD. That's Bates 2892 and 2893, the originals. Sorry about that. We can come back to e-mail if we need to but -- BY MR. FITZGERALD: Q. And before we get to the text of it, did the Vice President indicate who should actually speak to the reporters, as between you and the press people? A. Yes, he wanted me to do it, is that what you mean? Yes, he wanted, he wanted the press people, meaning Cathie Martin? Q. Yes. A. He wanted me to do it. Q. And why did he want you to speak to the reporters as opposed to Cathie Martin using your name? A. Well, usually when you give a -- you could give a statement from Cathie Martin to me, but he wanted me to give the statement. He wanted to make sure it was done exactly correctly and he wanted me to give it in name, and so I called -- so I was the one who called. Q. And is it fair to say that sometimes you would have a press person give an exact statement, a quote, in your name if you write it out and say, call a reporter, here's what I have to say, and attribute it to my name? A. Yes, they could, but in this case he wanted to not just a direct on-the-record statement but also some points on deep background and background, as we discussed earlier today, and those there was no direct text for. That was something you would have to talk your way through and he wanted me to do that. Q. Okay. And do you recall what he told you to say on background and deep background? A. It's in the notes. But my recollection was that he wanted me to say -- first, he had a long direct quote. On background, deep background, he wanted me to talk about the -- what was in the NIE, I think, that Director Tenet had now talked about on the record. It would be faster if I looked at the -- Q. Yes, why don't you take a look at the notes. A. Thank you. Thank you. Q. If we could focus on the back of 2893. MS. KEDIAN. It's a different number for him. MR. FITZGERALD. Oh, I'm sorry. The back of the card. WITNESS. Yes, sir. Where it says deep background? MR. FITZGERALD. Yes, well -- MS. KEDIAN. It's 1734. BY MR. FITZGERALD: Q. I'm sorry, the first page. Was there a reference here crossed out -- A. Magazine -- Q. -- deny, deny Wilson, VP -- A. -- VP link. Q. -- link -- A. Yes. Q. -- and then on record? A. Yes. In other words, if I could explain? The top part of this page are notes that I had made to talk about with him when I got some time with him, which would -- on the way back or on the ground, and I had written down the magazines as a reference to Time and Newsweek. Time -- both Time and Newsweek had calls into us. And the question that I was writing down, does he want us to deny the VP/Wilson link on the record. Does he want me to, you know, do you want to do it on the record either in his name, my name or Cathie's name or somebody's name? And we covered that point and I crossed out the line. And then he dictated what he wanted us to say. Q. Okay. And then the dictation on the first page of this card has on the record on the left column? A. Yes, that's correct. Q. And if we could turn to the other side of the column -- card, if you could transliterate what this card says? A. Under deep background, sir, or the whole thing? Q. The whole thing. A. VP was maybe unaware of Joe Wilson trip and didn't know about it until this year when it became public after the State of the Union. Q. And what was the part that was crossed out? You said, did not know anything? A. Did not know anything, right. He, he got more specific. Q. And then if you could read what it says under deep background? A. Only written record of Wilson trip included a statement that the former Prime Minister of Niger was saying that he had been approached by the Iraqi officials in what he believed to be an official -- to be an effort to acquire uranium in 1999. That's the point from the second part of the Wilson cable, and he thought on deep background I should make sure that people understood that. Q. Okay. And the next bullet point? A. He didn't see this until recently. That he saw the NIE last fall, which I, meaning the Vice President, took to be authoritative. This is all stuff to say on deep background. Q. And then the next reference? A. Deep background, as an administration official as opposed to, I guess, deep background, a senior administration official. That I should give a straight report on the NIE which was covered in -- also covered in Tenet's statement and not Report said -- oh, that the NIE said that the -- it was the NIE, not the, not the Wilson report, I guess, that said that Iraq had begun to vigorously pursue trying to procure uranium. So that I think there was some ambiguity in the Tenet statement. He wanted it very clear that it was the NIE six months after Wilson's trip where the CIA and the intelligence community was saying affirmatively that they had tried to procure uranium, and that's what he had taken to be authoritative. Q. Okay. And at this point do you know if you talked to Vice President Cheney about the 12th about the conversation you believe you had on the 11th, perhaps the 10th, with Mr. Russert, and then later with Mr. Rove where reporters were indicating that Wilson's wife worked for the CIA? A. I don't recall. It's not on my list here of things to raise with him that day. I don't recall if I talked about it to him the previous night. Q. And you recall discussing with Rove, but you don't recall whether you discussed it with the Vice President? A. Correct. I recall with Rove in part because of the Novak bit that he had done. I don't recall whether I discussed it with the Vice President. I'm not sure if I -- I don't know that I saw him in, in that sort of a setting after my discussion with Rove because my discussion with Rove may have been later in the day, and I had no private time with him in the morning, and then I went into this. So I don't, I don't recall. Q. And to the extent that it was written out pretty much verbatim what your statement would be on the record. Correct? Q. Yes, sir. Q. And it's written out verbatim what your statement would be on deep background. Correct? A. Just about. Yes, sir. Q. And why couldn't you allow Cathie Martin, the press person, to make the calls and attribute the statement to you? A. I did what he told me to, sir. He said he wanted me to make the call. He was concerned that he wanted it done right. He said, I want you to make the calls. Cathie Martin went with me and sat with me and listened to me as I made the call to Cooper, but he wanted me to make the call, I didn't fight it. He said me make the call, I made the call. Q. Did you get the sense that he had any concerns about whether she could handle this correctly? A. I think he felt he had more confidence in me making this call, especially when it got into this stuff about the NIE, which I was more familiar with than Cathie. He had confidence that I would be able to get it out -- Q. And -- A. -- in a better fashion. Q. -- tell us about the calls you made to the, to the press. A. We went into a lounge at -- we were on the airplane and we needed a land line phone or, you know, a phone where we could have a good connection. So we went into the lounge at Andrews Air Force Base, and we found a phone that we could use. And we sat down to make the phone calls, we being Jenny Mayfield, my assistant; Cathie Martin; and I. And we tried to call three or four reporters at that point. Matthew Cooper from Time Magazine; Evan Thomas, who had calls into us from Newsweek magazine; Glen Kessler from the Washington Post; and later I talked to Judith Miller. I think we tried her then but I'm not sure if we didn't try her later. And I wanted to -- you know, it was a Saturday, everybody had spent the whole day doing this commissioning ceremony and I wanted to get everybody out of there, so we tried to place all the calls right there from Andrews while we were all together. We were unable to reach Glen Kessler at first. Well, we did reach him shortly thereafter. We were unable to reach Evan Thomas at all for a while but we did reach him later. And -- but we did reach Matthew Cooper while we were sitting in the lounge and so I had a conversation with Matthew Cooper in the lounge. Q. And what did you tell Matthew Cooper? A. I had not met Matthew Cooper before, so Cathie introduced us. She said that, you know, we wanted to have this phone call in response in part to his questions, that some of the conversation would be on-the-record, some of it would be on deep background, some of it might be off-the- record, but we would have different layers of, of press conversations. So I -- after she finished that preliminary, I talked to him about the Tenet statement and I gave him this quotation on-the-record that we had here, and I think I also covered some of these background points with him in the phone call. And so I went through that, that the Vice President had asked a question that -- this is same thing, isn't it? Q. Without -- A. Yes. Q. -- repeating -- without repeating what is in the statement that had been agreed that you would tell him, did you have a discussion with Mr. Cooper about Wilson's wife? A. Yes, sir. Q. Okay. Tell us about that conversation. A. I went through -- just a little bit of preliminary. I went through these points and I went through what Tenet had said that, you know, the day before in his statement, you know, I hope you noticed Director Tenet's statement the day before, which is why we were making these calls, which said that I -- that he hadn't made the, he hadn't made the request and he hadn't gotten the reports on it. And after all of that, Matthew Cooper said, "well then why does Wilson say it?" And you know, I was a little taken aback because here we have the Director of Central Intelligence saying the Vice President didn't request it, the Vice President saying he hadn't requested it in his statement, White House spokesman etcetera, etcetera. And instead of sort of saying, oh, well, I see that he didn't request it, he said, well, why does Wilson say it? Wilson, of course, had said earlier in the week that someone had told him that the Vice President had asked for his mission. So I said, well, I don't know why he said it. You know, I said, we're off-the-record, and he agreed. And I said, someone -- I don't know why he said it, but I would have thought -- off-the-record, I would have thought that, that the CIA wouldn't tell somebody who is going on a mission who asked about it. And you know, conversation the Vice President has about these things are supposed to be confidential. But if he did -- if they did officially -- they wouldn't officially tell such a thing. If they did officially tell someone, they would tell them the right thing, which was that the CIA decided to do it, which is what Director Tenet had said in his statement the day before. So I wouldn't have thought that officially he heard this, which -- but it -- you know, it's possible he heard something unofficially. And if he heard something possibly unofficially, you know, maybe he knows somebody there and somebody said something to him that was wrong because it was unofficial. And in that context, I said, you know, off- the-record, reporters are telling us that Ambassador Wilson's wife works at the CIA and I don't know if it's true. As I told you, we don't know Mr. Wilson, we didn't know anything about his mission, so I don't know that it's true. But if it's true, it may explain how he knows some people at the Agency and maybe he got some bad skinny, you know, some bad information. So that was the discussion about Ambassador Wilson's wife. Q. And his response? A. I don't recall specifically what he said about that. I recall the response, "why does he say it," because that's what led into this conversation. Q. And it's your specific recollection that when you told Cooper about Wilson's wife working at the CIA, you attributed that fact to what reporters -- A. Yes. Q. -- plural, were saying. Correct? A. I was very clear to say reporters are telling us that because in my mind I still didn't know it as a fact. I thought I was -- all I had was this information that was coming in from the reporters. Q. And at the same time you have a specific recollection of telling him, you don't know whether it's true or not, you're just telling him what reporters are saying? A. Yes, that's correct, sir. And I said, reporters are telling us that, I don't know if it's true. I was careful about that because among other things, I wanted to be clear I didn't know Mr. Wilson. I don't know -- I think I said, I don't know if he has a wife, but this is what we're hearing. Q. Did you have any further conversation about Wilson and his wife with Cooper during this phone call? A. I don't think so and I don't think I had a subsequent phone call with him. That was it for Mr. Cooper. Q. And consistent with your practice would Cooper have to call you back to verify the quote in his article to say here's what, what I attribute to Lewis Libby? A. No, that -- this would be an exception because I gave it to him on-the-record the first time, and I read it, and I read it slowly so that he could get it down correctly. Q. And any other reporters that you discussed Wilson's wife with on that day, July 12th? A. Yes, sir. I talked to three other reporters that day. Towards the end of the day I believe I talked to Judith Miller, and I know that I discussed it with Judith Miller, New York Times, and the discussion was pretty much as I just described with Ambassador -- excuse me, with Matthew Cooper. Q. Why don't you describe the conversation for us? A. I said, that -- I went through all about the Tenet statement, that the Tenet statement had just come out, you know, please pay attention to the Tenet statement which said that we didn't know about the trip, that we didn't get the report, that the report was not definitive, that the NIE actually comes out and says that Iraq had begun to vigorously pursue acquiring uranium, and that -- and I did not use this text, as an exact quote, I did not use it exactly again, but I went through some of the same points with her. And I don't remember exactly how it came up, but I said to her -- sorry, but I -- Q. No, no, I'm just checking for my own self. Please continue. A. I'm sorry, I don't mean to hold you up here. I said to her that, that I didn't know if it was true, but that reporters had told us that the ambassador's wife works at the CIA, that I didn't know anything about it. But if that were true, that may explain how he got this unofficial -- I went through the same officially/unofficially sort of breakdown, trying to shorten it for you. Q. No, please, don't shorten it. We're -- A. Okay. Q. -- we're not going to finish today, break everyone's heart, so we'll just cover it -- you know, once so we don't have to cover the Miller conversation again. A. I also spoke to Evan Thomas. And with Evan Thomas -- Q. I just wanted to finish the Judith Miller conversation. Was there something that triggered it, your conversation with Judith Miller, to discuss Wilson's wife's employment in the way that Cooper had asked you, "why is Mr. Wilson saying this?" A. I think there was. I don't recall exactly what it was. Something that she said -- I thought something that she said, I think, triggered it. That's my, my vague recollection about it. You know, it had been something that was important to Tim Russert. It was something that, you know, Cooper still wanted to know at this point and I think partly by the time I talked to Judith Miller I was thinking, you know, the reporters seem to have this unopen -- unanswered question, and the question is, was, Wilson had said that someone had told him that the Vice President requested the mission. He said that on national television earlier in the week. And even with the explanation from George Tenet, it leaves unanswered this question well, how did he happen to hear it? And so, you know, I was pretty ready to explain that I didn't think he would have heard it officially, but he might have heard it unofficially, but I think there was something that she said that led me into it. Q. Okay. A. Evan Thomas? Q. Yes. A. I, I recall, recall that I did reach Evan Thomas eventually. I was home at this point. And I told Evan Thomas -- I, I drew his attention to the, to the Wilson statement -- excuse me. I drew his attention to the Tenet statement that had come out the day before. Evan was calling me in part because we were going to meet about something else. And he said, "I got it," my recollection. In other words, when I, when I laid out what, what Tenet had said, that we hadn't asked for it, that we didn't get the report, that the report was not definitive, that the NIE in fact said -- that the NIE in fact said that Iraq had been looking for six months after Wilson's report -- the CIA had not taken Wilson's report to be definitive, he said he got it, and he wanted to move on, and I just moved on. So I did not discuss it with Evan Thomas. Q. And are you sure you did not discuss it with Evan Thomas? A. Pretty sure. Q. Do you recall being interviewed by the FBI and telling them you couldn't recall whether or not you discussed it with Evan Thomas? A. As I say, I'm pretty sure I did not discuss it with Evan Thomas because I remember him saying it. I don't recall discussing it with Thomas. I do think I recall him saying I didn't -- that I got it, and so I don't think I talked to him about it. Q. And did you talk to Glen Kessler that day? A. I did. Q. Okay. A. We didn't get Glen Kessler -- excuse me. We didn't get Glen Kessler while we were in the -- at Andrews, but we got him on a cell phone while we were in the car driving back from Andrews to my house, which is like a 40 minute drive or something. And so while Cathie Martin and, and Jenny Mayfield were still with me, along with my family in the van, I spoke to him about this stuff. Kessler was, Kessler was, was contacting me primarily about Colin Powell's February 5th presentation. He was interested in the origins of the presentation that Colin Powell had made back on February 5th. And -- but I think he also wanted to know about this, or in any case, it was an occasion for me to make sure that he, from the Washington Post, paid attention to George Tenet's statement. So we talked a lot about Powell's February 5th presentation, and we also talked about the, the Tenet statement. Sorry. Lost thought -- I lost focus there for a second. We also talked about the Tenet statement at that point. And what I recall about this conversation was that Glen Kessler was at the zoo with his kids, and yet he was able to have this lucid conversation, something that I could never do with my kids at the zoo on a sunny day with, you know, hundreds of people milling around. And at one point he said, give me a moment here to get located, and then -- because he wanted to get someplace where he could see his kids. But then he was able to have this conversation, which I thought was pretty impressive actually, and we talked about this stuff. Q. Did you talk about Wilson's wife working at the CIA with Glen Kessler? A. I don't know for sure. What I -- I believe I did have a conversation with Glen Kessler about, about Ambassador Wilson's wife. I tend to think it was later, not in this conversation, but it was possibly in this conversation. And so possibly I did. I'm not sure. I'm pretty sure I did have a conversation with Glen Kessler about Ambassador Wilson's wife eventually, but I just don't know if it was this conversation. Q. And do you know if you spoke to, or made attempts to speak, to Andrea Mitchell that day? A. No. Well, I did speak to Andrea Mitchell at some point in that period but I don't know if it was before or after the -- Q. And how about Mark Matthews of the Baltimore Sun? Do you know if there was any effort to speak to him? A. I don't think I did talk to him. I don't know if he was one of the ones Cathie wanted me to talk to or not. I don't know Mr. Matthews, Mark Matthews, and I don't, I don't recall if we tried him or not. Q. Do you know if you ever spoke to Mark Matthews about this topic at all? A. In this weekend, I don't think so in this weekend. I think it was just those four. But I don't know him. It's possible. You know, after you've had a few of these conversations, they run together. Q. One last name, Mike Isikoff. Do you know if you spoke to him that weekend? A. I don't think so. I do know -- I now know Mike Isikoff. I don't think I really knew him then. I met him at -- I had met him but I really had a long conversation with him subsequent to that, and I don't think I talked to him that weekend. He would also be Newsweek, so he would be duplicative of Evan Thomas, I think. Q. We'll wrap -- we're going a little bit late. I'll just take a minute to wrap something up. When the Novak column came out on July 14th, did you -- you knew it was coming from your conversation with Rove. Had you ever heard or seen an advance copy of the Novak column? A. No, sir. Q. Did anybody indicate to you whether or not anyone had received a draft column either by fax or by e-mail? A. I've never heard that, sir. Q. And do you have any recollection of when it is that you discussed with Vice President Cheney, his comments about whether or not Ambassador Wilson had been sent on this trip by his wife as a junket? A. I know that there -- that Vice President Cheney asked -- made some comments like that. I think of them in my mind as later, you know, later in July or August or later, asking not so much in me, but just sort of how did he come to be sent on this? I don't know if he also made them earlier. That sort of runs together for me. MR. FITZGERALD. Why don't we adjourn -- WITNESS. Can I just make one other comment about this stuff? I get a lot of information during the course of a day. I probably get -- you know, after this all came up I sort of for a few days tried to take a census of how many pages of stuff I get in a day, and I tend to get between 100 and 200 pages of material a day that I'm supposed to read and understand and I -- you know, I start at 6:00 in the morning and I go until 8:00 or 8:30 at night, and most of that is meetings. So a lot of information comes through to me, and I can't possibly recall all the stuff that I think is important, let alone other stuff that I don't think is as important. And so when a lot of this -- a lot of stuff that comes to me, what I will normally do is I'll gather my staff together and say, hey, what happened here? You know, there was some meeting we had on, let's say, Iraq. What did, what did people say, or what happened last week when we had that meeting? Did State agree to do something, or was the Defense Department supposed to do something? And we'll sort of pool our recollections of it and that almost always bring me a fuller recollection of what's happened. I haven't done that here because as I understand it, you don't want me to do that here. I'm happy to do it at some point, but I haven't. So I apologize if my recollection of this stuff is not perfect, but it's not in a way that I would normally do these things. I would normally -- in the normal course of what we do in a day, I would bring the staff together or ask the Vice President and go through all this, and I haven't done that here, and I apologize if there's some stuff that I remember and some I don't, but it's -- I'm just trying to tell you what I do in fact remember. MR. FITZGERALD. Okay. We'll pick it up from there. I'm going to ask the foreperson to advise the witness he remains under subpoena. We'll talk with your counsel and with the Grand Jury about scheduling so we minimize the disruption, and I apologize. Another matter ran long today and we'll sort that out at the convenience of yourself, counsel, and the Grand Jury and us. So thank you. And I apologize for running a bit over, but we'll see -- GRAND JUROR. Thank you, Mr. Libby. WITNESS. Thank you. (Whereupon, the witness was excused at 4:38 p.m.) CERTIFICATE I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate transcript, to the best of my skill and ability, from my stenographic notes/electronic recording. November 21, 2006 Date Deborah H. Powers, Court Reporter