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