hadley/pollari

* byron york takes a sample of two and argues that fitzgerald is interviewing plame's neighbours for the first time (link)

* richard sale has a new article suggesting that the account last week that said Libby got plames name from cheney are wrong. its all a bit confusing.

* kathleen reardon makes a good point: "If the indictments package sticks or falls apart in the months to come because of efforts to disparage Fitzgerald or some likely dissembling, there's a larger picture here. We came very close to missing how bad the lies were and still are, no small credit going to a press cadre of the courted and cowed" (link)
(kathleen was one of my lecturers at USC - i had a teacher-crush on her)

* " The grand jury was expected to meet Friday morning, with an announcement by Fitzgerald expected about midday." (link)
plan your day accordingly.

* unless you accept the wsj version: "Mr. Fitzgerald met with the grand jury for three hours Wednesday, following which he met for 45 minutes with U.S. District Judge Thomas Hogan in his chambers."

* the nyt is reporting on the hadley/pollari meeting - i love this spin: " The White House has confirmed that the meeting took place, but a spokesman for Mr. Hadley described it as a courtesy call of 15 minutes or less." and the non-denial denial: ""No one present at that meeting has any recollection of yellowcake being discussed or documents being provided," Frederick Jones, Mr. Hadley's spokesman, said Thursday"
i wonder how many people were present at the 'courtesy call'?

* the nyt article then says: " the Senate report said the C.I.A.'s counterproliferation division decided to contact Mr. Wilson, who was posted early in his career in Niger. His wife, Valerie Wilson, also known as Valerie Plame, was an undercover officer in that division. The Senate report says that when the division decided to send Mr. Wilson to Niger, she approached him on behalf of the agency and told him "there's this crazy report" on a possible deal for Niger to sell uranium to Iraq."
i havent seen that before - a google shows that phrase comes up only 180 times - its odd that that quote has hardly been mentioned - its interesting spin - although i have no idea why it has surfaced now - or who it benefits. both 'sides' could have used that to spin a variety ways...