Once More, With Feeling

Now it's Daniela Deane who repeats the error made by Howard Kurtz, Eric Weiss and Charles Lane about Joe Wilson not finding evidence of Iraq seeking uranium in Niger.

Deane, in a post.com story filed after the Plame/Wilson presser* titled Cheney, Rove and Libby Sued Over CIA Leak:

Wilson said at the news conference that he told the administration repeatedly that he had "found no evidence" of yellowcake uranium in Niger after two missions there to look into charges that former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein had bought it to produce weapons of mass destruction, Bush's main justification for invading Iraq.

Despite Wilson's findings, Bush referred to the Niger uranium charges in his 2003 State of the Union speech outlining his reasons for going to war in March of that year.

And again, Susan Schmidt in the Post on July 10, 2004, accurately reporting the findings of the Senate Intelligence committee:

Wilson's report, rather than debunking intelligence about purported uranium sales to Iraq, as he has said, bolstered the case for most intelligence analysts.

Deane's report sounds a bit garbled to boot. "Finding no evidence of yellowcake" in Niger is unlikely, since Niger is uranium central. Nor do I recall the charge being that Saddam actually bought uranium, but rather that he had tried to do so.

What's clear, however, is that there's a renewed collective amnesia about the Senate report, which clearly identified the difference between Wilson's public and private statements.

To make things tidy, here's the list of stories that have gotten this wrong:

Novak Says He Named 3 Sources In Leak Case, Howard Kurtz, July 12, A4
Vice President Sued by Plame and Husband, Eric Weiss and Charles Lane, July 14, A3
Cheney, Rove and Libby Sued Over CIA Leak, Daniela Deane, online at post.com July14

Here's my best post on the issue this week, with some history, pegged to Kurtz's story.

I've emailed ombudsman Deborah Howell. She's deluged even on slow days, so we'll see.

UPDATE: While I'm at it, Strata-Sphere doesn't see the Wilson/Plame suit going anywhere:

I have to say I think Joe Wilson is just plain dumb. All evidence points to Libby not outing Plame but responding to reporter’s questions. Rove did not out Plame, he answered reporters questions. Novak did not out Plame, Armitage did. So what is this suite going to be about?

UPDATE: Tom Maguire thinks the suit benefits Democrats more than Republicans:

Advantage - Democrats!  Neither Joe Wilson, Tim Russert, nor George Tenet are candidates for anything; Bush won't be either, but he is the leader of his party, notionally at least.  The Dems have a puncher's chance of scoring a big win; the Reps are more likely to "win" this suit, but what is victory - humiliating Joe Wilson?  Been there, done that, and John Kerry cut him loose to ice the cake.

True, but I'm thinking that reporter depositions could provide a big win too, or failing that, adequate entertainment.

*The story now appears in the Saturday hard-copy Post. The Iraq/Niger/uranium error remains. This also might be a good time to note I'm corresponding with ombudsman Deborah Howell.