It doesn’t seem probable that Fredo, Bellinger, Miers and Addington would be getting this info from an CIA-sent email. It seems more likely that something like a CIA briefer would provide this info verbally.

Perhaps the same CIA briefer giving the PDB (Presidential Daily Brief). It was my understanding that Deadeye got the same briefing, though not necessarily at the same time as the Junya.

And if it came from a CIA-provided PDB, how does that bring in Fredo and Miers? I can understand Bellinger (National Security Council), and perhaps Addingtion (former CIA assistant general counsel), but I can’t see Fredo and Miers “sitting in” a PDB session with either Junya and/or Deadeye.

Congress Reviews CIA Videotape Documents

…At the Justice Department, investigators were combing through CIA e-mails and other documents and planning to interview former agency officials. One official familiar with the investigation said the review so far indicates that Alberto Gonzales, who served as White House counsel and then attorney general, advised against destroying the videotapes as one of four senior Bush administration attorneys discussing how to handle them…

~snip~

Another of the administration attorneys, John Bellinger, then a lawyer at the National Security Council, has told colleagues that administration lawyers came to a consensus that the tapes should not be destroyed, said a senior official familiar with Bellinger’s account of the 2003 White House discussion. Bellinger could not be reached for comment.

“The clear recommendation of Bellinger and the others was against destruction of the tapes,” the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter. “The recommendation in 2003 from the White House was that the tapes should not be destroyed.“

~snip~

Muller, who headed the CIA’s legal office from 2002 to 2004, advised agency officials against destroying the tapes, according to former government officials familiar with the situation who are not authorized to speak on the record.

So, it appears from spin of the WH vested-interest leaking, that the consensus was not to destroy. The consensus being Fredo, Bellinger, Scott Muller, and purportedly, Harriet Miers.

And since the NYT earlier reported that some were actually interested in destroying the tapes, one could ask who could that possibly be?

The only lawyer attending the meeting who has not be reported to be against destroying the tapes is David Addington.

But the meetings definitely started in 2003.

“It was a Friday afternoon in January 2008, and the witness was just a CIA
operative. Three staff members of the Senate Destruction of CIA Tapes Committee were questioning him, preparing for his public testimony the following Monday.
Trolling, one asked whether there might be other computer or duplicative video tapes of the torture, held by the CIA at Langley.
The CIA operative took a breath.
“I was hoping you fellows wouldn’t ask me that,” he said.

And yes, I would wager Libby was intimately involved in all of this. Wonder if he wants to go double or nothing with perjury?

John B. Bellinger, III was appointed February 11, 2005, by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to be Senior Associate Counsel to the President and Legal Adviser to the National Security Council at the U.S. Department of State. Bellinger was confirmed by the Senate April 6, 2005. [1]

Prior to his appointment, Bellinger “served as Counsel for National Security Matters in the Criminal Division of the Department of Justice from 1997 to 2001. He previously served as Counsel to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (1996), as General Counsel of the Commission on the Roles and Capabilities of the U.S. Intelligence Community (1995-1996), and as Special Assistant to Director of Central Intelligence William H. Webster (1988-1991). From 1991 to 1995, Mr. Bellinger practiced law with Wilmer, Cutler and Pickering in Washington, D.C.

“Mr. Bellinger received an A.B. from Princeton University’s Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, an M.A. in Foreign Affairs from the University of Virginia, and a J.D. from Harvard Law School.” [2]

Also, is there any way that Libby wasn’t involved in this? Because it’d be a lot of fun to see his parole officer show up and say, “You have to cooperate with any law enforcement investigations. Otherwise, you’re violating your parole, and you have to go to the clink.”