On what NBC’s “Meet the Press” host Tim Russert aptly called “the story that will not go away,” conservative pundit Robert Novak made a bit of news Sunday. He wouldn’t take Russert’s bait — a Newsweek story suggesting that Novak’s primary source on the Valerie Plame leak was then-Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage — telling Russert, “I do not identify my sources on any subject if they’re on a confidential basis until they identify themselves.” But Novak made a new plea: “I believe that the time has way passed for my source to identify himself.” It would be great to get this mystery solved.
Posted by Rhonda Holman
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Jed on Let immigrants run
- Regular on Open thread 11/23
- Regular on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- Freebird1971 on Open thread 11/23
- Freebird1971 on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- Freebird1971 on Open thread 11/23
58 Comments
Did he suggest any particular tune?
Novak already sang like a canary to the Special Prosecutor, so his statement, “I do not identify confidential sources” is a proven lie.
Russert should have pointed this out, but that’s “infotainment.”
Libby, was one source Armitage may be another.
What a laugh – Bob Novak has principles in not revealing his source? This man is one slippery windbag. Novak loved it for years dishing it out but when the heat is turned on to himself then he doesn’t like it. I say fry Novak along with the other rats on the sinking ship.
I find it amusing that the Righties aren’t wanting to see this traitor tried for treason. They seem to clamor for that for anyone they don’t like.
Let the judicial process happen is the stance I take.
From Byron York.
“So by October 2003 — more than two months before the appointment of special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald — the Justice Department knew who had told Novak about Plame.”
http://article.nationalreview.com/print/?q=NDMwMTNiM2QzNzI5MmI3YTFiZWRiOGUyMjU4NjIwMDc=
Can you say “Wich Hunt”?
I think a few “I told you so’s” are in order. Any of you lefties got the integrity to admit you were wrong?
I will admit I was wrong when we know for sure what happened. I say we are a ways from that.
If it was a witch hunt, heckler, then it was a republican witch hunt. Who runs all three branches of government? Certainly not the left. “I told you so’s” arn’t necessary if they are less then redundant, and in this case they are.
And Heckler it would be “witch” hunt, unless of course you were looking for something in Dudah…
Sounds more like a White House cover-up to me.
>>It would be great to get this mystery solved.<<
It’s only a mystery to the tinfoil-hatted moonbats that have been beating this dead horse for three years. But they’re fun to watch.
Oh yeah, it was all just a mistake. Move along, nothing to see here.
If they knew, it’d been nice if somebody had told Fitz.! Sounds to me like the situation where ‘Deep Throat’ was cnducting the investigation into who leaked on Nixon; only in reverse!
This article says nothing.
If Armitage let something slip that the Rove-sters then seized upon, that’s still outing a CIA agent.
Libby is getting prosecuted because he apparently lied. Why did he lie if he had nothing to hide?
Also, the Valerie Plame crime fits a pattern of this administration–smearing the opposition. Setting the swift-boat lying dogs on Kerry. Calling Democrats the “Al Qaeda” candidates–a vote for Ned Lamont is a vote to support the terrorists.
They’re despicable. No one except for the party faithful have any doubt that the Bushistas are capable of this.
CapnAmerica
She was an analyst, not and agent.
Get over it.
Correction there Capn, the party faithful are helping the Bushistas carry all this out.
Nobody is getting over it.In fact, when the Dems take back congress, expect years of investigations and hearings.Now Heck, I know you would blame the Dems for being vindictive, but this is what the majority of Americans want.Truth, honesty and transparency of our government.
As reprinted in the Washington Post:
…the Nation’s David Corn , says:
“The outing of Armitage does change the contours of the leak case. The initial leaker was not plotting vengeance. He and Powell had not been gung-ho supporters of the war. Yet Bush backers cannot claim the leak was merely an innocent slip. Rove confirmed the classified information to Novak and then leaked it himself as part of an effort to undermine a White House critic. Afterward, the White House falsely insisted that neither Rove nor Libby had been involved in the leak and vowed that anyone who had participated in it would be bounced from the administration. . . . To date, the president has not addressed Rove’s role in the leak. It remains a story of ugly and unethical politics, stonewalling, and lies.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/linkset/2005/04/11/LI2005041100587.html
So has much changed, here? I think the conservatives might be declaring victory a tad bit prematurely…
I wish I understood how you guys think that repeatedly recounting untruths about Plame’s covert status will change the reality of it. Interesting…
But Steven, she drove her car there every workday, and cashed paychecks from the CIA.How could she be a secret agent?(sarcasm)
Tracy,
I heard, too, on Wingnuttia 1200 on your AM dial, that she used to wear a T-shirt that said:
“I am a covert CIA agent: I dare you to ‘out’ me.”
QED…
I used to wear a tee shirt with Ronald McDonald on it and the caption EAT SHIT.I went into mickey dee’s with it on and got only laughs!Damn, set out to outrage, and couldn’t get arrested.
Armitage was the orignial source:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14533384/site/newsweek/
However, as posted previously, Plame and Wilson, her husband, are an intensely political couple.
Plame recommended Wilson for the unpaid Niger assignment. Wilson lied about this, telling a Senate panel that Plame had nothing to do with it. Wilson was then confroned with a letter from Plame recommending Wilson for this nepotism!Wilson allowed several major publications to run stories that claimed Wilson was reporting directly to Dick Cheney, and that there was a “written” report of the trip. This was not true.Wilson’s oral report to the CIA clearly stated that Saddam’s agents and contacts with Niger had expressed interest in “expanding trade” between the two countries.Nigers’ ONLY resource is URANIUM!
Tell me how you libs think this scenario is fair or legal or ethical:A politically motivated couple hatches a scheme to smear the President of the United States with a verifiably FALSE Op-ed piece to the New York Times, written by Joe Wilson, who obtained his “information,” and his touted “credentials” based on his wife’s influence at the CIA.
These are not a “whistle blowers” in the true sense of the phrase, since the information that Wilson provided to the press was false, and he KNEW it was false. Wilson admitted in Senate hearings that he “mispoke.”
On that particular admission, it was about the fact that Wilson had never seen “forged” documents prior to his Niger trip, or at any time since. Wilson simply brought up this irrelevent issue to imply that the forged documents were the primary basis of the Bush “Yellow Cake” statements. This was clearly false. Those documents were recognized as fake from the beginning. Wilson only brought up the forgery issue to hurt Bush.
The Washington Times admitted that Wilson provided false information to the Times.
Back to the question of fairness. How in the world do you think it is fair for a political couple with an obvious political agenda to hide behind “CIA Status” to avoid being challenged for a bogus Op-Ed?
Beyond this point, Wilson was not worried about his wife’s “covert” status very much, or he would not have eagerly become such a lightening rod with his false op-ed piece.Wilson, himself, had told others that his wife worked for the CIA, so Wilson, in truth, outed Plame before the Armitage slip up ever happened.”Who’s Who” clearly listed Plames employment with a well known front for the CIA.Plame and Wilson already look foolish in their lawsuit against the Administration. They still want “privacy” even after blabbing their case in Vanity Fair and countless other forums, and after telling the world that they live next door to their attorney.Plame and Wilson wanted to keep their address “covert.”These people are political operatives, looking for headlines. The Judge in their lawsuit clearly sees through this garbage:http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0825061plame1.html
Plame was not Covert.Wilson outed Plame.Nobody has been charged with “outing” Plame.
This is a Martha Stewart-type prosecution.Scooter Libby is being prosecuted for either trying to cover up something he didnt need to cover up, or for bad memory.Lets let the jury decide!
Paul?
If nobody did anything wrong, why do they all have to lie about it?
If Armitage was the source and “he didn’t do anything wrong,” why doesn’t he come forward as the source?
Why cover-up something that wasn’t wrong?
THEY LIE BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT COMES NATURALLY!
From Hitchens at Slate.
“It is particularly satisfying that this admission comes from two of the journalists—Michael Isikoff and David Corn—who did the most to get the story wrong in the first place and the most to keep it going long beyond the span of its natural life.”
http://www.slate.com/id/2148555
CapnAmerica and Paul.
Who lied about it? Liddy? We’ll see, I’m betting the charges against him never see trial.
So who lied, and when? The biggest liar in the whole thing was Joe Wilson.
I agree, let’s see what happens in court. I don’t know about you, but I would hate to have that obsessed Patrick Fitzgerald on my tail.
And, I must confess I am amused when conservatives try to say that Wilson himself outted Plame when they stop trying to say that she wasn’t covert. You guys get the award for consistency, at least … But, the question is – “is there an advantage to being consistently wrong?” I guess you could point to Rush’s millions as evidence of the benefit. Only in America…
Heckler:”Who lied about it? Liddy?”
Well, yes, during the watergate scandal. For this Republican episode the character is “Libby”
Hey all,Check this out:
http://wichitakscoc.weblinkconnect.com/CWT/External/WCPages/WCEvents/EventDetail.aspx?EventID=117
“Fitzgerald indicted Libby while claiming he was the first “known” official to have talked to reporters about Valerie Wilson. But Fitzgerald was simply wrong about this central contention in his case. He was wrong to indict Libby on questionable charges of having been deceitful about a matter that wasn’t in fact criminal to begin with. Valerie Wilson’s boss was wrong to go along with her nepotistic plan of giving her vainglorious liar of a husband a few more days of government service.
And Joseph Wilson – the word “wrong” doesn’t even begin to describe him. ”
http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/opedcolumnists/about_that_white_house_cabal_opedcolumnists_john_podhoretz.htm
By the way, where’s CF and JR on this?
In the accounts by the lawyer and associates, Mr. Armitage disclosed casually to Mr. Novak that Ms. Wilson worked for the C.I.A. at the end of an interview in his State Department office. Mr. Armitage knew that, the accounts continue, because he had seen a written memorandum by Under Secretary of State Marc Grossman.
Mr. Grossman had taken up the task of finding out about Ms. Wilson after an inquiry from I. Lewis Libby Jr., chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney. Mr. Libby’s inquiry was prompted by an Op-Ed article on May 6, 2003, in The New York Times by Nicholas D. Kristof and an article on June 12, 2003, in The Washington Post by Walter Pincus.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/30/washington/30armitage.html?
*****
Armitage has stepped forward and admitted his role in the Plame affair.
So what?
It changes nothing. As soon as Bush Co. realized they could use it to discredit Wilson, they did.
Stephen–Carville and Maitlen, I dislike them both.
Carville and his ilk are why the Democrats have lost the House and the Senate, while Maitlen is just wacked.
Capn,I did wonder what a farce those two were putting on if they could work for whom they worked for and then go home as a married couple??? It just seemed odd, to say the least.
The Washington Post agrees with ME: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/31/AR2006083101460_pf.html
The Post blames Wilson for ending Plames CIA career!
So much for the “liberal” media, eh, Paul.
Let the record show that the New York Times and the Washington Post were among the loudest drumbeats for the war in Iraq.
Even though a majority of Americans NEVER supported invading Iraq without UN support and a real coalition, the major media whipped up “manufactured consent” for the administration’s war, just as they always do . . .
Two other reporters were involved, besides Novak.And who requested the inaccurate memo re Valerie Wilson’s role be sent to Armitage?
‘Media figures repeat false claim that Armitage role in Plame leak exonerates Libby and Rove’ http://mediamatters.org/items/200609010001
By the way;Under the law, I believe one of the requirements for finding that someone’s cover has been “blown” or that someone was “illegally outed” is to prove that they were still “undercover” or covert.Under this logic, you could be a top secret spy with the highest security clearance. Your husband could brag about his “Jane Bond” wife. (Something egomaniac Joe Wilson did do).At this point, your cover would be “blown.”So, I don’t believe that Valerie Plame was covert at all. I don’t believe that she was covered by any “leak” laws at the time, even, of the Novak column, or the Armitage comments to Novak.However, since Plame and Wilson did such an awful job of keeping Plame’s status under wraps, she was NOT covered by the law anymore.The law clearly requires that anyone prosecuted for outing an “agent” be the first to “out” that agent.You can only be outed once, logically speaking.Wilson outed Plame.
Option A: Armitage outted Plame to Novak;Option B: Cheney & Libby sought to discredit Plame/Wilson by giving her identity to other reporters because of the Wilson’s critcisms of the lead-up to the Iraq war.
Option A being true DOES NOT mean that Option B CANNOT be true.It is entirely possible that A AND B are true. Fitzgerald will let us know.
So, in the meantime the Washington post op/ed and Paul’s opinions are just that opinions – which, like a__holes, everybody has one.
“Wilson outed Plame.”
Give ya credit for consistency. How about letting Fitzgerald present his case??? Anything wrong with that idea?
A very good column on the importance of intelligence, the impact of the Novak’s leak, etc. by one of the writers of the CIA Identities Bill.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brent-budowsky/the-cia-leak-case-on-bob_b_28283.html
Fitzgeralds case will NOT be about “outing” it will be about the possibility that Libby gave false statements.The matter of law is probably settled on the “outing” issue.”Innocent until proven guilty” on the Libby statements.However, innocence of everyone on the outing issue is implied by the fact that NOBODY has been charged with outing anyone!
Furthermore, politics aint bean bag. Wilson and Plame deserved to be held accountable.It is not realistic to think anyone can enter the political world without rebuttle.
Joe Wilson and Valerie Plame are frauds, a couple of political hacks who got caught in the act.
Held accountable for TELLING THE TRUTH?
Paul you fascist pig.
Twist and spin all you want,but at least Wilson had the BALLS to tell the truth.What about you Paulie?You certainly have some audacity,I wouldn’t call them balls, cause you hide behind the legal-schmeagle smoke and mirrors.Just like our lying preznut.
TracyWilson admitted that he “misspoke” during a Senate hearing.Wilson lied about his wife’s involvement in Wilson’s selection for this nepotism of sending husband Wilson on Wife’s Africa errand.Wilson lied about seeing “forged documents” that he never saw, ever, and admitted under questioning that he never saw.Wilson lied about giving a “written report” of his trip. The report was oral, only.Wilson lied in his op-ed piece that Niger was not approached by Saddam’s agents for Uranium.Wilson’s oral report to the CIA clearly stated that Saddam was interested in “expanding trade” with Niger, who’s only export is Uranium!Wilson never corrected the false press reports that he was on an assignment for Dick Cheney.Wilson is your “hero” Tracy??You can have him.Wilson is more “Fascist” than anyone in the Whitehouse.Wilson lies and distorts and abuses power like a true Goebels.
Paul F. Rosell,
You clearly have unreliable sources (Rush, et al?), and/or very serious reading comprehension problems.
Paul: “Wilson lied about his wife’s involvement in Wilson’s selection for this nepotism of sending husband Wilson on Wife’s Africa errand.”
* Did Wilson know his wife’s boss asked her to submit a doc listing his qualifications, or any other possible involvements? If he did not know, then he did NOT lie.* She did not have the authority to select, or send him.* “Wife’s Africa errand”? The VP asked the CIA to investigate — the CIA selected, and sent Wilson.
Paul: “Wilson never corrected the false press reports that he was on an assignment for Dick Cheney.”
Actually, the press itself is making false claims.Wilson said that he went on an assignment for the CIA — he did not claim a direct link to the VP.
BTW: Bush Sr said Wilson was “truly inspiring” and “courageous” re Baghdad.
CosmosWilson was left in Bagdad as an insult to Saddam.He was a very junior, no authority functionary.Wilson was left in Iraq before Bush Sr. invaded Kuwait, to make it clear to Saddam that he was not to be afforded any respect.
Cosmos,Wilson admitted that he “mispoke” on the forged documents issue.I suppose you concede that point, since you don’t even try to respond to it.
Paul F. Rosell,
So Bush Sr’s praise of Wilson for standing up to Saddam is not true, because Wilson was “very junior”?
People sometimes get times, events, etc confused, and misspeak.People like you who frequently (and deliberately?) spread falsehoods and bogus talking points are despicable. Your behavior is inexcusable.
Paul – “Wilson was left in Iraq before Bush Sr. invaded Kuwait, to make it clear to Saddam that he was not to be afforded any respect.”
Upon what do you base that bullshit? Wilson was left in Baghdad because he had the courage to stay and stand up to the enemies of this country.
Ben and Cosmos;Wilson was never appointed as an ambassodor in charge of Iraq. He was in charge because all the important people left.Saddam would never have attacked the US embassy.Courage was no more an issue in this post than it is in any foreign embassy post.So Bush Sr. wrote a pro-forma letter commending Wilson?General Washington, no doubt, wrote a possitive letter to Benedict Arnold before his treason, as well!
Paul – in your zeal to slander Wilson you ignore the obvious. (1) He was chosen to face down Saddam in person after April Glaspie had given Saddam the green light to invade Kuwait; and (2) nothing has ever been proved against him. The undeniable fact remains: your guys made the decision to “out” his wife and don’t have the balls to own up to it publically. If it was so “right” of them to do it then why the cowardice?
BenWilson outed Plame.
If Wilson’s wife had such a sensitive job, then why would Wilson risk his Wife’s safety by writing a false hit-piece in the New York Times?
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=16896
WOW! Another hit piece by “I wish my favorite terrorist had blown up the NYTimes” Ann Coulter.
Actually Paul; Bush outed her personally.
Hey BenMaybe you like Broder better?Broder says all of the Media owe Rove an apology:http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/06/AR2006090601648_pf.html
Broder does give it some credibility. The original leak came from elsewhere in the Bush administration; Rove and Libby just helped it along. The whole thing still stinks.
Ben
Explain to me how you “out”someone who works openly at CIA headquarters. You need to get over this.
Show me one example of someone at the White House calling a reporter to tell them about Plame….Let me save you some time, ….You won’t find it!
Wilson attacked the White House. It is only natural that some e-mails and phone calls went back and forth saying WTF, WIT. None of them contacted the media to “out” Plame, the media called them and asked about her. Show me differently.