I hate Novak, that prick. He converted from Judaism, and is happy about it. His anti-Israel statements make me sick.

Ah, the Bush admin breaks the law, and this site finds a way to associate the problem with Clinton.

If this had happened during the Clinton Admin, there would be an "IMPEACH CLINTON" banner up already.

That's a give away on Novak.

Still doesn't excuse "senoir administration officials", whatever the heck that is supposed to mean, from disclosing classified information.

Though the WaPo is short on sources, one would imagine that the CIA, before asking for an inquiry would have completed some sort of internal investigation. I imagine the WaPo is light on specifics since they aren't very clear-- hence, the investigation.

What is clear is that the CIA has requested a Justice Dept. investigation of a possible leak, a leak that if substantiated happens to be a felony.

Strange days indeed when the CIA is coming off as a voice of reason.

Charles, are you actually suggesting that if "top white house officials" disclose the name of a CIA operative to the media there should not be an investigation?

It's appalling that they are willing to endanger a member of the intelligence community just for their own petty political revenge. In this war, with no uniformed enemy, and no geographical target, intelligence is more important than ever. The CIA needs the support and respect of the administration if it is going to win this war for us.

Good for Tenet for having the spine to pursue this, and if he takes that bastard Novak out in the process, all the better.

#2 Deacon Frost

Referencing the fact that Tenet is a Clinton administration holdover is hardly an association of the issue with Clinton. Tenet is after an investigation, he's not implicated. The only inference made is that Tenet isn't one of Bush's cronies.

It's pretty clear that this is a Bush administration problem. Methinks thou doth protest too much.

Novak needs a smack as does whoever leaked to him. Tenet wants to know who did it. Bubba has nothing to do with it.

marymary wrote:

Charles, are you actually suggesting that if "top white house officials" disclose the name of a CIA operative to the media there should not be an investigation?

Huh? How did you get that out of what I wrote? If there was a leak, then absolutely there should be an investigation.

By mentioning that Tenet is a Clinton holdover, however, I'm pointing out that this situation is lousy with politics.

Charles,

It's not hard to see how marymary got that impression. I think that she was reacting to your reference to Tenet as a 'Clinton holdover' and Novak as 'heavily medicated'.

Clearly one is indisputable and the other likely, but your phrasing tends to take the focus away from the actual leak and spin it towards the reporter and the man asking for the investigation.

We're agreed that the whole situation is lousy with politics, but let's not overlook the little detail that if Wilson is to be believed this was a politically motivated attack on his wife in reaction to comments criticising administration policy. I sincerely hope that isn't the case, but Tenets history and Novaks ethics are not the big story here.

Somehow, I find it hard to get worked up over this story. Something about a bunch of FBI background check files getting into the wrong hands and the lack of outrage over it comes to mind, for some reason.

Oh, and let's not forget the leaking of Tripp's records.

Yeah, this should be investigated, and anyone who actually broke the law should be punished, but the loony left's outrage is disgustingly selective.

Ya, but did anybody get a blow job?

Well, maybe I jumped the gun on that one Charles. Sorry.

And La Lurka- LOL

Actually, a lot of people of all political persuasions in Washington need to learn what those in the Armed Forces learn early on: keep the secrets and tell only those with a need to know. Otherwise, you're going to jail. Hell, in DC they run off at the mouth and don't even lose access.

La Lurka: Why? You supplying them?

The FBI files and the Linda Tripp leak vs. the exposure of Ms. Plume is apples and oranges.

This was exposing an active undercover CIA operative, which not only an illegal act. It endangered her, her family, and anyone who is or was associated with her.

Did the Clinton-era stupidities that you referenced endanger anyone involved, whether voluntarity or involuntarily?

Sheesh, at least you could've suggested that it was her husband who outed her, as I've seen on some other comment threads.

9.2 out of 10 for getting loonly left in on this thread.

How weird. I was just watching Spy Game, wherein there are spies and leaks to the media. And now here they are as well.

Somewhat spooky.

Off topic:

Democrats find Saddam's WMD, links to terrorists:
 

"In the next century, the community of nations may see more and more the very kind of threat Iraq poses now -- a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction ready to use them or provide them to terrorists, drug traffickers or organized criminals who travel the world among us unnoticed.

If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow by the knowledge that they can act with impunity, even in the face of a clear message from the United Nations Security Council and clear evidence of a weapons of mass destruction program."

President Clinton
Address to Joint Chiefs of Staff and Pentagon staff
February 17, 1998
http://www.cnn.com/A...
 

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members..."

"It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."

Senator Hillary Clinton (Democrat, New York)
Addressing the Senate
October 10, 2002
http://clinton.senat...
 

"Mr. President, I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security and that of our allies in the Persian Gulf region."

Senator John F. Kerry (Democrat, Massachusetts)
Addressing the Senate
October 9, 2002
http://www.johnkerry...
 

"Iraq is a long way from Ohio, but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."

President Clinton's Secretary of State Madeleine Albright
Town Hall Meeting on Iraq at Ohio State University
February 18, 1998
http://www.fas.org/n...
 

"Imagine the consequences if Saddam fails to comply and we fail to act. Saddam will be emboldened, believing the international community has lost its will. He will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction. And some day, some way, I am certain, he will use that arsenal again, as he has ten times since 1983."

President Clinton's National Security Adviser Sandy Berger
Town Hall Meeting on Iraq at Ohio State University
February 18, 1998
http://www.fas.org/n...
 

"We urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraq sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."

Sincerely,

Carl Levin, Joe Lieberman, Frank R. Lautenberg, Dick Lugar, Kit Bond, Jon Kyl, Chris Dodd, John McCain, Kay Bailey Hutchison, Alfonse D'Amato, Bob Kerrey, Pete V. Domenici, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Mikulski, Thomas Daschle, John Breaux, Tim Johnson, Daniel K. Inouye, Arlen Specter, James Inhofe, Strom Thurmond, Mary L. Landrieu, Wendell Ford, John F. Kerry, Chuck Grassley, Jesse Helms, Rick Santorum.

Letter to President Clinton
Signed by Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John F. Kerry and others
October 9, 1998
http://www.iraqwatch...
 

"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."

Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi (Democrat, California)
Statement on US Led Military Strike Against Iraq
December 16, 1998
http://www.house.gov...
 

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."

Former Clinton Vice-President Al Gore
Speech to San Francisco Commonwealth Club
September 23, 2002
http://www.gore2004u...
 

Al Gore said last night that the time had come for a "final reckoning" with Iraq, describing the country as a "virulent threat in a class by itself" and suggesting that the United States should consider ways to oust Saddam Hussein.

The New York Times
Gore, Championing Bush, Calls For a 'Final Reckoning' With Iraq
February 13, 2002
http://query.nytimes...
 

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retained some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capability. Intelligence reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons, but has not yet achieved nuclear capability."

Robert C. Byrd
Former Ku Klux Klan recruiter, currently a US Senator (Democrat, West Virginia)
October 3, 2002
http://byrd.senate.g...

Just curious,

Can anyone offer me any info. on why Robert Novak is so despised here on LGF? Some people on here say he is anti-Israel. I do not watch "Crossfire" (I rarely watch Communist News Network at all) so I don't know enough about him to form an opinion one way or another.

this is all about politics.
wilson disagreed with bush policy and went public.
the far-left who had no qualms about exposing the cia
lapped this up when novak's column pointed the finger
toward rove and bush.

amy goodman on the publicly supported
extreme leftist Pacifica Radio (they can make NPR look
like Fox light) had been pushing this on her Democracy Now! show. people should listen to democracy now -where edward said and noam chomsky are worshipped like gods, to know what the dean left is thinking. expand that, to include the kennedy/dodd/harkin/carter democratic party

So, according to the WaPo, yesterday "a senior administration official" said that before Novak's column ran, "two top White House officials" called at least "six Washington journalists" and disclosed the identity and occupation of Wilson's wife.

So many questions:

Who is the senior administration official who made this statement on Saturday?

Who are these two top White House officials who called at least six Washington journalists in July?

Who are all the Washington journalists that these two top White House officials contacted?

Where was Wilson's wife at the time and did she have sexual intercourse with Bill Clinton?

Charles,

Not really. Just because Clinton hired Tenet does not mean Tenet is obviously a pureblood Democrat partisan. The simpler explanation is that he's a CIA chief outraged at the fact someone, that multiple sources are saying is in the Bush Administration, leaked the name of one of his agents to the press and caused damage to the organization for petty revenge.

If that's the case, Republican or not, that person should be sent to prison. I was under the impression Republicans campaigned AGAINST little games like the ones Clinton played. When someone's stupidity ends up destroying missions, which is the inevitable result of exposing undercover operatives, consequences should occur, no question.

This whole thing stinks to high heaven. The accusation that two White House officials seemed to viciously attack Wilson, implies that Wilson was himself involved politically. This could very well be the case because if you look at Wilson's biography, you will see he is closely associated with the Democratic elite. He was a Clinton appointed ambassador and had worked in the offices of Al Gore and Tom Foley in the 80s. The whole thing seems to be a twisted version of the BBC/Kelly fiasco. Leaks to the press by "unnamed" high level sources, accusations, intelligence, reputations on the line, Iraq, and an attack on the current administration.

The whole Niger uranium story always seemed to be written off too fast. It would seem to me that having your ex-ambassador ask officials in Niger if they were involved with selling uranium to Iraq, is like a policeman asking the clerk at the local convenience store if he sells cigarettes to to children. Whether the real answer is yes or no, the clerk (or Niger officials) will always say no. (And with Saddam you have more incentive to say no, since he might have you killed if you cross him). From what I have heard, Niger did admit that Iraqi officials were there discussing buying something, but they denied that it was uranium. Meaning that Niger suspected we knew the Iraqis had been there. In other words the intelligence gathered by Wilson is pretty low grade intelligence. But it was presented to the public as fact. And the public ate it up. If the White House, or members of the admin did attack Wilson, it would seem to me to mean that Wilson's mission was considered by the White House to have been a politically motivated attack, and not just simple intel gathering. If the white house did attack Wilson then they broke a prime rule of high level politics. Never make personal revenge attacks, at least not in haste. When politics gets personal, mistakes are made. Keep politics at the the political level.

I think that like the BBC/Kelly affair, this one has a lot of behind the scenes fiddling going on.

Interesting coincidence that the WaPo story emerges just as the row in the UK between the media and the government is quieting down. Joshua Rozenberg, the legal editor of the Telegraph, included the following paragraph in his column about the Hutton inquiry:

Quote: "It will be interesting to see what effect this has on standards of public administration. Will officials be more cautious about what they write in e-mails? Or will they now aspire to higher journalistic and ethical standards, for fear of being dragged over the coals by some future inquiry? Even a tiny dose of the latter would make Hutton worthwhile."
/end quote

Link: http://www.telegraph...

No doubt this is all politics, like Charles mentioned. But what pisses me off is for the WH to have allowed Wilson, a Bush-bashing, Iraq war-criticizing political hack tool of the Dems to ever have been allowed to get involved in the Niger thing.

Has anyone heard Wilson speak? They may as well have had Jim McDermott go check out a claim that would support the Bush administration. So for that, Cheney, Rice or whoever earns the Asshat award.

And then, if they did reveal his wife's identity as payback, then that's their second mistake.

Jetstorm (17)

Novak is viciously anti-Israel. The only one in Washington more overt about it is Buchanan. His writings are replite with the exact kind of moral equivalency so deplored on LGF. I have never heard him write or say a decent thing about Israel and I rather doubt he thinks the U.S. should be allied with Israel at all or that Israel should even exist. Since he is of the "right" which overwhelmingly supports Israel, his anti-Israel attitude stands out even more.

Also, who sent Joseph C. Wilson IV to check up on the Niger-Yellowcake story anyway? Joseph C. Wilson IV is so steeped in the politics of these issues I doubt Joseph C. Wilson IV's report of his own investigation had much credibility. Just because Joseph C. Wilson IV couldn't confirm the report of Niger-Yellowcake would not have been enough to prove it was never true. Joseph C. Wilson IV is just an aging bitter fart. His wife was probably never endangered by being identified anyway.

#9 Crawford:

A story about the White House revealing the identity and name of a CIA operative and you blame the left. That loony right.

#26

His wife was probably never endangered by being identified anyway.

And you know this how....?

Hey, Trevelayan, or whatever:

What is this important mission that Ms. Wilson was on anyway?

Do you even know, because I never heard what it was.

Nick

I don't know, Nick. I just figure if her husband is so concerned about her, she surely would not have been anywhere that was too dangerous.

If you go to Josh Marshall's TRM site, you can read what Wilson says his mission to Niger entailed, and what he did while he was there. He didn't just ask the Niger officials if they were solicited by Saddam to sell uranium: he actually investigated the process of what happens to the uranium from the time it leaves the mine to the time the yellowcake gets shipped out of the country. He never said that a sale to Iraq never happened, just that if it did, it would've involved a lot of people in the goverment, and the cooperation of the consortium that runs the the whole shebang.

Do some research before shooting off your mouth.

"Smarter monkeys, please."

#29: Even if true, law is law. If Clinton would've done something like this, than you'd be all over it, right?

Should be "TPM site."

Oops!

#27 Nick

#26

His wife was probably never endangered by being identified anyway.

And you know this how....?

She is a desk jockey in the US, not a covert agent abroad.

Sorry, the last sentence of my comment is not a quote and should not be in italics

Somethings not "Kosher" (obviously..lol) with Novak. What exactly is his addenda? Who is he been trying to please and why? (his new religion? his Arabist friends?) He uses his column to get at the groups and individuals he just doesn't like. I h eard him say this on CNN...This is an abuse of his position. Its an OVER THE TOP use of a personal opinion column. It isn't the positions he necessarily dislikes and wants to destroy..its the people and groups of people that he goes after. Its a "personal destruction column" if I ever saw one.

Need to turn the tables on this guy. WE need to do an investigation of HIS particulars. When and why did he convert? Who is involved in his conversion? Has he been trying to PROVE to his new faith that he isn't Jewish anymore...It that it? Does his support of Islamic causes guarantee..his continuing employment?

Something tells ME this person is into????? G-d knows what for who knows what? When my bells go off, I pay attench. Ive been right alot of the time. I dont have an idea of whats going on with him YET..but somethings not right...somethings UP.

#33

Again, you know this... how?

A story about the White House revealing the identity and name of a CIA operative and you blame the left.

How the fuck did I "blame the left"? I merely pointed to their extremely selective outrage. Oh, and if you think the cases I mentioned are nothing in comparison, what about the Pentagon Papers? The left jizzes itself whenever it thinks about the "brave" traitor who leaked classified documents and endangered lives then.

Are you a retard? Or just politically so?

I think this is likely to blow over and turn out to be nothing, another case of a reporter playing fast and loose with facts and causing a political storm as a result. If someone did leak the information, they should be prosecuted. Is that clear enough? Or do I have to burn an effigy of Bush for you to listen to me?

17 Jetstorm

Novak is aligned with the Arabist/Saudi wing of the State Department. Oil-land uber alles.

Hey, Dark Avenger.

What do you mean that "He never said that a sale to Iraq never happened, just that if it did, it would've involved a lot of people in the goverment, and the cooperation of the consortium that runs the the whole shebang?'

Here is what Joe Wilson said:

Published on Sunday, July 6, 2003 by the New York Times
What I Didn't Find in Africa
by Joseph C. Wilson 4th

"Given the structure of the consortiums that operated the mines, it would be exceedingly difficult for Niger to transfer uranium to Iraq. Niger's uranium business consists of two mines, Somair and Cominak, which are run by French, Spanish, Japanese, German and Nigerian interests. If the government wanted to remove uranium from a mine, it would have to notify the consortium, which in turn is strictly monitored by the International Atomic Energy Agency. Moreover, because the two mines are closely regulated, quasi-governmental entities, selling uranium would require the approval of the minister of mines, the prime minister and probably the president. In short, there's simply too much oversight over too small an industry for a sale to have transpired.

Charles: "By mentioning that Tenet is a Clinton holdover, however, I'm pointing out that this situation is lousy with politics."

Which makes it different from anything else connected with BushII (or Clinton or any other president) how?

Saying it's "lousy with politics" is like saying Washington is full of oxygen breathers, technically true and not very relevant to the situation (which in this case possibly involves high ranking folks in the White house commiting a felony as a petty payback).

37 Robert Crawford

Sorry, but it wasn't illegal back than. Bush 41 passed the law. We're not talking morals here, but laws and illegality.

What WE need to do is; To find the Arabists in the CIA that KNOW they can get more bang for the buck by leaking to their trusted friend? or possibly colleague --NOVAK.. (who are they?) Do we have only a columnist here in Novak OR what is he in reality?

We play a "game" here in DC..Who is a agent and who is a part time agent? Who is a quasi agent..or who is the person to GO TO when you want certain misinformation to be published...or who do you GO TO when you want to trash a person, group or policy... Novak is mentioned a quite a bit of the time. Hes definitely the CIA Arabists GO TO guy..thats for sure.

#39 Schmerel - it is true that it would be hard to transfer 500 tons of uranium ore from Niger, a landlocked country, to Iraq without it being noticed. But was that really the question? The question was whether Iraq was trying to buy the uranium. Delivery time may not have been immediate. Contracts can be and are kept secret. The reason this is a totally different question is the situation at the time that Iraq was supposedly trying to buy it. France and Russia (and others) were investing heavily in Saddam's Iraq. And as we found out, they were willing and able to use their votes on the UNSC to protect Iraq (and their investments). If the US/UK coalition had not avoided the UNSC vote on whether to attack Iraq, that vote would have been the first step toward removing sanctions from Iraq. It was only a matter of time before the UN pushed to drop the whole Iraq issue, and Saddam would be free to persue his weapons programs again. The whole thing rested on the presumption that the US/UK would go along with the UN.

Saddam already had 500 tons of uranium ore, which is arguably enough to make one nuke. I suspect that it was not enough. They needed more. If Saddam felt that in a year or two he would be free of the UN resolutions, then he might want to place an order ahead of time. I am sure you don't just buy uranium "off the shelf". His goal was undeniably to eventually have nukes. They are the dream of every evil dictator.

Ya know, the whole question of who leaked it could be answered if a couple of reporters did their jobs and reported. Someone called Novak with the tip; he certainly knows who called him.

Novak should name names.

"Heavily medicated". I love it. He is sooooooo heavily medicated.

Not even conservatives can love him.

#41 Nick:

We're not talking morals here, but laws and illegality.

Notice how LLLs always feel more comfortable debating the latter rather than the former?

What amazes me is how... excited they are over this story. I think the left needs to take a long nap and switch to brands with less THC.

Catbert writes: "She is a desk jockey in the US, not a covert agent abroad. "

If she weren't a covert agent, no law would have been broken, and there would be no need for Tenet to ask for a DOJ investigation. (The CIA having no enforcement authority in domestic issues, it has to go to Justice for that).

Is that clear? No covert, no investigation. There is an investigation, so she was covert. The law doesn't require that the agent be currently deployed.

Oh, and her area of expertise is WMD. Kinda stupid to be exposing and discarding covert agents who specialize in WMD.

Robert Crawford writes: "Ya know, the whole question of who leaked it could be answered if a couple of reporters did their jobs and reported. Someone called Novak with the tip; he certainly knows who called him."

The whole question could be answered if Bush made an effort to crack down on the traitorous felons in his White House.

Besides the crime itself, they're stupid, and clearly candidates for pruning.

This has been smouldering for months, and nothing has been done.

The left obviously smells blood on this.

I suspect it will turn out like the BBC's "sexed up" allegations.

This has been smouldering for months, and nothing has been done.

Maybe because there's nothing to do?

There are no names to this story yet, and yet the left is getting worked up into a feeding frenzy. Why not wait for the facts to come out before messing your pants, OK?

#42 Leah-

What WE need to do is; To find the Arabists in the CIA that KNOW they can get more bang for the buck by leaking to their trusted friend? or possibly colleague --NOVAK.. (who are they?)

I'd been wondering that myself. There's one ex-CIA tool that had been on CNN a lot lately, whining about the administration for some lame reason. Happily anti-Republican, anti-Bush. Jo C WilsonIV obviously the same. And what's up with the IV? What a tool.

Wonder if the CIA is a lot like State Dept? Lots of people sucking up to others to get info, moral equivalence, and all kinds of political leanings. Too bad we can't vote all of the bastards out every 4 years. And their wives, too, for that matter.

There should be a thorough investigation of all parties. For example, why was Wilson's wife permitted to assign him to do a half-baked investigation? Why is Wilson complaining about his wife's maiden name being disclosed, even though it's already public knowledge? Was this some hothead's thoughtless act of retaliation, or was it part of a coordinated effort? Why not put just put Novak on the witness stand? (The Constitution only provides a right to silence in cases of self-incrimination.)

#48 Jon H - While I agree with you to some extent, the word covert seems to mean different things under different circumstances. Here the word covert means that Mrs Wilson was not wearing a CIA name tag all the time. When it comes to suspecting someone of being a CIA agent, if they work or live in a US embassy, then the chances are pretty good they are agents of some type. It isn't like she was infiltrating al-Qaeda and or dead-dropping photomicrographs of secret plans in parks at night. She was sitting at a desk shuffling papers. Maybe occasionally she would report gossip she heard at parties from the wives of other diplomats. Reporting things like where they said they had been on vacations or what dignitaries had visited. But calling her a covert op is a bit of a stretch. Technically true, but outing her is not going to put anybody's life in jepardy.

As far as her being an expert at WMDs goes, you can become an "expert" at anything if you are stuck in a place like Niger or Congo.

What do you think are the chances that Barbara Bush did some CIA work when her husband was Chief of the U. S. Liaison Office to China? Do you think the Chinese suspected her?

Robert:

Adminstration officals blow the cover of a CIA op endangering her, her contancts, and our national security, and you don't want an investigation. You attribute this story to the left??? It is obivious that Novak was told by somebody in the WH about Plame. Here's Novak:

Two senior administration officials told me Wilson’s wife suggested sending him to Niger to investigate

This will be nothing like the BBC. Somebody in the WH is pissed enough to break ranks and tell the WaPo about the leak to Novak and five other journalists. It is obvious two people in the WH were shopping around Plames identity. In the process they broke the law.

Adminstration officals blow the cover of a CIA op endangering her, her contancts, and our national security, and you don't want an investigation. You attribute this story to the left???

Ah. Once more, an example of the low level of reading comprehension among the LLL.

No, the story is not from the left. The left is going berserk over it. They're jizzing themselves in glee over it. They're baying at it like a pack of dogs around a bitch in heat. They're inventing theory after theory about who said what when, why, and going into orgasmic paroxysms over the idea of somehow bringing Bush down over it.

Let the investigation go on. If there's anything to the story, then the guilty need to be punished. But the endless "little deaths" being experienced by the left over the story are unseemly, to put it mildly.

This will be nothing like the BBC. Somebody in the WH is pissed enough to break ranks and tell the WaPo about the leak to Novak and five other journalists. It is obvious two people in the WH were shopping around Plames identity.

Nothing is "obvious". We barely have any information on this story. Maybe the investigation should happen before the lynchings, OK?

Also, there are six "reporters" who could identify the people involved. Yet they haven't. There would be a hell of a lot less to investigate if they told what they knew.

I still think the chances that it will be much ado about nothing are pretty high. After all, nothing much happened after the illegal release of Linda Tripp's files, or the illegal possession of FBI background checks.

Worth considering: http://www.soundfury.us/archives/000020.html: this was leaked on a Saturday afternoon.

If Tenet really has the goods, why didn't they wait until Saturday morning/afternoon to leak this?

Oops--sorry--I meant Monday morning/afternoon...

I think this story may have some legs to it because even people who would normally be sympathetic to the WoT will be offended by the exposure of an agent.

Even Bush's supporters will be offended.

#46 Marc Poitras

I see. You're reduced to ad hominem. Truly a shame.

#55

Also, there are six "reporters" who could identify the people involved. Yet they haven't.

Yeah, 6 reporters. And a conservative one is the one that comes out with the story. Oh no, the liberal media! They hate America!

Update from Jayson Blair's old paper: "New Criticism on Prewar Use of Intelligence"

Quote: "White House advisers are clearly concerned that the F.B.I. may conclude there is reason to investigate the intelligence leak. Ms. Rice said repeatedly today that the facts were not yet known, and Attorney General John Ashcroft has not yet acted on the C.I.A.'s formal referral of the matter to the Justice Department.

"But the mere charge may itself gain some political currency. 'There is blood in the water, and there are people all over Washington who want to take advantage of that,' one senior official said."

Link: http://www.nytimes.c...

Nick (#59),

Yeah, 6 reporters. And a conservative one is the one that comes out with the story. Oh no, the liberal media! They hate America!

And you know who these 6 other reporters are (and that they're less conservative than Novak) how?

"Nick": What's your point? Those "reporters" have the information to either blow this story wide open or blow it away.

Why haven't they?

IMHO, it's their job to report. Their dereliction on this matter is odd, to say the least.

Here's an excellent explanation of why I think this story is very much hot air at this point:

http://www.grimbeorn...

Today, we have a new story--which is also based entirely on anonymous sources. A "Senior Administration official," two unnamed "Top White House officials," this is of no use whatever. We are left scrabbling after what "Top" and "Senior" normally mean in this context, and pulling feathers and thin reeds out of the air. Yet there is still not a name to hold onto.

Read the whole thing.

Geepers: The WP article Charles links to.

Robert: My take? It takes guts to name the person. Remember, we're talking about an (alleged, I must say) undercover CIA operative. I understand that you're pissed about the left jumping on it. I also understand your skepticism. But what if it's true? Let's just say the Justice Dep. and the FBI say that it's true and that and really did blow the cover of a CIA undercover operative. Don't you agree that it's one a) very illegal and punishable and b) very stupid?

By the way, George Bush the Elder, the one who passed the law, said the following:

Even though I'm a tranquil guy now at this stage of my life, I have nothing but contempt and anger for those who betray the trust by exposing the name of our sources. They are, in my view, the most insidious, of traitors.

Argh. Got the grammar messed up.

Is that the article Reynold linked to? Overall, I agree. I'll wait for confirmation before I pull conclusions. But the left is doing what the right did to Clinton.

And in the meanwhile, go read this: http://foi.missouri....

Is there an expectation on this thread that JD can aggressivly investigate this? This is very mportant to the war on terror and the limitation of the spread of WMD. Exposing any covert operative in a time of war is not "politics", in fact, one politician I admire once said "We need more human intelligence. That means we need more protection for the methods we use to gather intelligence and more protection for our sources, particularly our human sources, people that are risking their lives for their country. Even though I'm a tranquil guy now at this stage of my life, I have nothing but contempt and anger for those who betray the trust by exposing the name of our sources. They are, in my view, the most insidious, of traitors.

George H.W. Bush
April 16th, 1999

This is what the fuss is all about. If there are people in the White House that can be called "traitor" by Bush41, and his own son has done nothing to find out who they are, we have a larger problem than blow jobs or halliburton vs. bechtel.

No one has posted for half an hour. didn't mean to shut down the thread!

#68 Killer

threads move really quick here. gotta keep on your toes.

late do the (dead?) thread, but...

Anyone listen or watch C-Span's Washington Journal this morning?

Fmr. Amb. Wilson was the guest. Aside from the crazies (on both sides) that they let call into that show, it was rather enlightening.

Wilson said he had "associated himself" with moveon.org, which is, amongst other things, calling for Rumsfeld and his "senior staff" (read: Wolfowitz) to resign, as well as attempting to halt the requested $87 billion Bush wants for Iraq, until there is an "accounting" of the reasons for war.

Not sure when Wilson "associated" himself with moveon, but he certainly had been making many a TV appearance over the past 6-9 months without making that claim.

It could be payback and it could get some "senior administration official(s)" in quite the mess.

The only worse anti Israel prick then the acne scarred Novak is his colleague the ultra liberal jowley Mark Shields.

#17 Jetstorm

Novak and his late unlamented colleague Rowland Evans (Evans & Novak aka Errors and No Facts) have been Israel haters since the Johnson Administartion.

Eye on the media: Novak's malice.

#2

Ah, the Bush admin breaks the law, and this site finds a way to associate the problem with Clinton.
If this had happened during the Clinton Admin, there would be an "IMPEACH CLINTON" banner up already.

Well, there have been "IMPEACH BUSH" calls even before this, so quit whining.

cheshirecat

But the endless "little deaths" being experienced by the left over the story are unseemly, to put it mildly.

To parody Sondheim:

Every day a litttle death,
In the Times and in the Post,
On the news and on the shows,
From the pundits on the Coast...

cheshirecat

What if the leak is... Wilson?

The officer's name was disclosed on July 14 in a syndicated column by Robert D. Novak, who said his sources were two senior administration officials.

I detest Bob Novak as a journalist, but I doubt he's both making this up and shielding Wilson at the same time.

From Drudge:

Novak: NOBODY IN THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION CALLED ME TO LEAK THIS

'In July I was interviewing a senior administration official on Ambassador Wilson's report when he told the trip was inspired by his wife, a CIA employee working on weapons of mass destruction. Another senior official told me the same thing. As a professional journalist with 46 years experience in Washington I do not reveal confidential sources. When I called the CIA
in July to confirm Mrs. Wilson's involvement in the mission for her husband -- he is a former Clinton administration official -- they asked me not to use her name, but never indicated it would endanger her or anybody else. According to a confidential source at the CIA, Mrs. Wilson was an analyst, not a spy, not a covert operator, and not in charge of undercover
operatives'...

Could take some wind out of the story's sails. Remains to be seen.

Robert Crawford-

A little-known fact in journalism is that if you reveal the names of your sources, you soon will have no names or sources to reveal. Could Novak say "Hey, so-and-so told me who leaked Plame's name." ? Of course, and he'd nuke his career in so doing. Remember that l'il Watergate thing? We still don't have Deep Throat's name because of one basic fact: Sources are frequently willing to take risks only OFF THE RECORD. It's really not that hard to understand.

Meanwhile, you are goddamn right that some folks are "jizzing themselves in glee" over all this. Bush has been mishandling every project that comes in front of him, at profound expense to pretty much everyone, and his comeuppance is awaited in delicious anticipation.

Let the meltdown begin, finally.

Number 78:

Read Number 77. And this article:

http://www.nationalr...

Wilson belonged to several leftist groups. Mr. May also points out that:

Mr. Wilson is now saying (on C-SPAN this morning, for example) that he opposed military action in Iraq because he didn't believe Saddam had weapons of mass destruction and he foresaw the possibility of a difficult occupation. In fact, prior to the U.S. invasion, Mr. Wilson told ABC's Dave Marash that if American troops were sent into Iraq, Saddam might "use a biological weapon in a battle that we might have. For example, if we're taking Baghdad or we're trying to take, in ground-to-ground, hand-to-hand combat."

End of Clifford May quote.

It's also worth pointing out that unlike the Clintons, Mr. Bush:

Is not claiming any privileges
Is not waiting for a subpoena before cooperating with investigators
Has not hidden any records
Hasn't suggested he'll pardon anyone who stonewalls the investigators.

For what it's worth, this matter has been under investigation for several months. The Justice Department investigates about 50 cases like this a year.

One good thing has come out of this: Democrats are now concerned about national security.

Yes Paul..same political crappidy do dah..goes on in the CIA as in State. Arabists as well in BOTH (Arabists also in DOD Intelligence, NSA, Commerce, Justice..etc)Agencies.. Long time career people who cant be cleaned out with each change of Administration, stake their positions and thats the people we need to worry about , thats the people with the real power...these people who hire each other in the same families generation after generation...are in fact in charge of these very vital Agencies.

Incidentally in these Agencies particularly the motto is: "Once in NEVER out"...