Novak: Rove outed CIA agent...

[Lightning Bolt]

Conservative columnist Robert Novak has replied to claims by the Rove camp that Rove had no involvement in the Valerie Plame confidential disclosure case, ...and he doesn't agree with their claims.


Insider treason isn't that high on the Bush administration's concern list these days I guess..

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060712/ap_ ... leak_novak

[AdamBomb8]

Conservative columnist Robert Novak has replied to claims by the Rove camp that Rove had no involvement in the Valerie Plame confidential disclosure case, ...and he doesn't agree with their claims.


Insider treason isn't that high on the Bush administration's concern list these days I guess..

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060712/ap_ ... leak_novak

I suppose treason isn't as high a national security threat as people playing poker online

[krusin1]

Conservative columnist Robert Novak has replied to claims by the Rove camp that Rove had no involvement in the Valerie Plame confidential disclosure case, ...and he doesn't agree with their claims.


Insider treason isn't that high on the Bush administration's concern list these days I guess..

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060712/ap_ ... leak_novak

Come on people. If you're going to start throwing around the "t" word, at least go read Novak's column yourself.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articl ... egate.html

Novak actually got Valerie Plane's name from Joe Wilson's entry in "Who's Who in America." Doesn't sound like she's too secret of a "Secret Agent" to me.

[flyboy55]

I think Novak is speaking out now in an attempt to repair his journalistic reputation and to preserve the illusion of having some journalistic integrity, having spent the last couple of years being a mouthpiece for the Bush administration. Consider this from the same article . . .

By PETE YOST, Associated Press Writer Wed Jul 12, 5:24 AM ET

WASHINGTON - Now that Karl Rove won't be indicted, now that the president won't fire him, now that it really doesn't matter anymore, more details of the Valerie Plame leak investigation trickle out.

Keeping quiet had the effect of providing protection for the Bush White House during the 2004 presidential campaign, because the White House had denied Rove played any role in the leak of Plame's CIA identity.

[krusin1]

I think Novak is speaking out now in an attempt to repair his journalistic reputation and to preserve the illusion of having some journalistic integrity, having spent the last couple of years being a mouthpiece for the Bush administration. Consider this from the same article . . .

By PETE YOST, Associated Press Writer Wed Jul 12, 5:24 AM ET

WASHINGTON - Now that Karl Rove won't be indicted, now that the president won't fire him, now that it really doesn't matter anymore, more details of the Valerie Plame leak investigation trickle out.

Keeping quiet had the effect of providing protection for the Bush White House during the 2004 presidential campaign, because the White House had denied Rove played any role in the leak of Plame's CIA identity.

Actually, it sounds like Pete Yost from AP is doing a little editorializing instead of reporting. Just another day in the Main Stream (Liberal) Media.

Like I said earlier, if you want to actually know what Novak said, go read his column. If you just want to potshot the administration, please continue, but realize your lack of credibility.

[LIPH]

By PETE YOST, Associated Press Writer Wed Jul 12, 5:24 AM ET

WASHINGTON - Now that Karl Rove won't be indicted, now that the president won't fire him, now that it really doesn't matter anymore, more details of the Valerie Plame leak investigation trickle out.

Interesting how the reporter spins this, as opposed to what Novak wrote in his column.

That frees me to reveal my role in the federal inquiry that, at the request of Fitzgerald, I have kept secret.

[flyboy55]

I think Novak is speaking out now in an attempt to repair his journalistic reputation and to preserve the illusion of having some journalistic integrity, having spent the last couple of years being a mouthpiece for the Bush administration. Consider this from the same article . . .

By PETE YOST, Associated Press Writer Wed Jul 12, 5:24 AM ET

WASHINGTON - Now that Karl Rove won't be indicted, now that the president won't fire him, now that it really doesn't matter anymore, more details of the Valerie Plame leak investigation trickle out.

Keeping quiet had the effect of providing protection for the Bush White House during the 2004 presidential campaign, because the White House had denied Rove played any role in the leak of Plame's CIA identity.

Actually, it sounds like Pete Yost from AP is doing a little editorializing instead of reporting. Just another day in the Main Stream (Liberal) Media.

Like I said earlier, if you want to actually know what Novak said, go read his column. If you just want to potshot the administration, please continue, but realize your lack of credibility.

You are going to lose big time come November - you and I both know it.

[Lightning Bolt]

Conservative columnist Robert Novak has replied to claims by the Rove camp that Rove had no involvement in the Valerie Plame confidential disclosure case, ...and he doesn't agree with their claims.


Insider treason isn't that high on the Bush administration's concern list these days I guess..

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060712/ap_ ... leak_novak

Come on people. If you're going to start throwing around the "t" word, at least go read Novak's column yourself.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articl ... egate.html

Novak actually got Valerie Plane's name from Joe Wilson's entry in "Who's Who in America." Doesn't sound like she's too secret of a "Secret Agent" to me.

Read closer.
He learned of her role with the CIA through his yet-unnamed source (my bet is it's Scooter Libby), and had it VERIFIED by Rove.
He made no mention of learning her employment in the Who's who... publication. It appears to only identify her as Joe Wilson's wife.

Meanwhile, do you remember Bush stating that he'd fire ANYONE from his staff who was involved with this leak???...
Looks like Scooter takes one for the team, huh?

[krusin1]

Conservative columnist Robert Novak has replied to claims by the Rove camp that Rove had no involvement in the Valerie Plame confidential disclosure case, ...and he doesn't agree with their claims.


Insider treason isn't that high on the Bush administration's concern list these days I guess..

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060712/ap_ ... leak_novak

Come on people. If you're going to start throwing around the "t" word, at least go read Novak's column yourself.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articl ... egate.html

Novak actually got Valerie Plane's name from Joe Wilson's entry in "Who's Who in America." Doesn't sound like she's too secret of a "Secret Agent" to me.

Read closer.
He learned of her role with the CIA through his yet-unnamed source (my bet is it's Scooter Libby), and had it VERIFIED by Rove.
He made no mention of learning her employment in the Who's who... publication. It appears to only identify her as Joe Wilson's wife.

Meanwhile, do you remember Bush stating that he'd fire ANYONE from his staff who was involved with this leak???...
Looks like Scooter takes one for the team, huh?

I DID read it closely. He got her name from Who's Who. Employment from someone else yet-to-be-named by Novak. Rove was only a confirming source. Looks like Rove simply failed to lie when asked a direct question by Novak.

Like I said earlier, Valerie Plame was not exactly a secret "Secret Agent."

Sorry, no Fitzmas this year.

[Lightning Bolt]

Conservative columnist Robert Novak has replied to claims by the Rove camp that Rove had no involvement in the Valerie Plame confidential disclosure case, ...and he doesn't agree with their claims.


Insider treason isn't that high on the Bush administration's concern list these days I guess..

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060712/ap_ ... leak_novak

Come on people. If you're going to start throwing around the "t" word, at least go read Novak's column yourself.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articl ... egate.html

Novak actually got Valerie Plane's name from Joe Wilson's entry in "Who's Who in America." Doesn't sound like she's too secret of a "Secret Agent" to me.

Read closer.
He learned of her role with the CIA through his yet-unnamed source (my bet is it's Scooter Libby), and had it VERIFIED by Rove.
He made no mention of learning her employment in the Who's who... publication. It appears to only identify her as Joe Wilson's wife.

Meanwhile, do you remember Bush stating that he'd fire ANYONE from his staff who was involved with this leak???...
Looks like Scooter takes one for the team, huh?

I DID read it closely. He got her name from Who's Who. Employment from someone else yet-to-be-named by Novak. Rove was only a confirming source. Looks like Rove simply failed to lie when asked a direct question by Novak.

gee... thanks for repeating my assertion.
Who's who WAS NOT the source of her EMPLOYMENT identity...and answering a reporter's questions, with
those classified implications, would be just plain illegal... AND STUPID.... that is, unless you had an axe to grind.

...and, no comment from you on Bush's remarks? He said 'em. not me..
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8605680/

[krusin1]

Conservative columnist Robert Novak has replied to claims by the Rove camp that Rove had no involvement in the Valerie Plame confidential disclosure case, ...and he doesn't agree with their claims.


Insider treason isn't that high on the Bush administration's concern list these days I guess..

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060712/ap_ ... leak_novak

Come on people. If you're going to start throwing around the "t" word, at least go read Novak's column yourself.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articl ... egate.html

Novak actually got Valerie Plane's name from Joe Wilson's entry in "Who's Who in America." Doesn't sound like she's too secret of a "Secret Agent" to me.

Read closer.
He learned of her role with the CIA through his yet-unnamed source (my bet is it's Scooter Libby), and had it VERIFIED by Rove.
He made no mention of learning her employment in the Who's who... publication. It appears to only identify her as Joe Wilson's wife.

Meanwhile, do you remember Bush stating that he'd fire ANYONE from his staff who was involved with this leak???...
Looks like Scooter takes one for the team, huh?

I DID read it closely. He got her name from Who's Who. Employment from someone else yet-to-be-named by Novak. Rove was only a confirming source. Looks like Rove simply failed to lie when asked a direct question by Novak.

gee... thanks for repeating my assertion.
Who's who WAS NOT the source of her EMPLOYMENT identity...and answering a reporter's questions, with
those classified implications, would be just plain illegal... AND STUPID.... that is, unless you had an axe to grind.

...and, no comment from you on Bush's remarks? He said 'em. not me..
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8605680/

Watch Novak's interview with Brit Hume (yes it's on Fox.)

Or maybe read this...
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,203234,00.html

His explanation is reasonable, consistent, and rational. Nobody "outed" Valerie Plame. At worst, her name was inadvertently given to Novak. Being a journalist, he actually engaged in fact-checking, and wasn't lied to by the administration.

I will agree with you, though, that it sounds like Scooter did some stupid stuff. However, it was NOT leaking classified info - it was failing to tell the truth when the whole thing got investigated. Stupid, stupid, stupid.

Two things BTW...

1. How do you feel about Dan Rather failing to fact-check that little story on President Bush right before the election? Journalistic failing, or should Bob Novak have followed his "example" and just skip the whole factual thing?

2. Since you're upset about the "outing" of Valerie Plame, are you also upset about the New York Times sharing our anti-terrorism secrets with the world? Seems like that probably jeopardized a few more lives than Valerie losing her cover while going to work at a CIA building in the states every day...

[Lightning Bolt]

Nobody "outed" Valerie Plame. At worst, her name was inadvertently given to Novak. Being a journalist, he actually engaged in fact-checking, and wasn't lied to by the administration.

..and there's the rub. You just contradicted your own claim. You can call it "inadvertant" or "outed", but only the former is a legal defense to the charges.
As far as "fact-checking" goes, his yet-unnamed source should have stayed within legal limits to classified information and at least stonewalled. Call it what you want, whoever "didn't lie" to Novak IS the one taking the fall... Scooter Libby.

Re: your follow up points...

1. Rather blew it. His lefty reputation is well-known, and any crack in what was, generally, an accurate account of Bush's hoax of service, was red meat for Rove's character aSSassins. Novak is a conservative honk who had no qualms about being fed a nugget of gossip about a Bush detractor (Wilson) at a pivotal point of the Iraq invasion buildup.

2. Catch up, now.
The NY Times was hardly the first to "break" news of foreign account reviews.
http://newsbusters.org/node/6152
The latest blitz by the Right House was just a ham-handed attack made to catch the attention of the majority of Americans ...who don't pay attention!

[krusin1]

Nobody "outed" Valerie Plame. At worst, her name was inadvertently given to Novak. Being a journalist, he actually engaged in fact-checking, and wasn't lied to by the administration.

..and there's the rub. You just contradicted your own claim. You can call it "inadvertant" or "outed", but only the former is a legal defense to the charges.
As far as "fact-checking" goes, his yet-unnamed source should have stayed within legal limits to classified information and at least stonewalled. Call it what you want, whoever "didn't lie" to Novak IS the one taking the fall... Scooter Libby.

Re: your follow up points...

1. Rather blew it. His lefty reputation is well-known, and any crack in what was, generally, an accurate account of Bush's hoax of service, was red meat for Rove's character aSSassins. Novak is a conservative honk who had no qualms about being fed a nugget of gossip about a Bush detractor (Wilson) at a pivotal point of the Iraq invasion buildup.

2. Catch up, now.
The NY Times was hardly the first to "break" news of foreign account reviews.
http://newsbusters.org/node/6152
The latest blitz by the Right House was just a ham-handed attack made to catch the attention of the majority of Americans ...who don't pay attention!

Huh????? Having a hard time following you here...

I DID say the supposed "outing" was inadvertent - which by your own words is a legal defense. Not sure your point there...

As for the Newsbusters link... did you read it? Here's the summary. Thirteen days after 9/11, the NY Times suggested we pursue terrorists financially. The article's point is that the very program the NY Times advocated is now in place, and the NY Times is NOW against it and has inhibited its effectiveness by running the details on the front page.

Sounds like a "flip-flop" by the NY Times in an effort to make the prez look bad. Oh, and it also gave terrorists aid and comfort... but that's another argument.

At least we agree that Rather blew it.

[flyboy55]

Bush's approval rating has tanked and will likely never recover in the two years he has left.

As a result, Republicans across the country are playing the political equivalent of that game "Twister", trying to weasel away from the stink of the Bush regime all the while being trapped on the political "Twister" mat, in too close proximity to the sweating, grunting, heaving efforts of Bush&Co.

Republican apologist and self-described journalist Robert Novak wants to have some value as a conservative pundit long after the current crop of deadheads is gone. All he's doing now is playing CYA (cover your a**).

So after all the investigation and probing we are supposed to believe that Valerie Plame's outing was "inadvertent"? Gadzooks!! I would generously call that attitude naive in the extreme. But that's just me.

[a1aara]

Former CIA officer sues Cheney, Libby, Rove over leak
Plame alleges Bush administration officials ruined her career


http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/07/13/ ... index.html

[Sam]

HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM.....was the answer to the question ever decided if she was actually a covert operative at the time? There is nothing classified about telling someone one works for the CIA.
Considering that the CIA has their own regs about saying who/what is a covert agent and who/what one is.....and their was some question about it.
It was her idea to send her husband to do "the investigation", true enough others had to sign off on it, yet still it was her idea.

Since the question has been raised was she "operational" and if a definitive answer is found to be she was not.....she is gonna lose the suit.

I admit I have not been keeping up with all of the particulars....too much bias in the whole thing. I will wait until the dust finally settles and see what happens. For all those that claimed to know Rove was the guilty party....why aren't you up there testifying against him and helping make sure he is convicted for this act?

How do those that claim Libby is "taking one for the team" KNOW that is true instead of mere speculation? I would hate to see such pre-judgemental people on a jury and expect a fair trial or Justice to be served. They should be on the witness stand testifying to what, they claim to know.

[Y-NO-9-O]

HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM.....was the answer to the question ever decided if she was actually a covert operative at the time? There is nothing classified about telling someone one works for the CIA.
Considering that the CIA has their own regs about saying who/what is a covert agent and who/what one is.....and their was some question about it.
It was her idea to send her husband to do "the investigation", true enough others had to sign off on it, yet still it was her idea.
Since the question has been raised was she "operational" and if a definitive answer is found to be she was not.....she is gonna lose the suit.

I admit I have not been keeping up with all of the particulars....too much bias in the whole thing. I will wait until the dust finally settles and see what happens. For all those that claimed to know Rove was the guilty party....why aren't you up there testifying against him and helping make sure he is convicted for this act?

How do those that claim Libby is "taking one for the team" KNOW that is true instead of mere speculation? I would hate to see such pre-judgemental people on a jury and expect a fair trial or Justice to be served. They should be on the witness stand testifying to what, they claim to know.

As opposed to your non-judgmental stance.