Powered by TypePad

« Be Not Afraid | Main | Mae Magouirk - The Next Terri Schiavo? »

April 06, 2005



Months ago I asked who Judith Miller is protecting.
I'm still betting on the indictment being against a CIA official for leaking confidential information.
And....I'd still like to see the source of the original Italian Yellow Cake letter pursued.


Murray Waas, in an otherwise fine story, reports that Wilson told the CIA that the Yellowcake story was a hoax. I don't believe Wilson reported any such thing. That is the part that he famously 'misremembered' later, and may yet go to the meat of the story. How did he know that?

Cecil Turner

"Murray Waas, in an otherwise fine story, reports that Wilson told the CIA that the Yellowcake story was a hoax."

It is a good story, though he's clearly a Wilson supporter. (And throughout, he reports Wilson's assertions as fact.) His web site is similarly biased, and has several more unsupportable allegations. Here, he posits an unlikely public view of the incident, and suggests Novak's reporting was an intentional hit-piece on plame in support of an ideological goal:

The reason that the public has not been sympathetic to those who have become embroiled in the Novak case, has been because Novak was not engaging in his First amendment privileges to expose governmental wrongdoing, but rather exploiting those privileges in furtherance of governmental wrongdoing. And he was advancing his own ideological interest and that of his sources, instead of that of the public when he outed Valerie Plame as CIA operative. Novak did harm not only to Plame but also to ongoing intelligence operations essential to the war on terrorism. And he did monumental harm to his own profession.
Which seems a rather strange way to describe a single background sentence in an otherwise less-than-supportive column that Novak summed up with: "The story, actually, is whether the administration deliberately ignored Wilson's advice, and that requires scrutinizing the CIA summary of what their envoy reported." The possibility that lack of public support in this case might be related to perceptions of left-wing bias never appears to've crossed his mind.

Tom Bowler

"...Novak was not engaging in his First amendment privileges to expose governmental wrongdoing..."

Really? Ambassador Joe's eight day excursion seems to have had a predetermined outcome. So, it's not government wrong doing for an agency, like the CIA, to cook up a phony report in an effort to affect foreign policy? And when did our south paw brethren decide the CIA were good guys?

I'm going to be pretty disappointed if we never get to see exactly how the "frog march" is done. I've been wondering if maybe Joe or Val would be the ones to show us.


I must say that I'm not clued into all the details of this story, but it seems all the clamour for this investigation abruptly at some point in time. My conspiracy-theorist lead me to believe that the investigation led not to the White House, but to other culprits like someone in Congress, members of the press, or even politically motivated employees of the intelligence services. I'd like to know exactly what happened, but I don't think I ever will.

This whole affair smacks of the faux furor and call for rolling heads over Enron until that investigation started to interlace with the Ullico stock scandal.

Jim Glass

"Here in NASCAR Nation..."

Moved to Staten Island?



A bit OT. OK, completely OT.

Remember http://justoneminute.typepad.com/main/2005/03/krugman_versus_.html>this?

Well, look at http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-schiavo7apr07,1,1728431.story>this.

Krugman 1, NYT 0?


As to who mght be indicted for lying to investigators, I suppose, anyone is possible.

However, if we chose to assume that the testimony of the reporters is crucial to the "lying" phase, maybe Novak himself is under the microscope - if what he says he was told differs from what an aide says he told him and from what others confirm the aide told them, it is more than a he said/she said as to whether Novak is lying.

Or, twist that slightly, amd maybe three reporters tell a story about what an aide told them that differs from what the aide admits to having told.

Or, throw out the reporters. The Senate Intel report was quite skeptical of Joe Wilson - maybe he had a veracity problem with Fitzgerald as well.

Or this could just be recycled speculation - it has been obvious since the investigation started that a Martha Stewart resoluton was possible (I know I posted on that, and it was not just me.)

In other news: In a battle of Krugman v the Times, I can't lose.

However, this bit from the LA Times is worth remembering:

Several factors explain why the legislative push has lost steam.

Since Congress returned to work this week, much of its schedule has been postponed because of the death of Pope John Paul II on Saturday. Many lawmakers are attending the funeral rites at the Vatican.

Time will tell.

creepy dude's evil friend

Meanwhile-how about a real white flag being raised on private accounts?

Is it too early to call the Delay delay camp triumphant?


Well, we have not been seeing "Tom DeLay" and "triumphant" paired very often lately. Let's hold off on that - maybe private accounts are still minimally conscious, and can be revived with love and attention.




But what if they simply want to die with dignity?

Who has custody?


"...die with dignity?"

We haven't seen "DeLay" and "dignity" paired a lot, either.

As to who has custody, I always say, give it to Mariano. But nothing is working right now.

Patrick R. Sullivan

I think I've unmasked the mysterious 'gt'. He's Larry King.

Harry Arthur

CDEF, don't count your chickens, .... The republicans might just figure out how to argue the ownership issue; and young people might just look at what's really going to happen to them in the future, dress up like Indians and dump the tea in the harbor again.


From my limited perspective it appears that young people are beginning to catch on. Most had given up on getting anything from SS. Personal accounts represent an opportunity to regain hope. And we know where that springs eternal.

I half expect the Fitzgerald indictment will be against Valerie Plame for revealing secrets to Joe Wilson. He appeared to know things he shouldn't have, and used that knowledge for personal gain. Tacky.

The comments to this entry are closed.