Drudge FLASH: “Bob Novak will break his silence tomorrow night in two separate interviews with FOXNEWS CHANNEL, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned. Novak will appear on Brit Hume (6pm/et) and Hannity & Colmes (9pm/et)…”
Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald has informed my attorneys that, after two and one-half years, his investigation of the CIA leak case concerning matters directly relating to me has been concluded. That frees me to reveal my role in the federal inquiry that, at the request of Fitzgerald, I have kept secret… MORE… My primary source has not come forward to identify himself… Bill Harlow, the CIA public information officer who was my CIA source for the column confirming Mrs. Wilson’s identity. I answered questions using the names of Rove, Harlow and my primary source.
New link with the complete Novak statement, at Human Events Online (Currently slow loading, no doubt due to the Drudge traffic surge).
More at OTB;
The general consensus at the moment seems to be that the identity of the “primary source” is former Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage. This is important because it would suggest that Novak learned of Plame’s identity and employment inadvertently as gossip–as Novak has maintained all along–rather than through some concerted effort by the Bush administration to “out” Plame as retribution for her husband Joe Wilson’s attacks against the administration.
So can we get smokin joe wilson frogmarched for revealing the identity of a CIA operative? According to the left, he’s a traitor for doing this and deserves jail, if not a noose!
This get’s a big, Nelson style, HA HA!
Simply awesome. My schadenfreude is simply undescribable.
This all seems to be a bit of non-news, seeing as Novak still isn’t revealing who his source was. But it raises a few questions:
1. The general consensus at the moment seems to be that the identity of the “primary source” is former Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage. This is important because it would suggest that Novak learned of Plame’s identity and employment inadvertently as gossip…
That’s a statement that needs some ‘splainin. If there is nothing but speculation regarding the source of the leak, then how can there be anything more than speculation about the motive or lack thereof. If not malice, the leak was, at the very least, carelessness or incompetence.
2. How could Rove, or anybody else, defend the decision to confirm the identity of a covert agent to a journalist? Even if not a crime, it showed either carelessness or very poor judgment.
3. How can Novak defend the indefensible of actually publishing this information? Again, maybe it isn’t technically a crime, but the people who are all over the New York Times for revealing classified administration policies shouldn’t flock to the defense of Novak.
I love the quote from Charles Johnson at LGF on this news:
“Those tiny popping sounds you hear are thousands of moonbat heads exploding.”
Do everyone a favour, Drago and read the link to Novak’s statement. As many times as it takes to understand what it says.
I have indeed read Novak’s statement.
…he told me through a third party that the disclosure was inadvertent on his part.
is a weak and unconfirmable assertion.
I considered his wife’s role in initiating Wilson’s mission, later confirmed by the Senate Intelligence Committee, to be a previously undisclosed part of an important news story. I reported it on that basis.
is no defence for revealing classified information that could cause harm to people. The New York Times also thought they were acting out of public interest.
“is no defence for revealing classified information that could cause harm to people.”
Yes, I believe Mark Steyn has had several columns on the Boris and Natasha team of Joe and Val. Her identity was incredibly hard to figure out, particularly if you never read Vanity Fair magazine.
Let them eat yellow cake.
I’m in a generous mood today, so for you Drago, this well-explained, simply worded explanation:
“So it seems we’re still awaiting the name of the “primary source”… Which we always need to keep in mind is completely irrelevant anyway, because she wasn’t “outted” in the sense that she wasn’t covered under any law and she was never put in danger, and she wasn’t overseas and covert. Again, this is why there were no indictments on the “leak”, because there wasn’t really a “leak” in the sense of the word the media and left has used it.”
http://www.rightwinged.com/2006/07 novak_reveals_sources_and_did.html
Meanwhile, posts are disappearing at DailyKos…
Novak had a long rambling discussion with an Unidentified Government Official (UGO). We know it was not a White House official, and that the person no longer is in government. The consensus is that the UGO is someone in State, most likely Richard Armitage or Colin Powell.
During the chat with Novak, the UGO inadvertently mentions that Wilson was sent on the trip by his wife who works at the CIA. Novak’s antenna goes up. To confirm, Novak calls Rove, who says “I heard that too.” Novak then looks up the wife’s name in the book “Who’s Who in America” and finds the name of Valerie Plame. For a screenshot of the book entry, see http://www.algintech.com/Wilson.jpg.
Ready to publish and name in hand, Novak calls Bill Harlow, the CIA public information officer, to confirm that Plame is indeed a CIA employee. Harlow looks up her name and confirms she works there. Quite the secret agent, eh?
And we learn that Fitzgerald already knew the names of all the participants from day one, having waivers already in his hand for the UGO, Rove, and Harlow before he interviewed Novak.
2-1/2 years of investigation follow, despite that the fact that 1) Fitzgerald knew the names of all the participants from day one, 2) he exonerated the UGO early on as making a legitimate faux pas, and 3) he stated he has no intention of proving any damage or that Plame was covert.