Bite me!
Times Argus — Weirdness in high places. Something is fishy.
By now, the details are familiar to many Americans. Conservative columnist Robert Novak reported that Valerie Plame, the wife of an outspoken critic of the Bush administration, was an active CIA agent. It is against the law to publish the names of active agents, yet to date Novak has curiously paid no price for his obviously illegal disclosure.
Novak wrote that he got his information from a high-level member of the administration. That person’s intent, apparently, was to use the press to embarrass the CIA agent’s husband, former ambassador Joseph Wilson, as punishment for having written (in a newspaper column) that the White House lied when it said Saddam Hussein had obtained illegal “yellow cake” plutonium from Niger.
Judith Miller of the New York Times and Matthew Cooper of Time Magazine were given the same off-the-record information as Novak, but � obeying the law � they didn’t use it. Cooper later wrote about it, but on the basis of Novak’s column rather than the source’s tip.
The federal prosecutor in the case, Patrick Fitzgerald, has targeted Miller and Cooper but kept his hands off Novak. He won’t explain why, and neither will Novak. And the Supreme Court, as is its custom when it decides not to take up a case, offered no explanation for its decision.
If Miller and Cooper have to serve as much as one day behind bars while Novak remains free, then clearly Americans will have witnessed a gross miscarriage of justice. What won’t be so clear is the motive behind the injustice. Fitzgerald needs to tell the public exactly what purpose he is serving.
There is the possibility of going after liberal reporters and not the conservative Novak. Also, Novak may have revealed his source. The Supreme Court is right not to take the case. Of course journalists can’t claim legal protection. Why should the law be used to enforce their promises at all costs? Kind of serves the New York Times right, since they claimed this was a major crime by the Bush Administration, and now they are forced to argue the truth that there is no crime. The prosecutor has no business going after the reporters when there is no underlying crime as is clear. Then again John Dean said that he knew the judge involved in the case, and said that he believed there must be more to the case than what’s been reported.
Nothing is fishy here: just another example of how the current admin abuses the system and disregards any laws or relations in their way. Sad!
This is the most obvious question from the whole mess, and yet in every story and TV piece I’ve seen, no mainstream journalists are even asking “Why isn’t Novak being subpeonaed?” Maybe because the answer is “no one knows,” but shouldn’t that raise alarms bells!
Where’s the drumbeat when you need it? I can’t believe Fitzgerald’s office and his staff are hermetically sealed like this. Some persistent harrassment will surely produce the reason, fishy or not.
Just to be clear, Novak didn’t break the law, the source that revealed Plame’s identity as a CIA agent did. And Miller and Cooper may be punished for “contempt of court” for not revealing their source(s), not for revealing Plame’s identity.
Since Novak wrote about it, it’s only fair that he should be the one in the pressure cooker.
This isn’t even about “bloggers as journalists”, or that case in Texas involving a part-time book writer. Miller and Cooper are full-time journalists who work for very reputable publications (NYT and Time?).
Fitzgerald is abusing his discretion, exploiting the letter of the law, and thumbing his nose at a tradition of allowing journalists to protect their sources, while still retaining the right to force revelation if a crime has been committed and revealing the source is crucial to obtaining justice.
The whole thing stinks to high heaven.
The Thug in the White House doesn’t give a shit about law or ethics, domestic or otherwise.
Bush League supporters care even less.
TC you’re right that the prosecutor is abusing discretion, but the leaker didn’t commit a crime either, and that’s why athe prosecutor should back off.
Why are you guys blaming this on Bush?
The federal prosecutor (and maybe the attorney general) have the final say. It’s called prosecutorial discretion. Any meddling by the White House would be seen as political. Sometimes people do a bad job all on their own, without any influence from above.
There is no law that bounds this administration and it’s cronies as they simply change or ignore the laws that they don’t like whenever they please and there isn’t a large respected “independent” press anywhere (in this country) to make them publicly accountable for their actions and/or inactions. The right-wingers have the country by the ass like a colon cancer.
Unless he got orders from duh. This guy was a big big bush head last election.
He’s suppose to have a good rep, but this is too blatant.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A55560-2005Feb1
It was Democrat liberals calling for a special prosecutor to ivnestigate this non-crime. Now they’re upset when their reporters got put in jail for what they now sometimes admit is not a crime after all.
AB CD
What are you talking about when you say a crime wasn’t committed? Someone leaked to several members of the press the name of a CIA operative. That is illegal. It is also against the law. And it is a crime. Ok? The identities of CIA operatives are confidential and may not be revealed.
I am not a lawyer so I could not tell you if Novak would be protected for publishing under the 1st Amendment or if National Security would prevail. Regardless, it was tacky, crass, and poor judgment on Novak’s part to write that column.
An independent prosecutor was appointed to investigate the incident to see if a crime was committed and if a prosecution should ensue. Patrick Fitzgerald, the prosecutor, does not have the final word on whether to prosecute; that will still lie within the Department of Justice. His report will, however, most strongly influence any decision.
I don’t think you can endanger someone’s life and then claim you’re protected by the first amendment.
My issue here is they should nail everyone involved, not cherry pick.
Simple leaking isn’t all you need to have a crime here. There are many criteria, as the law was written to go after traitors like Philip Agee. Among other things, the CIA had to have been actively trying to keep the person under cover.
Thanks, Sound the alarm. That Washington Post article is very good.
I don’t see any mention of a connection between him and the Bush campaign, though. He’s even a registered Independent (no party affiliation).
Sounds like he’s a straight shooter who’s just being overzealous in this case.
Sorry AB CD, but as the old saying goes; Loose lips sink ships. It is quite unlawful to revel State Secrets and the identities of all CIA operatives are classified as secret. According to the column Novak wrote, this wasn’t an accidental leak either. The leaker contacted him. It was intended as paybacks to her husband for NOT playing ball with the Administration’s lies about Iraq’s Weapons of Mass Destruction.
I have a friend that works for the Republican Party in il that knows this guy. He was a big booster locally for Bush in ’04 according to Jamie.
If you were right, then it is quite proper for these reporters and Novak to be in jail, assuming that Novak hasn’t cooperated. If you’re not going to jail reporters to find out who is giving away state secrets, then when should you do it? You may think it is unlawful, but the act in question, the Intelligence Identities Protection Act, doesn’t cover this case.
How can we get the real answers from Novak? He is the key to this and has not even been questioned apparently.