Syndicated columnist Robert D. Novak, who has repeatedly declined to discuss his role in disclosing the identity of CIA operative Valerie Plame, said in a speech this week that he is certain President Bush knows who his mystery administration source is.

I’m confident the president knows who the source is,” Novak told a luncheon audience at the John Locke Foundation in Raleigh, N.C., on Tuesday, according to an account published yesterday in the Raleigh News & Observer. “I’d be amazed if he doesn’t.”

“So I say, don’t bug me. Don’t bug Bob Woodward. Bug the president as to whether he should reveal who the source is,” Novak said.

Any odds on anyone getting any information out of the White House?



  1. Mike says:

    For the last time — there was no law broken. Time to move on.

  2. Jim Scarborough says:

    > Any odds on anyone getting any information out of the White House?

    Um… we get plenty of information out of the White House. The veracity is all dubious, though.

  3. Mike, I think you forgot to include the line about your credentials as a legal expert well versed in every aspect of this case, including parts not yet disclosed to the public.

  4. Mike says:

    Even Fitzgerald found there was no evidence that the law in question was ever broken by this “leak.” All he could do was charge Libby with lying to a grand jury about a crime that didn’t happen.

  5. Mister Mustard says:

    >>For the last time — there was no law broken. Time to move on.

    Heh heh heh. How the glory of the oval office has fallen, hmmm? I wonder where these “move along now” types were when Ken Starr was titillating overweight, balding neocons with his tales of Bill Clinton’s cigar and Monica’s thong? Was the cigar smuggled in from Cuba? Why did we pay for THAT debacle to go on, year after year?

    And that didn’t even have anything to do with immoral shenannigans related to RUNNING THE COUNTRY. Jeez. If faced with a choice between someone who did a superb job as president but was diddling a chubby intern in his spare time, and someone who has brought the once proud United States of America into the gutter with his ignorance, hillbilly wooden-headedness, and his lack of any apparent moral principles, well……..you pick.

    And could someone please tell him to lose that juvenile-sounding “heh heh heh heh” titter? He sounds like a pre-adolescent when he makes that sound.

  6. Mike says:

    This all revolves around a single question: was a law broken or not? If there was no law broken, as Fitzgerald found no evidence of, then the issue is settled. If the Congress later decides the law needs to be changed, then that is their prerogative. The people (especially in the media) who are still making a big deal about this are more concerned with achieving the result of embarrasing the President than they are about the law. It is time to move on.

    I also find it amusing that liberals toss around the term “neocon” at anybody who is a conservative. It’s kind of like how the word “racist” is throw around by people who can’t even be bothered to look it up in a dictionary first.

  7. mike: there is an accusation the Libby broke the law (prudery). The next question is to send it to a jury to determine if he did commit prudery. Just like Clinton the law that he was accused of was prudery. The main problem with what went on then and now, is it is full of politics. The democrats during Clinton’s time said lying under oath was not wrong, yet now they are saying it is, ah make up your minds is it wrong/illegal.

    I don’t think this is a right/left wing consperisy to get Clinton/Libby

  8. AB CD says:

    >And that didn’t even have anything to do with immoral shenannigans related to RUNNING THE COUNTRY.

    So getting oral sex while talking to a congressman about military policy in Bosnia has nothing to do with running the country? Got it.

    It wasn’t Ken Starr. Janet Reno assigned it to him, and this prosecutor Fitzgerald would have done the same thing. The charges aren’t that different. Perjury to a grand jury. Possible subornation of perjury, for which Starr had tape recordings to prove the case. Starr also had job offers via Vernon Jordan, linking the case to Whitewater.

  9. AB CD says:

    Fitzgerald hasn’t charged anyone with national security crimes. So that claim is gone, and so is political payback if noone violated the national security law at least in spirit(it’s only payback if they thought they were hurting his wife’s career.) I doubt any corrections will be issued by the media, or even John(or was it Eidard?), just like there have been none about the original Tom Delay charge being dismissed.

  10. Robert Nichols says:

    Charges were not dismissed. Ongoing investigation. No corections (or apologies) necessary. We have to wait and see what the investigation brings.

  11. mike Cannali says:

    Novack “repeatedly declined to discuss his role” – What makes him special? Too bad that they just outlawed torture as a means to get information out of Novack

  12. Mike Voice says:

    “So getting oral sex while talking to a congressman about military policy in Bosnia has nothing to do with running the country?”

    Only if the oral sex was an attempt to influence poilcy, not just for the fun of it. 🙂

  13. MattV says:

    Richard Armitage is the the current front-runner as the person who leaked to Novak and Woodward. See Just One Minute and/or firedoglake for details. FYI – he’s not part of the neo-con gang.

    It appears that the only thing possibly hanging over Rove’s head is a perjury charge related to his forgetting about a conversation with Matt Cooper of Time. Though he did remember in time to tell the grand jury while the were still in session, which does matter. If you want you can add quotes around the word forgetting.

  14. AB CD says:

    >Charges were not dismissed.

    The original indictment charge that made front page news around the country, the conspiracy charge, has been dismissed.

  15. Robert Nichols says:

    And the rest of the charges?

  16. Mr Mustard says:

    >>The original indictment charge that made front page news around
    >>the country, the conspiracy charge, has been dismissed.

    Umm, TWO original charges made front-page news around the country, conspiracy and MONEY LAUNDERING.

    He’s still under indictment for the latter.

    From money laundering to outing Valerie Plame to faking reasons to start a war to Heart Attach Cheney’s Secret Energy Meetings, the entire administration reeks of corruption, dishonesty, and sleaze. When enough charges are filed, SOME of them are bound to be dismissed. A look at the overall pictures, though, paints a portrait of a bunch of sleaze bags engaged in monkey business at the expense of the integrity of America.

    2008 elections…. BRING ‘EM ON!!!!

  17. AB CD says:

    >Novack “repeatedly declined to discuss his role” – What makes him special?

    He hasn’t said so, but everyone thinks he told the grand jury. He just hasn’t dropped his promises like the other reporters, so noone else has been told.

  18. AB CD says:

    >Umm, TWO original charges made fron-page news around the country, >conspiracy and MONEY LAUNDERING.

    Check again. The money laundering charge was not in the original indictment, and was added later, after it became obvious the original charge wouldn’t stick. It also didn’t get the same level of coverage.

  19. Mister Mustard says:

    Heh heh heh. Tom Delay stinks of corruption, just like his cronies.

    I wonder if Dumbya’s supporters don’t ever get embarrassed by having to support a regime that’s as rotten to the core as this one. For all their palaver about “values”, the ones they embrace in their headlong dash for Money can only be described as despicable. But he, they’re “values”, right? Heh heh heh heh.

  20. AB CD says:

    For all this corruption, who’s in jail? Jack Abramoff, who’s bipartisan? Some Congressman in California? and maybe Scooter LIbby? This is after a censure of Newt Gingrich(exonerated), investigation of Rush Limbaugh(no crime charged yet), indictment of Tom Delay(one charge dismissed already), and of course accusing Bush and Cheney of exposing agents. Under Clinton, you had people sitting in jail like Webster Hubbell and his Lieutenant Governor in Arkansas, and fleeing the country to stay out of jail.

  21. Robert Nichols says:

    How sad have we become?

    Our party is better because we have less people in jail for corruption.

    Is there any hope ever of a legitimate third (independent) party?

  22. Sounds the Alarm says:

    AB CD,

    I love the way you lie – its right out of the neocon hand book!

    You are making great progress toward your goal as FOX “news” bum-boy.

    Keep up the good work!

  23. mike Cannali says:

    Well Novak himself is now a FOX “news” bum-boy.

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051216/ap_en_tv/tv_cnn_novak

  24. Pat says:

    ABCD

    Delay still has two charges; Money Laundering and Conspiracy. The one conspiracy charge dismissed by the Judge, is under appeal to the Texas Court of Appeals by the prosecution.

    We do not have any idea what evidence Fitzgerald has. To dwell on what the investigation MIGHT do is pure speculation and has no fact to back it up.

    True, the legality of the actual leak might be on the leakers side, the morality is not. How this administration could make statements such as criticizing the war is treasonous, challenging the President is anti-American, or questioning the lies told by Bush to Congress as hurting the troops amazes me. To suggest that the New York Times or Washington Post are traitorous for publishing certain aspects of the Administration illegal operations are just double hypocrisy.

    This Administration is corrupt, both legally and morally. They do not represent Americans. They do not even represent their base.

  25. Pat says:

    I didn’t know prudery is a crime. I can understand getting a blowjob might not be right up some uptight neocon’s alley, but I didn’t think it would be a crime to be a prude.

  26. AB CD says:

    >I didn’t know prudery is a crime.

    I think you have the wrong words here, and are saying the opposite of what you mean.
    That said, I doubt people criticizing Bush would think it was OK if his decision to go to war was made while getting a blowjob from an intern. That wouldn’t be illegal, but it would be grounds for impeachment.

  27. Mister Mustard says:

    >>That said, I doubt people criticizing Bush would think it was OK if his
    >>decision to go to war was made while getting a blowjob from an intern.

    Better that he had been getting a blowjob from an intern than what ACTUALLY happened….getting a blowjob from oil industry lobbyists and bible-thumping nutjobs.


0

Bad Behavior has blocked 4516 access attempts in the last 7 days.