Novak Loses the Narrative (Again)

by emptywheel

As I've said before, the pro-Cheney forces are really hamstrung because they have to rely on Novak as the public face of their fight with Wilson. You've got a man whose charisma derives from his dark creepiness fighting for press attention against a classic American blonde beauty. (I keep seeing visions of the Hunchback of Notre Dame, but at least Quasimodo was a sympathetic character.)

Add to that, Novak is really having a tough time sticking to his script.

Novak appeared on MTP today and gave yet another version of the story he's peddled his his own column and with Brit Hume. So here's my take on Novak's ever-changing story.

The Use of the Word "Operative"

Novak elaborated on his old rubbish about using the word operative--which Josh Marshall debunked eons ago. But he added this bizarre rationale.

I call all kinds of politicians operatives. … Someone’s running a congressional campaign in Wyoming, I call him an operative.

From this we're to understand that Valerie Plame's analytical work at the CIA, for which her identity was still classified, was running someone's campaign out in Wyoming, all while raising twins in DC? All the weirder since the most famous Wyoming Congressman of recent memory was one Dick Cheney. No, seriously, Novak hasn't ever asserted that Plane is a politician. So why call her an operative?

One of Russert's finer moments, though, came when he forced Novak to admit that Plame was undercover.

Russert: But she was undercover, you grant her that?

Novak: There’s a difference between undercover and being a covert, uh uh, agent. [ed. note: Note Novak's difficult, yet ultimately successful, attempt to avoid using the most natural word here, "operative."] She was doing analytical work at the CIA. She was not involved in any covert activities.

But underlying the issue of Novak's use of the word "operative" is his description of her job at Counter-Prolfieration (CPD). Like Libby (who similarly learned Plame was in CPD, though he learned it straight from Dick), Novak probably knows more about the CIA than I do. So he probably knows that CPD is on the Operations side of the CIA. Now, curiously, he reverts to his earlier assertion that his "primary" source (presumably Armitage) told him Plame worked at CPD. So to review:

July 2003: Wilson never worked for the CIA, but his wife, Valerie Plame, is an Agency operative on weapons of mass destruction.

October 2003: He said Wilson had been sent by the CIA's counterproliferation section at the suggestion of one of its employees, his wife.

Last week: His wife worked in the office of nuclear nonproliferation in the CIA, and she suggested he go.

Today: Well, you know, his wife suggested it she works at the Counter-Proliferation Division of the CIA.

And they said John Kerry flip-flopped? Novak seems desperate to fuzz this issue, even though it goes straight to Novak's consciousness that Plame was an operative. Twice he has said his source identified Plame as an employee of CPD, suggesting strongly she's an operative. Once more, he identified her as an operative. You seem to be suggesting, Bobby, that you had been told--or had concluded, having been told she worked at CPD--that she was an operative.

His Use of the Word "Suggested"

And again, Novak tries to rationalize why he would state that Plame had "suggested" Wilson for the job, when:

• One source used the word "suggested" or "initiated" in an off-hand comment.
• One source simply confirmed whatever Novak said.
• The most knowledgable source told Novak he was wrong, that Plame had not "suggested" Wilson.

Now, Novak again tries to justify why he chose to ignore his most knowledgable source and print language from his off-hand source in 2003 by a document that came out in 2004, claiming that he was right because the Senate Intelligence Committee had concluded that she had suggested Wilson. Russert tried a gotcha in response:

The Senate Intelligence Committee had indicated that but they did not conclude it.

To which Novak, backing off his claim that the committee had unanimously decided Plame sent Wilson, now simply admits that the "Republican majority" had concluded this. So let me ask again. In 2004, these 8 Republicans were on the SSCI:

Roberts
Bond
Hatch
Lott
Warner
Snowe
Hagel
Chambliss

Of those, only three--the first three--"concluded" that Plame "suggested" Wilson. So, your best-informed source told you she didn't, you published it on the word of an off-hand comment from a less well-informed source, and now you're saying that because a minority of Republicans on the SSCI claim Plame "suggested" Wilson, you're right?

Boy you're a shitty journalist, Bob. Plus you seem to be playing fast and loose with the two meanings of the word "majority." Of course, Russert must need some of Rush's help on his Gotcha pills, because he agreed with Novak, that the Republican "majority" had concluded that Plame sent Wilson.

Hot and Cold Running Novak Mouth

Russert has a little fun with Novak (no doubt because he has been such a target of criticism for such issues), pointing out that NBC, NYT, and Time all fought the subpoenas, but Novak just rolled over like a little puppy getting his belly scratched. Novak pointed out, fairly, that he bore most of the costs of his legal defense. But he didn't answer my questions about why he rolled over like a puppy in face of the waivers:

Why did you have a dilemma because Fitzgerald had waivers, but when Fitzgerald came to you with waivers from Armitage and Rove, your dilemma disappeared?

If Fitzgerald hadn't brought the waiver from Harlow, would you have told him who you spoke to at CIA?

Though Novak has answered a question I've been wanting him to answer. Regarding Novak's fib about getting the name from Who's Who:

Russert: Was that the very first time you had seen or heard the name, Valerie Plame?

Novak: Yes.

Russert: No one told you?

Novak: No.

So I suppose that rules out an earlier source for Valerie Plame's name as Valerie Plame (How about Victoria Wilson, Bob, anyone give you that?). But if I were Russert, I would have asked, "was this the first time you had heard of Wilson's wife?" Perhaps the cocktail weenies have addled Russert's brain and he can't figure out the critical issues like this.

Russert is more successful with the other burning question (and again, something Russert got flack for himself).

Russert: Why did you wait almost three years to thell the public that you had been subpoenaed and what you said.

Novak: Mr. Fitzgerald asked my lawyer not to divulge our contacts.... When he announced that Karl Rove would not be indicted my attorney went to Mr. Fitzgerald and asked him if that request now no longer held true, and he said that his investigation had been concluded, as far as I was concerned.

There are two critical issues here. First, as I've suspected, Fitzgerald asked Novak not to speak about his testimony, unlike most of the other journalist witnesses. Make of that what you will. And second, the implication is that Novak asked Fitzgerald if he was free to reveal his testimony when Rove learned he escaped charges. Presumably, not last week. Which suggests (as I have argued) that Novak's recent blabbering has more to do with the expected filing of the Wilson suit than it did with any new news from Fitzgerald. Of course, if Russert had taken Rush's Gotcha pills, he might have asked about that, too. But alas, it was not to be.

My Favorite Bit

So does anyone out there spend a lot of time on the cocktail circuit? Have you seen Novak talking to, say, Bush? Hadley? Cheney? Armitage?

Russert: Have you spoken to your primary source?

Novak: No.

Russert: Not since that interview?

Novak: No.

We could probably eliminate some of these guys by checking those cocktail party invite lists.

But I'm also struck by this. If Novak's source is Armitage, that says a reasonably long-term relationship froze--perhaps even ended--when Novak outed Plame back in 2003. Why?

Update: Raw Story has a transcript up.

Comments

[mainsailset]

And here I was thinking that Novak was going into a Freudian slip using the Wyoming reference and really meaning that his primary source was Cheney. He seemed to be holding on so hard to his secret that it came out Novakspeak when he wasn't looking.

[op99]

If the Establishment Media was truly interested in upholding its first amendment responsibilities of demanding accountability, they would have folks like you, EW, who know WTF they're talking about, as guest interviewers of tools like Novak. (Pardon me for farting in the cathedral ;) )

[emptywheel]

Yeah, one could read a Freudian slip in that, couldn't one, mailsail?

[emptywheel]

op99

Frankly, we're quite fond of farting in this cathedral. Be my guest...

[mr.ed]

Time for ol' traitor Bob to retire. How many of Plame's contacts got snuffed when her identity was revealed by him? How many didja kill, Bob?

[Sally]

If Mrs. Wilson wasn't "outed," why did the CIA ask DOJ to investigate, Bob? A person with the facts should interview old Bob so we could all watch him flail and whine and lie and blame.

[Swopa]

If Novak's source is Armitage, that says a reasonably long-term relationship froze--perhaps even ended--when Novak outed Plame back in 2003. Why?

Either that, or his "primary source" wasn't someone he had a long-term relationship with ... maybe even someone who left government a week later, ending his possible usefulness as a source. ;-)

BTW, Novak has mentioned Armitage by name six times in his columns since July 14, 2003.

[emptywheel]

Score one for Swopa!!! The dead rise again!!!!

[Swopa]

For the sake of balance, there is also one">http://www.townhall.com/columnists/column.aspx?UrlTitle=the_presidents_travels&ns=RobertDNovak&dt=11/22/2003&page=2">one mention of Ari Fleischer:

"A footnote: Former White House press secretary Ari Fleischer, joining the Republican fund-raising circuit, will appear in Richmond, Va., Monday at a reception for Rep. Eric Cantor. A $1,000 donation is the price of getting a photo taken with Fleischer, a career congressional aide before entering the White House in 2001."

[emptywheel]

Ha! I knew I could get the other examples out better if I ceded your dead theory is back on track.

Though the Ari reference doesn't entail a visit or conversation.

[emptywheel]

Do you have the Armitage links? Are they TV mentions?

[emptywheel]

Also, we could probably rule out a bunch of people with the invite list to that Novak tribute or whatever it was.

[SaltinWound]

"When he announced that Karl Rove would not be indicted my attorney went to Mr. Fitzgerald..."

Did I miss an announcement? There's been nothing from Fitzgerald that I'm aware of.

[Swopa]

Do you have the Armitage links? Are they TV mentions?

I was in the middle of a pollyusa-style comprehensive listing, but my browser crashed.

[SaltinWound]

When he says he hasn't spoken to his source since then, I don't think the old fool is to be taken literally.

[op99]

Assuming Novak is being honest (ha), he and his unnamed source could have been at the same function(s) without speaking, or speaking substantively. Perhaps both are avoiding each other like the plague on advice of the source's counsel?

[lukery]

swopa - while you are researching, how about hadley?

[lukery]

one other thing of interest - Novak:

"And I have said before that if he had called me or if he had put George Tenet on the phone, who I’m sure was aware of what was going on"

if it was no big deal, why would tenet necessarily know what was going on?

[eCAHNomics]

For what it's worth, here's Wayne Madsen on the collatral damage from the Plame outing:
After Mrs. Wilson's name and identity of her cover company were revealed by the White House to the media, at least one CIA non-official cover agent monitoring Iran's nuclear weapons program was tortured and executed, according to our intelligence sources. In addition, WMR has learned that covert Iranian backchannels employed by a current member of the U.S. House of Representatives in support of Plame's Brewster Jennings & Associates network were thoroughly compromised by the White House leak. The member of Congress, who, like Plame, had been an earlier CIA "non-official cover (NOC) energy consultant" in the Middle East during the late 1970s and early 80s, and who was familiar with the early weapons of mass destruction proliferation involving the A. Q. Khan network of Pakistan, Libya, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia, was compromised and he and his connections to the Brewster Jennings & Associates intelligence network and Iranian government contacts were made known to adversarial intelligence agencies. The staff of the member whose covert Iranian contact network was compromised was targeted and tainted with Jack Abramoff money, putting the U.S. Representative in extreme political jeopardy.

[Blank Kludge]

Thought I'd take a peek in here. Hi.
------
Is Novak's quote that PJF "When he announced that Karl Rove would not be indicted..." accurate?

I thought that was Luskin, and PJF has let it stand w/o comment. Maybe I missed it.

[John Casper]

Blank Kludge, yes, it was Luskin, but he's quoting from a letter he received from Fitz. IMO, Fitz put a lot of stuff in the letter that is very embarrasing to Rove he cooperated big time, which is why Luskin Rove don't want it leaked. The language in Fitz's letter was that he "does not anticipate seeking an indictment," against Rover. From what others have said, that is classic, "government witness, roll over on your Mom and everyone else to save your own sorry ass," language. As long as you tell the truth, I won't have to indict you.

[pdaly]

EW wrote: [Novak elaborated on his old rubbish about using the word operative--which Josh Marshall debunked eons ago. But he added this bizarre rationale.

"I call all kinds of politicians operatives. … Someone’s running a congressional campaign in Wyoming, I call him an operative." ]

---

And I laughed at the end of the TV segment. Before saying "Thank you very much," Novak's last words on MTP today were "I don’t think she was a, a covert operative."
Hey, he used that word again correctly in a sentence.

[emptywheel]

pdaly

Beautiful catch, I didn't catch that.

lukery

Well, of course there's a logical explanation. Tenet knew because, well, Rove told him they were busy convincing Tenet to take the fall. But really, it was no big deal. ;-p

[Jeff]

Presumably this is impossible to disprove, since I am sure Fitzgerald pursued it, but I was intrigued by something Novak says about learning Plame’s name. Despite the fact that he repeats once again that he got the name from Armitage – apparently misspeaking once again – Novak insists he got it from Who’s Who. But for the first time, I believe, he specifies that he turned to Who’s Who after he spoke with his first source (Armitage):

I got the name—because I, I, I realized I didn’t have the name, and I figured out, how am I going to get this name to put in, in the column? So I said, “Maybe it’s in ‘Who’s Who.’” And I looked it up and there it was.

If, as has been reported, Novak spoke with Armitage on July 8, that means that Novak had to decide he was going to use the information, have the thought of looking in Who’s Who, and access the Who’s Who between the time he finished his hour-long interview with Armitage and the moment, in the later afternoon I believe, that he ran into the stranger on the street to whom he identified Wilson’s wife by her first name as he belittled Wilson and his trip. That’s not impossible, of course, but I find it pretty remarkable. I was figuring his story was that he looked up Wilson in Who’s Who when Wilson hit the news and before he talked to any of his sources, just as background research. But evidently that’s not his story.

Kudos to Russert for precision on just what the SSCI said about Plame’s role in his trip.

I’m glad Novak had to make clear on national televnision that he was not misquoted by Newsday. I wish Russert had pushed him on just what he was accusing Waas of lying about in his story, since I have the feeling all Novak will have is a denial that he and Rove participated in a cover-up, not a denial that investigators suspected as much, not a denial that he had a conversation with Rove at the end of September 2003, not a denial that Rove testified as Waas reported he testified, and not a denial – unless a legalistic denial – that the conversation went in essence the way it was reported Rove testified it went. But I guess that issue – of suspicions that Rove and Novak coordinated their stories in a cover-up – was a little too touchy for Russert to touch.

That Novak is repeating the story that when he called Plame an Agency operative, he meant she was a political operative is just incredible. I wonder when Novak learned about the alleged cover-blowing by Ames - if he knew early on, that could go some way toward explaining his terrible conduct.

And Novak is evidently back to his old version of what Harlow told him.

Finally, I'm willing to buy that part of what explains Novak's timing is the Wilsons' suit, as emptywheel has been suggesting. But I also think Novak sincerely wants to clear his reputation, now that he has been washed up on the soft shores of Fox News and knows his destiny is for the first (or, at best, the second) line of his obituary to mention the fact that he blew the cover of a CIA agent. He will not succeed.

[Brian Boru]

Has anyone checked the pertinent who's who? I vaguely remember someone claiming that Novak's statement that he got the name there is absurd.