« 'Breathtaking' Waste and Fraud in Hurricane Aid | Main | When Do We Leave Iraq? Does It Depend On The Meaning Of "Leave"? »

June 27, 2006


From Howie:

And most of those proclaiming horror at the leaking of classified info were willing to give the *White House* a pass for the outing of the covert Valerie Plame.

From EW:

And you noticed the clear hypocrisy coming from the *administration* that outed Valerie Plame.

Emphasis added, natch - I take it you are not going to call Howie on the "White House" thing? Why not - one fine day the WaPo will admit that Armitage was the guy - why not now?

As to the rest of the Plame-Times parallel - is there any doubt that the Times was warned that outing the Swift program might be a bad idea?

Conversely, is there any specific evidence that anyone warned Armitage, Libby, Cheney, or anyone else about Plame's status? If you have it, please pass it to Fitzgerald - the best he came up with was a conversation warning of possible consequences that followed the Novak column.

Plame did the same thing at 'Vanity Fair.' No charges.

Um, Tom, while you're looking for evidence, got any that Armitage "was the guy"? So far, all your arguments about that seem to have fizzled. Woodward was clear that Armitage (presumably) didn't say PLame was covert, and Novak has said Mr. X didn't break the law. Even Rove's leakers--who would have an incentive to see Armitage do time--seem to have admitted Fitz doesn't believe Armitage did anything wrong.

As to warnings about Plame, I suppose you're working under an immaculate reception theory, in which Libby's warnings to Edelman and Ari don't involve an interim cognizance on his own part that spreading her name would have potential consequences? That's a new one. So Libby's just an automaton, you're arguing?

Oh, one more point. Until the AIPAC trial redefines how courts interpret the Constitution (which I doubt will happen), there is a clear legal distinction between the NYT printing classified information and Libby leaking it. You ready to throw out that distinction, and with it AIPAC into jail?

Howard Kurtz's online chat at WaPo 1 - 2 EST

Really OfT Michigan has a State version of the Federal False Claims Act
IANAL, but wrt the misogynist physician you posted about yesterday, I had a really wild idea about how you might be able to subpoena the material the court refused to provide you. If he was billing for Medicaid/Medicare patients, that's Federal. Michigan is one of a few states that has as state version of the Federal False Claims Act. That might (and I am stressing the definition of "might" here) give you another way to go after the data you are seeking.

David Shuster said the whole point of attacking the Times is to keep everyone from talking about the real issue: Bush's spying on American citizens.

I was shocked to see freakin' Peter King calling for the NYT to be charged with treason. Why don't we hang Woodward and Bernstein while we're at it? Those damn uppity reporters got us started on this whole business of the press being the public's government watchdog.


That's a really good retort. Let's hand our journalistic heros, they did the same thing as Risen and Lichtblau.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Where We Met

Blog powered by Typepad