I'll delete in a few - but thought folks might like to live blog Novak's Faux interview.
Faux went to commercial with the teaser: Novak saw no evidence of plot to out Plame and these highlights from the interview:
I saw no such campaign. No one belittled Wilson to Novak. He was discussing general foreign policy with his original source, who mentioned Wilson's wife in passing.
He only spoke with Rove about Wilson for a "few seconds."
It all sounds so innocent.
How come the administration just didn't admit this in July, 2003?
Fred Fleitz, the CIA operative on loan to Bolton, is apparently the hot topic on the rumor mill tonight.
Per Clemons, who cautions that the role of Fleitz is purely rumor at this point:
But then, a short while ago -- one of America's top journalists called me to ask what I knew about Fleitz. He said rumors were swirling everywhere and that a "really wild rumor" was that Bob Woodward had a piece appearing in tomorrow's Washington Post focusing on Fleitz. Realize -- NOTHING substantiated here.
Part of the rumor is that Fleitz is on leave.
I just tried to track that down. I just called Fred Fleitz, but got his answering machine and nothing seemed out of the ordinary. I then called Under Secretary of State Bob Joseph's office and talked to a person who told me that Fleitz was on leave for two days but would return to the office Monday morning.
This new WSJ article
differs from the earlier WAPO/NYT articles, which both indicate Fitz is focussed on charges relating to cover up the Plame leak.
But lawyers and others close to the case say he may be piecing together a case that White House officials conspired to leak various types of classified material in conversations with reporters -- including Ms. Plame's identity but also other secrets related to national security.
Murray Waas has a new National Journal
article which indicates that Fitz' focus is on discrepancies between accounts Miller and Libby provided to the grand jury.
As previously reported, Libby did not disclose to the GJ his June, 2003 meeting with Miller, and also asserted that he did not, in his July, 2003 meeting with Miller, tell Miller either Plame's name or that she worked for the CIA.
Judy's testimony contradicted him on both points. But the SP seems focused on the extent to which Libby and his attorneys attempted to influence Miller's testimony.
Can we add witness intimidation and obstruction to the list of potential charges for Libby?
Nice little article in Friday's WAPO
saying yeah, the scandals are getting to the White House. What's different about this article though, is that some sources are named
. How often do you see that? Here's my favorite:
Other White House advisers see politics behind the recent spurt of investigations. "Some of it is cyclical politically," said Leonard A. Leo, who has taken leave as executive vice president of the conservative Federalist Society to help promote the Miers nomination. "And some of it, I'll be honest, is when the left and the Democrats are losing the battle of ideas, they turn to manufacturing scandal."
Jump, will ya?
This new "The Nation" article via the LA Times
hits home on why Cindy has been so effective in capturing attention in the normally dead silent political beat of August.
Cindy has succeeded in finally capturing the media's attention because she personalizes the tragedy and pain this war has inflicted, while highlighting both the impersonal war coverage to date, and the Buscho strategy to keep the cost of this war, must less its deceptive origins, from public view.
Jump, jump, jump
We all know what happened to Valerie Plame when Joe Wilson called Bushco's bluff on Iraq's pursuit of yellowcake.
What we haven't heard much about is a longtime CIA operative I've cleverly identified only as Mr.X, who was fired in 2004 and has filed a lawsuit alleging that:
his dismissal was punishment for his reports questioning the agency's assumptions on a series of weapons-related matters. Among other things, he charged that he had been the target of retaliation for his refusal to go along with the agency's intelligence conclusions.
Ah, punishment and retaliation,the standard-issue Bushco treatment for the unpatriotic who dare question their lies. There are two critical components to nuclear weaponhood: uranium oxide (yellowcake) and centrifuges, which are used to turn uranium into fuel for nuclear weapons.
The Wilsons paid their price for helping knock down the yellowcake purchase. Mr. X alleges he paid the price for reporting Iraq was ready to sell its centrifuges.
What reality-based "drivel" was Mr. X peddling in the agency?
Ladydawg posted an interesting question from the Guess what diary today
On Saturday, I interviewed Aziz al-Taee, Chairman of the Iraqi-American Council. He detailed a compelling body of evidence about the holocaust being waged against the Iraqi people.
Who is Aziz al-Taee?
Forty years after 2 civil rights workers and a local African American attempting to register African American voters in Mississippi were murdered, the alleged killer may finally be held to account.
1) Remember back in August when the FBI began investigating a DOD analyst for passing classified data to AIPAC, the pro-Israel lobbying group?
The investigation is still alive, with the FBI today completing a second search of AIPAC's offices and issuing grand jury subpeonas to four senior officials. link
One of the most striking elements of debate/campaign coverage is the lack of real people response. Remember Phil Donahue, who asked intelligent questions of audience members?
I just watched the MSNBC After Hours show, which allots mere moments to behind-the-rope-line voters and loved hearing the response from "real people".
I also felt the voter-generated questions were so much more direct and on point than the usual debate format.
What say we applaud MSNBC After Hours and request that more time be devoted to real(i.e., not paid for hearing themselves talk) responses.
I'm sick to death of the talking head/pundit spin response to spin. I hear much better political discussions between plays at Monday Night Football.
Why not demand that we be heard?