Via
RawStory, Dave Newbart of the Chicago Sun Times
reports on recent comments by Bob Novak at a Sun-Times/UIC forum:
"The question is, does Mr. Fitzgerald know who the source was?" Novak asked. "Of course. He's known for years who the first source is. If he knows the source, why didn't he indict him? Because no crime was committed." [emphasis added]
The "no crime was committed" line was what got me. When we first heard that phrase, it was being used by GOP spinmeisters to imply that there was no crime because Plame wasn't really covert (even though she was). But since last week's bombshell that Bush claims he "declassified" portions of the NIE, that phrase is being used to imply that there was no crime because the information was already declassified by the "Leaker-in-Chief."
More below the fold:
Newbart continues:
Novak said he doesn't believe his source violated laws forbidding the disclosure of a CIA agent's identity.
A spokesman for Fitzgerald declined to comment on Novak's remarks.
At an appearance in December, Novak said President Bush knows his source, too. On Wednesday, he called those remarks "indiscreet."
Quite the juxtaposition, there, Mr. Newbart! Were you inviting us to read between the lines? Indiscreet -- not wrong. Indiscreet, as in -- oops, I shouldn't have been so freaking obvious. "President Bush knows his source, too." -- as in President Bush was the source. The "Leaker-in-Chief."
I know it's speculation at this point, but I needed my Plame fix for the day!