This is an oldie but a goodie. Back in September 2003, an unnamed senior administration official came forward to the Washington Post because "he or she" felt the Plame leak was "wrong and a huge miscalculation." And, most importantly (for today's purposes), "he or she" explained that the leak was "purely and simply for revenge."
In other words (or, more precisely, in this senior official's words), the fact that Valerie Plame was a CIA operative was "irrelevant" to the veracity of what Joe Wilson was saying about the lack of evidence of an Iraq-Niger yellowcake deal.
Now, who WAS that?
Obviously, this explanation doesn't square with current GOP talking points -- REVENGE implies INTENT -- and KNOWING WHAT YOU ARE DOING, namely, BLOWING THE MAN'S WIFE'S COVER.
Here's the story:
Read More