This is unbelievable. How does this chump rate where he hasn't been implicated in this whole charade? Must be his residual starpower from his Watergate days.
He's gotta go. NOW!
2005-11-17
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Blog by reformed leftist "Paul Hue", and his friends, including some UnReformed Leftists; the headlines reflect these competing views.
3 comments:
Why, precisely, are you demanding the head of Bob Woodward? He's always been a bit of a hack. Not long after the launch of the Iraq War, he wrote a flattering account of how Bush managed the lead up. I wonder what he has up his sleeve here.
Here's what it looks like to me, and pretty clearly so. During a discussion with a source, the info got revealed. Woodward properly regarded the info as non-amazing, and did not print it. That made Woodward the first of what would be a handful of reporters to hear this info (Woodward, the Newsweek dude, the NYT hoe, and Novak). When Novak printed the info, and Joe Wilson decided decided to turn what would have been a minor tidbit in which few humans on earth would have realized that Valerie Plame worked for the CIA into a 24-hour-a-day, 7-days-a-week cause celeb with accusations of high treason against the president, and subpenas went out (mysteriously not one for Novak, a story still untold), Woodward wanted to avoid getting subpenaed, because he didn't want to have his fabled Protect-your-source-at-all-costs reputation actually tested under penalty of prison.
So we now see what Woodward is made of.
The Bush-haters are now hating Woodward. It turns out that all along Woodward has been saying that he thought that the Plame affair had at its core nothing of any substance, which is pretty much my view, with Wilson and his wife found themselves with an opportunity to make themselves into stars, and to strike a big blow against the very surprised Bushies. This view is consistent with Woodward's reaction to having recieved the Plame revelation in the first place: he didn't even think that it was worthy enough news to print. He now says that the Bushie who told him did so in a very casual manner, ie, not trying to push the info into the paper. Woodward also assumed that a woman described as a CIA analyst was non-covert.
Where Woodward gets into trouble is that when the info did become a story, it did so only within the context of criminal allegations. You see, when Novak reported the info, Novak's article received very little attention. Had Plame really been a covert agent jealously guarding her status (first of all, her husband would not have printed an NYT op-ed railing about the findings of a job he got through her connections!), the husband Wilson would not sensibly have responded to the Novak article by creating a relentless media specticle. So it was only then that Woodward regarded the information as note worthy... but revealing his info at that time would put him in the sights of an investigation that could have made him choose between protecting a source (the basis of his career) and going to jail.
Post a Comment