Skip to comments.
Woodward Apologizes to Post for Withholding Knowledge of Plame
Washington Post ^
| November 16, 2005; 1:18 PM
| Howard Kurtz
Posted on 11/16/2005 12:27:27 PM PST by NewMediaFan
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-93 next last
To: NewMediaFan
Something smells funny here
2
posted on
11/16/2005 12:29:37 PM PST
by
txroadhawg
("Stuck on stupid? I invented stupid! " Al Gore)
To: NewMediaFan
I'm sorry - that's it? What about Scooter?
3
posted on
11/16/2005 12:29:57 PM PST
by
LYSandra
To: NewMediaFan
he was worried about being subpoenaed by Patrick J. Fitzgerald-- how nice.
Is this the dude that speaks about 10 words per minute?
4
posted on
11/16/2005 12:31:51 PM PST
by
petercooper
(I was misled. I actually voted for war, before I wanted to vote against it with 20/20 hindsight.)
To: All
Will someone please take a minute to enlighten me?
With all the facts, and accusations and contradictory information out there, color me confused.
Is this revelation a good, or bad thing?
5
posted on
11/16/2005 12:32:16 PM PST
by
Armedanddangerous
(Big people are harder to kidnap!)
To: LYSandra
damage has been done, that was the real agenda
6
posted on
11/16/2005 12:33:49 PM PST
by
sure_fine
(*not one to over kill the thought process*)
To: NewMediaFan
Maybe Woodward should apologize to the various people who went through the Grand Jury investigation. His timely testimony might have saved people some grief. Maybe even an indictment or two.
To: NewMediaFan
Clarification needed. Wash Post requires all reporters to declare all sources to superiors?
8
posted on
11/16/2005 12:37:05 PM PST
by
Shermy
To: Armedanddangerous
Will someone please take a minute to enlighten me? With all the facts, and accusations and contradictory information out there, color me confused. Is this revelation a good, or bad thing? Me too, it is so confusing. BUT one thing that comes to my mind - Woodward would like a re-run of WATERGATE!!
9
posted on
11/16/2005 12:37:32 PM PST
by
p23185
(Why isn't attempting to take down a sitting Pres & his Admin considered Sedition?)
To: Armedanddangerous
all you need to know is this - the media people involved in this can say anything they want to the GJ and investigators, get the prosecutor to accept whater confidentiality agreements they dream up, without fear. and Libby is the guy holding an indictment.
To: Shermy
I believe in this case, the editor specifically asked the reporters to reveal if anyone knew anything about Plame.
To: NewMediaFan
Rove's attorney has stated that Rove never spoke to Woodward so it appears that Rove is still just "under investigation". Powell?
12
posted on
11/16/2005 12:39:23 PM PST
by
tobyhill
(The War on Terrorism is not for the weak.)
To: NewMediaFan
"He said he had "pushed" his other administration source, without success, to allow him to discuss that person's identity, but that the source has insisted that the waiver applies only to Woodward's testimony."
So did Woodward testify about this source? Is it the same as Novak's?
13
posted on
11/16/2005 12:39:33 PM PST
by
Shermy
To: txroadhawg
Something smells funny here That's just his 'source', Deep S#!t.
14
posted on
11/16/2005 12:39:58 PM PST
by
michigander
(The Constitution only guarantees the right to pursue happiness. You have to catch it yourself.)
To: NewMediaFan
Sounds like Woodward will soon be joining Judy Miller in exile.
To: petercooper
He was worried about being subpoenaed but then ended up getting subpoenaed anyway? Why now and not before? Did he get religion in the meantime and decide he better talk to the SP?
16
posted on
11/16/2005 12:40:19 PM PST
by
babaloo
To: oceanview
Bump. The MSM has a license to lie and the Republicans are about to give them a get out of jail free card to keep it up with impunity.
17
posted on
11/16/2005 12:40:27 PM PST
by
Cautor
To: txroadhawg
Where's Bob Woodward been?
Planet Mars?
18
posted on
11/16/2005 12:40:55 PM PST
by
pointsal
To: oceanview
Yep, that's what they said a while back ... they asked all WaPo people to reveal what they knew. Deep dodo for ex-star reporter. I suspect we don't know the half of it about the MSM involvement in this trumped up phony affair.
19
posted on
11/16/2005 12:41:37 PM PST
by
Tarpon
To: oceanview
"I believe in this case, the editor specifically asked the reporters to reveal if anyone knew anything about Plame."
The chances Pincus' wife didn't tell him about Plame are about as good as Wilson's wife not telling him about the Niger docs.
20
posted on
11/16/2005 12:42:28 PM PST
by
Shermy
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-93 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson