Posted on 11/16/2005 12:27:27 PM PST by NewMediaFan
Bob Woodward apologized today to The Washington Post's executive editor for failing to tell him for more than two years that a senior Bush administration official had told him about CIA operative Valerie Plame, even as an investigation of those leaks mushroomed into a national scandal.
Woodward, an assistant managing editor and best-selling author, said he told Leonard Downie Jr. that he held back the information because he was worried about being subpoenaed by Patrick J. Fitzgerald, the special counsel in the case.
"I apologized because I should have told him about this much sooner," Woodward said in an interview. "I explained in detail that I was trying to protect my sources. That's Job No. 1 in a case like this. . . .
"I hunkered down. I'm in the habit of keeping secrets. I didn't want anything out there that was going to get me subpoenaed."
Downie, who was informed by Woodward late last month, said in a separate interview that his most famous employee had "made a mistake." Despite Woodward's concerns about his confidential sources, Downie said, "he still should have come forward, which he now admits. We should have had that conversation . . . I'm concerned that people will get a misimpression about Bob's value to the newspaper and our readers because of this one instance in which he should have told us sooner."...
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Woodward has CIA ties. I seem to recall he was in the CIA before he left to join the Post, and some think he was part of a plot by the CIA to bring down Nixon. That theory was somewhat nebulous, but not out of the realm of possibility. To find out he has information about what is clearly a plot by the CIA to bring down another Republican president is interesting. Go Porter!
Time for fitz to wrap this up and go back to the windy city ,maybe he can find al capones vault. this sham has hit a wall. Fitz did not deliver for thr dems. They are done with him.
Would that your prediction comes true. However, Fitzgerald is way out on a limb, and has a reputation for being very stubborn. If he throws in the towel at this point, he'll be little more than another young attorney looking for work.
Look for a Federal trial of Libby, in DC. Not too many white Republicans stand a chance in this city. Sorry to note that...but true.
I don't understand why he should have told his editors or why he should apoligize to them for not telling them.
"hopefully Bush has the sense to veto any new federal shield law for the media."
This case is certainly a strong argument against a shield law. Heck, journalists and their sources get to keep thier little secrets, while the rest of the peasants risk going to jail?
What a despicable low down excuse for a man.
Altho' it's been said,
many times, many ways
MERRY FITZMAS, to you!
And the Fitz-a$$ took Russert's word against Libby's. Knowing that the conversation was about the Wilson article in the NYSlimes?
Fitz should have immediately vacated the indictments of Libby, ALL of them.
He's slime. Nothing more, nothing less. |
Gee........How about an apology to the American People?
I read that Fitz wanted to talk to him after being prodded by the good guys, i.e. adiministration or Libby's defense...
He went to Yale and was in Naval Intelligence. I don't know if he was in Skull and Bones, but that Yale secret society has spawned a lot of spooks plus some names we know: Prescott Bush, G. H. W. Bush, George W. Bush, John Kerry.
Woodward's contact at the White House was Al Haig, when Woodward was still with intel. I always figured Haig as Deep Throat, but DT was probably a manufactured personality created to cover for many leakers.
The whole thing is a non-story to me, but I love seeing Woodward in trouble.
This does not add up at all.
Woodward didn't keep any kind of notes about the reference he now claims was made about Plame, and he didn't tell anyone until he was reminded that he knew.
Fishy. Very fishy.
I just read Woodward's "statement" and here is an interesting point:
"When asked by Fitzgerald if it was possible I told Libby I knew Wilson's wife worked for the CIA and was involved in his assignment, I testified that it was possible I asked a question about Wilson or his wife, but that I had no recollection of doing so. My notes do not include all the questions I asked, but I testified that if Libby had said anything on the subject, I would have recorded it in my notes. "
This puts the possiblity into play that LIBBY had gotten info about Wilson's wife from Woodward...note that he does NOT deny the possiblity. He says that if LIBBY had told him something about Wilson/Plame, he would have recorded it...but he admits that he has not recorded all the questions HE ASKED or DISCUSSED with Libby.
In terms of a case against Libby...it's fairly easy for him to say that he mixed up his discussion with Woodward with that of Russert... Woodward has not...like Russert...said that he positively did not discuss/tell Libby about Plame.
The answer to your question lies in what passes as "ethics" in the journalism biz. Reporters are (were) expected to confide the identities of their "confidential" or "not for attribution" sources to their editor. For example, presumably, during Watergate Woodword told his editor (Ben Bradlee) the identity of "Deep Throat".
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.