Posted on 11/20/2005 8:29:54 AM PST by conservative in nyc
Who was Bob Novak's source?
--Snip--
So who is Novak's source—and Woodward's source—and why will his identity take the wind out of the brewing storm? One by one last week, a parade of current and former senior officials, including the CIA's George Tenet and national-security adviser Stephen Hadley, denied being the source. A conspicuous exception was former deputy secretary of State Richard Armitage, whose office would only say, "We're not commenting." He was one of a handful of top officials who had access to the information. He is an old source and friend of Woodward's, and he fits Novak's description of his source as "not a partisan gunslinger." Woodward has indicated that he knows the identity of Novak's source, which further suggests his source and Novak's were one and the same.
If Armitage was the original leaker, that undercuts the argument that outing Plame was a plot by the hard-liners in the veep's office to "out" Plame. Armitage was, if anything, a foe of the neocons who did not want to go to war in Iraq. He had no motive to discredit Wilson. On "Larry King Live" last month, Woodward was dismissive of the special prosecutor's investigation, suggesting that the original leak was not the result of a "smear campaign" but rather a "kind of gossip, as chatter... I don't see an underlying crime here."
(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...
Isikoff and the left just trying to smear anyone connected to Bush.
They trying hard to keep this focus on the Administration,
When all roads lead back to the media involvement and coverup
Just more smoke & mirrors from the 'axis of illogic'... Newsweek, Time & The Washington Post.
"Libby still faces strong evidence that he lied to the Feds"
Now how do Thomas and Isakoff know there is strong evidence? Did Fitz share the evidence with them? Or are they basing it on the bare bones indictment and/or the horrendous Fitz press conference where Fitz made some false statements of his own.
I will give them credit for at least mentioning:
"If Armitage was the original leaker, that undercuts the argument that outing Plame was a plot by the hard-liners in the veep's office to "out" Plame. Armitage was, if anything, a foe of the neocons who did not want to go to war in Iraq. He had no motive to discredit Wilson."
We already know that Isikoff will lie, stretch the truth, for a story no matter the consequences. After all, he is deeply responsible for lives lost after writing about the korans being flushed down toilets in Gitmo, a story that is now known as false.
Of course, most reporters now a days make up things, do not report facts, but mere speculation and innuendo. Or they report their own 'feelings' and opinions as fact.
When it comes from Isikoff, rather than trust but verify, we should not trust and get verification from other sources.
If everyone in Washington knew Valerie Plame worked for the CIA, it was NOT a secret.
No, no, no, they've got the wrong man! I'm the one who told the media all about Plame!
I told them about the aliens, too, but they wouldn't listen! Mars needs women, but they don't believe me!
Meanwhile, stealing top secret documents and destroying them is no big deal. The mainstream media chuckle over the "I'm clumsy and I didn't notice I somehow shoved top secret documents into my pants and now I can't find them (the documents)." There wasn't the slightest curiosity about that curious episode.
SO WHERE IS THE CRIME? It is not against the law to tell somebody that someone else is a desk jockey working at Langley. This BS from Fitzmas and his boys is a farce and a waste of taxpayer money. If the Senate wants to "probe" something, they need to "probe" this DemocRAT fiasco.
Its a MEDIA MANUFACTURED, supposed crime, but Fitzgerald cannot find a CRIME!
One thing that has come of this, we now have a better picture of the incestual relationships going on with the media and gubmint officials. Everyone involved in the media side of this seems to be sharing a bed with an agenda.
Armitage?....Now *that* resonates with me....
He's allways made the hair on the back of
my neck stand up...and not in a good way.
Not that i immediately accept it as true..but
i'd not be dunbfounded if it turned out to be.
It's been said that the source may no longer work in government. Do we know for certain that the source worked in the Bush WH? Just a question...
Let me speculate as well...Michael Sissykoff and Chrissie Matthews (the Siegfried and Roy of the MSM) are an item. Their partisan foreplay in 'Softballs'is just too obscene to watch.
It seems highly unlikely that Novak's source and Woodward's source would be the same person. After all, Novak presumably testified as to his source and information in the first Grand Jury.
Therefore, Fitzgerald would already have called the source to testify--or at least be aware of the identity. But the story this week says that the source only came forward and identified himself AFTER the Libby indictment.
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.