And so it was "treasonous" for Karl Rove to correct Matt Cooper? Oh that's right. He's supposed to go to jail for that...
It's a woman's perogative to change her mind:
June 1, 2005 | 3:54 p.m. ET
[W]eren't those members of the military or the government with whom Newsweek vetted the plausibility of its item, honor-bound to say "you can't print this"?
Or would somebody rather play politics with this? The way Craig Crawford reconstructed it, this one went similarly to the way the Killian Memos story evolved at the White House. The news organization turns to the administration for a denial. The administration says nothing. The news organization runs the story. The administration jumps on the necks of the news organization with both feet or has its proxies do it for them.
That's beyond shameful. It's treasonous.
July 22, 2005 | 10:02 p.m. ET
In his ‘story guidance’ to Matthew Cooper of Time, Rove did more damage to your safety than the most thumb-sucking liberal or guard at Abu Ghraib. He destroyed an intelligence asset like Valerie Plame merely to deflect criticism of a politician. We have all the damned politicians, of every stripe, that we need. The best of them isn’t worth half a Valerie Plame. And if the particular politician for whom Rove was deflecting, President Bush, is more than just all hat and no cattle on terrorism, he needs to banish Rove — and loudly.