OK ..
Novak says she is an Agency operative on weapons of mass destruction.
Newsday says she works at the agency on weapons of mass destruction issues in an undercover capacity
Time says she is a CIA official who monitors weapons of mass destruction
Corn basically says she is a deep-cover CIA employee
And they all name anonymous sources
And here's my guess .. she had a cushy desk/office job working for the CIA .. but she was no undercover agent
Now, I admit, I could be wrong .. but I don't think so
And here's my guess .. she had a cushy desk/office job working for the CIA .. but she was no undercover agent Could be. I have no idea.
But the two things aren't inconsistent. Being an undercover agent just means that she was working for the CIA without letting it be known that she was doing so, not that she was doing a James Bond imitation. This could have been at a cushy desk job.
As for the sources, it seems to me that Corn is probably the best-connected one of the bunch. (That doesn't mean that what he says is correct, of course.)