The author of this story, which by the way is not a new story, is trying to conflate approval Libby may have had to discuss some "classified" info with the press, into an "approval" to reveal Valerie Plame's "classified" identity, when in fact it is not such an approval any more than is it evidence that her status was "classified".
Yet, you can bet that the dim-witted Dim Matthews will jump t o every erroneous conclusion the author is trying to present.
"The author of this story, which by the way is not a new story, is trying to conflate approval Libby may have had to discuss some "classified" info with the press, into an "approval" to reveal Valerie Plame's "classified" identity, when in fact it is not such an approval any more than is it evidence that her status was "classified".
Yet, you can bet that the dim-witted Dim Matthews will jump t o every erroneous conclusion the author is trying to present."
Matthews, unfortunately, is not the only anchor/reporter who is presenting this story in the same way. The leap from approving release of some of the classified report for improving support for the war, to approving release of Plame's identity, is astonishing and even though Libby's attorney's have released a statement saying that this is not true, they continue to report it. Terry McAuliff was the first yesterday afternoon on CNN and it hasn't stopped. Now it is being reported by CNN that a Paul Pillar (?) is releasing a statement saying in summary that Bush used misleading information to support the already-made decision for war.