Second, what I’m suggesting is that investigations were performed. The leakers are all known, and yet none of them had any charges brought against them. Additionally, one of them was a CIA agent, and he was neither arrested, nor charged with sedition.

Libby’s conviction seemed to be a case of the prosecutor latching onto anything so that his time spent didn’t seem wasted. What exactly did Libby perjure himself over? I haven’t been able to find any specifics. Was it something major, or did he just misrepresent what he had for lunch the day before? Given the “win at all costs” mindset of a lot of prosecutors, and examples of gross incompetence such as the Duke lacrosse case, I’m wildly suspicious.

Lemme point out, as well, that I wasn’t a fan of Ken Starr when he was a special prosecutor in the 90s, either. I’m not just spouting a right-wing line. These are questions I haven’t seen addressed.

My question from all of this is really, where were the investigative reporters in all of this? Where’s our modern day Woodward and Bernstein? You called for further investigations, but do you honestly believe that the government has a vested interest in regulating itself any longer? It seems to me that if one branch weakens another, they all get weaker as a result. Asking government to investigate itself is no different, in my mind, to asking a big corporation to do the same.

Then there’s the news media. I have a hard time seeing them as anything more than a press release service. There’s no news any longer, and what gets passed off as news tends to be nothing more than repetition of polls, speculation and gossip.

Hmmm…. I think I might have wandered off track a bit. I’m not quite sure how to get back on track, either, so, I’ll just post this and hope it makes some sort of sense.

Thanks for posting…

I would say that is something is “old news” and the media stopped covering it for a while does not mean it is not important.

Robert Novak said he had government sources in his column, and has confirmed both of them. Yes, one was Richard Armitage but the other one was Karl Rove. You are correct about a third source, CIA Spokesman, Bill Harlow.

According to the CIA itself, Plame had no role in Wilson getting the assignment traveling to Niger.

News Article
Washington Post-December 26, 2003
Mike Allen and Dana Milbank

“Sources said the CIA is angry about the circulation of a still-classified document to conservative news outlets suggesting Plame had a role in arranging her husband’s trip to Africa for the CIA. The document, written by a State Department official who works for its Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR), describes a meeting at the CIA where the Niger trip by Wilson was discussed, said a senior administration official who has seen it.

CIA officials have challenged the accuracy of the INR document, the official said, because the agency officer identified as talking about Plame’s alleged role in arranging Wilson’s trip could not have attended the meeting.”

Also, StingRay, Plame’s status as a covert was never debunked. There were far right outlets that suggested this to be case, but Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald court filings documented she was covert at the time of the leak.

According to this report, Fitzgerald stated that Plame was covert and took measures to protect her identity as such. She had also traveled over seas under cover and even under a alias.

Since Fitzgerald documented her status as covert the law does apply.

Also, if her status was debunked, Fitzgerald would not have a case against Scooter Libby. Fitzgerald would have no grounds for the conviction that was returned. If this is what your are suggesting, then Libby had some really poor attorneys working for him.

I’ll agree that the backlash against McClellan is over the top and out of line, but I can’t say I’m surprised by that. I’d expect to hear that from any career politician. It’s part of why I personally despise both parties at the moment.