- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
From what we know so far, nothing rings true here. For example:
Woodward testified that his source "casually" mentioned that Wilson's wife worked for the CIA.
Yet once this story broke, his explanantion to the press for why he never came forward - while the grand jury investigation was going on - was that he wanted to protect his source and didn't want to be put in the bind of Cooper and Miller.
Hello? A source's "casual" comment is not anywhere close to information given by sources on the condition of anonymity, as was the case with both Cooper and Miller.
Woodward also said, under oath, that he mentioned this to Pincus in passing (literally), an assertion Pincus says he doesn't remember, and certainly would have had it been so.
These two facts from Woodard's deposition give support to Libby's assertion that Plame's CIA position was common knowledge among the press. Ergo, Libby didn't out Plame, only repeated what was already out there.
So why would Woodward put himself in both legal and ethical jeopardy with this testimony to carry water for this administration? Why the risk?
