So, Novak describes his primary source "as a 'senior administration official' who was 'no partisan gunslinger'"?

Talk about your rare bird -- with THIS administration, most unbiased observers would say non-partisans were completely extinct!

Q

At the very end of his piece on the Novak revelations in the Post today, Howard Kurtz writes:

******************************************************************************************

"Harlow, who declined to comment yesterday, has told The Post that he challenged aspects of Novak's account three days before the column was published and warned the columnist that if he did write about Wilson's Niger trip, Plame's name should not be revealed. Novak said he has a different recollection of the conversation.

"I certainly wouldn't have used her name if anyone had indicated she might be in danger," Novak said."

******************************************************************************************

Say what? The CIA guy "warned" Novak not to use Ms. Plame's name? And note that Novak doesn't deny he was warned; rather, he weasels around it by claiming he wasn't told "she might be in danger". So in my view Harlow's version stands uncontradicted. Bob Novak was warned not to reveal her name, but I guess the White House ordered hit on Wilson's reputation overrode the CIA's stated concerns about the secrecy of an employee's identity.

And great job by the ever-dependable Post for burying what seems to be one of the most important parts of the story at the butt end of the piece!

i think all signs point to armitage.

Just imagine if the investigator of all of this had been as unbiased as Kenneth Star! We'd all have found out by now who was being investigated, everyone in the Bush Whitehouse would be spending tens of thousands of dollars on legal fees, and the investigation would have expanded well past the original Plame leak. Why, we'd be having investigations into the destruction of National Guard records in Texas, funeral home business deals, why Bush was given a new driver's license after having his old records expunged, and we'd know all about the business deals Bush had before he became President.

Just imagine the investigations that could have been launched based on what Bush and his administration actually did while in office! Iraq intelligence, a serious investigation into whether or not anyone knew about terrorist plans for the 9/11 attack before it happened, and the important details of whether or not Bush's daughters have used drugs! Was Jeff Gannon in a relationship with someone in the Whitehouse? The IC wants to know!

Fitzgerald just isn't living up to Ken Starr's standards.

Novak has not forgotten anything. He is not changing his story. He is part of the Rove propaganda machine that is working to change the narrative. There was no 'plot' to discredit Plame. The 'real' leak by an unamed, 'high-level,' 'non-political operative' was INADVERTANT according to a third party who told Novak after the fact. Novak, who should be on trial for his role in this sordid affair, is attempting to untie the narrative knot but claiming there was no story in the first place. "It was all a simple mistake. I found Plame's name in Who's Who's (under CIA Agents who need outing)." By the time Libby actually goes to trial, the public will have been mollified, and when Bush finally pardons Libby, the public will see it is a noble act.

If Novak's principal source has signed a waiver presumably waiving confidentiality, and Novak has confirmed his identity to Fitzgerald, and his identity is a key component in a major national news story, then why is Novak still refusing to identify him publicly? Isn't he supposed to be a journalist?

The Wikipedia entry for Mr. Robert David Sanders Novak describes him in its opening paragraph as a political commentator, political figure, columnist, and television personality. Conspicuous by its absence is the word "journalist."

Personally, I prefer the famous Jon Stewart description: "Douchebag of Liberty"

So, Patrick Fitzgerald knew all the answers to the Plame case within 2 weeks of taking the case. That means he could have revealed the entire affair in the open if he'd sped up his "investigation" to beyond the pace of a crippled snail.

That means we would have known all about Rove, Novak, Cooper and Scooter Libby's role in all of this well in advance of the 2004 elections.

Man, Fitzgerald is a smooth political operative, is he not? Got everyone to believe he was being thorough while he was passing the time between Chicago and DC, shootin' the breeze with the lawyers and the principal players, all the while holding off on any announcements or indictments until well after the 2004 election.

And Scooter Libby? Fitzgerald is supposedly not bringing Libby's case before a jury until "early 2007." That's convenient, is it not, since there are elections in late 2006?

As for Rove and Novak, et al, who concocted their little cover stories amongst themselves and got away with it... well, I'm betting they made "deals" with Fitzgerald. They promise to testify against Libby just as soon as Fitzgerald brings a case against Libby in a court of law. And if Libby happens to be pardoned before they have to testify -- why, it's just a coincidence, that's all. And if powerful Republicans like Tucker Carlson's daddy and others pay Scooter Libby's lawyerin' bills for him, then no harm done, eh? Libby goes free, Rove goes free, Novak goes free and so on and so on down the line. Very little is paid for by taxpayers (Fitzgerald is "humble" and "not extravagant" and an "introvert", remember? He's no Ken Starr!) and a lot is paid for by Libby's benefactors.

Rove, Libby, Novak, et al, go on to continue making millions of dollars through book deals, speaking fees, seats on 'think tanks" and as "consultants" to corporations. Hey -- maybe Libby will get a cabinet appointment, just as if he were an Iran-Contra pardoned convict. Wouldn't that be a nice reward?

And Fitzgerald will go along claiming to be the unbiased, "completely thorough" dullard prosecutor who simply did the best he could, considering his obsessive-compulsive need to dot all the i's and cross all the t's.

Heh, heh. We've been had. Bigtime, as Cheney would say. And all the "leaks" lefty bloggers printed on the Plame case?

Ultimately, they were orchestrated by Rove and the GOP.

So much for the power of blogs. All the GOP needed for this whole shebang was one guy. A prosecutor who needn't recuse himself; someone who would play the dress-up game, performing an elaborate prolonged drama -- a drama that ultimately turned out to be a pantomime-- and they got him.

Merry Fizzlemas.