As a side note: wasn't Mrs. Wilson at one point the director of the CIA's Iraq unit? I seem to recall something (in Salon, actually) about how the Iraq operation in the CIA was expanded shortly before 9/11 and how Wilson was made a director of a unit with something like fifty agents dedicated to it. I may be recalling the details wrong, but this was the gist. If so, then I would not be surprised if she was behind at least some of the evidence that Saddam Hussein, in fact, neither has any "nukular" stuff, nor is trying to get it, nor is in cahoots with Osama bin Laden. If THAT was the case, then her outing seems much less an attempt to discredit her somewhat less influential husband, but rather a move to silence HER. And a method of retribution.

Maybe this is a nutty idea, for all the brouhaha around the leak, I haven't seen anyone suggest that maybe Mrs. Wilson herself, rather than her husband, was the target. (Of course, that would imply that she DID send him to Niger, but hey.)

Did you read Novak's column today? In it, he trashes Armitage's claim that he "accidently blabed", by indicating that Armitage was very clear about the information and said that while he could not name the source that it would be "perfect material for his column."

What Novak doesn't speculate on is *why* Armitage was trying to get him to print it. Either Novak is lying or there's another shoe left to drop.

If Novak is telling the truth, it leaves open the distinct possibility that in spite of Armitage's "closeness" to Powell and the other "lefties" in the administration, that he was actually recruited by Cheney/Libby to be the initial leak!

It might sound like a conspiracy theory, but what other explanation is there for Novak's claims?

Who is hiding? All those liars are covering their asses now thatthe truth seems to leak out. Finally. But where are the prosecutors? That should answer it!