Did Robert Novak willfully disregard warnings that his column would endanger Valerie Plame?
Murray Waas in The American Prospect reports that Robert Novak was asked specifically not to name Valerie Plame but did so in the face of that request (admonition?).
Two government officials have told the FBI that conservative columnist Robert Novak was asked specifically not to publish the name of undercover CIA operative Valerie Plame in his now-famous July 14 newspaper column. The two officials told investigators they warned Novak that by naming Plame he might potentially jeopardize her ability to engage in covert work, stymie ongoing intelligence operations, and jeopardize sensitive overseas sources.
For an investigation of this magnitude and duration you have to wonder why there has been so little about it in the press. Here's why . . .
Over the past several months, the FBI has interviewed more than 30 Bush administration officials and has reviewed phone logs, personal calendars, and e-mail records, according to government sources. But Attorney General John Ashcroft tightly controlled information gathered during the probe, requiring FBI agents to sign unprecedented nondisclosure agreements that say they could face immediate termination if they speak to the press. As a result, scant information about the leak investigation has appeared in the media, making it all but disappear as a political issue for the Bush administration until the disclosure last week that a federal grand jury had been convened to hear evidence in the matter.
Could we see the beginning of an implosion in the conservative firmament, both in the White House and among the pundits? Mutual allegations!! How delicious!!!
It appears that the FBI is really taking the incident seriously and that indictments are going to occur. You have to wonder what Karl Rove is thinking about now when W could have made it all go away and gotten credit for being a straight-shooter who doesn't shrink from disciplining his own miscreants months ago, even as late as December when Aschcroft recused himself. At this time, if he announces tomorrow that he has identified and obtained the resignation of XYZ he gets as much credit for the action as he gives Kadaffi for renouncing WMD --it was the show of force that led to the change of heart.
Posted by Donald Douglas at February 12, 2004 06:10 PM