So much for the Plame outing
 

She was not outed by the administration (by that I mean the President, VP or his direct staff)
She was not outed as revenge
She was not outed to damage her life and her husbands

More where all this comes from

People were SO eager to buy into the story because they wanted to believe it- so much for that.

Presidents fault for not cleaning house when he first came into office....what was he thinking keeping so many people who despised him?

At least the truth is coming out now.....not that it will matter much because the mainstream media won't cover this angle anywhere near to the extent it covered the angle that was negative to the admin.

It's just not as much fun unless it's conspiratorial and revenge motivated.

Don't forget this key part fo the article - Wilson completely botched his investigation in Africa. He blew it. Whether intentionally or not....probably will never be known for sure, but I have my suspicions, and I'm sure everyone can guess what they are.

I don't think you'll see that particular aspect played up either. Because that would back up the original reason for invasion of Iraq - WMD and attempt to restart and/or further WMD programs.

Are you talking about an article on freaking "Slate"???

Sorry, but I'm not about to turn knowledge upside down based on that alone. Richard Armitage being Novak's source is one thing (Novak has given prior indications), but on what basis and whose say-so is Slate claiming that the Wilson investigation in Niger was botched? There's gonna have to be some pretty expert evidence as to that charge.

And it still doesn't explain Scooter Libby's involvement, or why he would be lying to federal investigators about the doings in the Vice-President's office for the sake of covering the fukups of bloody Richard Armitage at the State Department.

I can't speak to other wranglings, but the story about it being Armitage is everywhere and pretty widely accepted and well within Novak's description of someone who was "not a partisan gun slinger".

As far as Wilson botching the investigation and lying, we've been over it many times before with sources cited, and nothing is going to go anywhere with it, so there's no point.

Huh? I thought this was going to be about some sort of meet somewhere named "Plame."

Now GC.....should the story right now be that it was in fact Rove leaked her name with vengence on his mind, instead of Armitage all on his own who immediately reported it to Powell as a big boo-boo, do you still think it would be beating that same dead horse? I think not.

Oh, I don't think dead horse. That Armitage is finally confirmed as the source of the Novak leak is indeed fresh news ... and does indeed change the nature of what we Libs thought was going on.

Not 100%, mind you, because the V.P.'s office was still clearly involved in other leaks that, just because they weren't first, does not make them legal.

But I'll freely admit the nefarious conspiracy theories have not proved to play out according to our most salacious imaginings.

no- it's only a dead horse now that it did not yield the revelation of some evil intent in the administration.

wow-did not expect this.

Apologists of this administration can stretch themselves all the way to the Clinton administration to find blame, but would not even fathom looking at the current VP's office for any sort of wrong doing. Libby was the VP's man, someone who spoke with the VP often. But there's no blame for the VP? How can that be? Everything that leaves the White House is also the responsibility of Rove to insure that the message is correct. How can Rove not be to blame either?
A CIA operative was outed. It was wrong for anyone to do it. It was done. But there's apparently no one to blame.

But what I am saying here is no surprise. It's the same thing I have been saying all along. What this thread is about is about going in circles. Thus the dead horse. It's totally a dead horse to me, Bush does no wrong, no one in his administration has any sort of accountability... long live the king.

No one to blame? It was Armitage. I'm not sure I follow you.

Pardon me if I'm not so quick to put all of the blame on Armitage. Last I heard, he wasn't one of Matthew Cooper's sources. Rove and Libby were. Perhaps it's all just a big happy misunderstanding but, until I hear otherwise from someone a little less partisan than Christoper Hitchens, a self avowed neocon, I'm going to remain suspicious that perhaps we haven't heard the whole story yet.

I do find the self-righteous indignation very entertaining, considering so many of the neo's found this (originally) not worth discussing. Suddenly, y'all want to talk. I'm with MBC- watchful waiting here.

I still don't think it is a big story - regarding the supposed outing of Plame. The big story is that it certainly seems as if the conspiracy theory developed of revenge for a so-called (but laughable) investigation of Iraq seeking uranium is not true. And so many wanted it to be true.

I still think Novak should be charged with treason.:mad:

It was Professor Plum, in the conservatory, with the candlestick :p

An interesting point.

I have oft pondered what is the appropriate balance between freedom of the press and classified or sensitive information. Is the job of the journalist to report everything they discover (without specific requests from the government to hold a story, as happens on occasion)? Or is there a responsibility to reflect on the ramifications of reporting certain things?

Hold on a minute there. The Armitage leak does not make the Libby leak somehow 'go away.' What were the motives of the vice-president's office? (oh, and the Niger documents were rank forgeries, according to British, Italian, Israeli and American investigators ... so where are you getting any of your facts if not from conservative spin rags?)


As for whether journalists have a responsibility to consider the ramifications of publishing sensitive information ... certainly, they do. They fail at it quite often. But in a free society, I'm much more comfortable with that responsibility being in the hands of journalists rather than in the fists of government. The misjudgments and mistakes have to be accepted as part and parcel of the freedoms that protect us from fascism.

Hitchens is not the source for the story, he is responding to the story. Time (or Newsweek) broke the story. But I haven't taken the time to read that or much of the other writing on it since so I don't have an opinion yet.

Rank forgeries? Must have been from CBS and Dan Rather then.

When I have time I'll look up the stuff again. Deleted the bookmarks long ago.

Here ya go- take your pick for source: Niger forgeries

There's so much finger pointing going on in this thread I'm starting to get virtual bruises.

took my title from the source I found-

WASH POST: It's unfortunate so many people took Joe Wilson seriously...