"Harry Hope" <rivrvu@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:gt66s0h2ik7fne1rhv8ovis3utlnmar024@4ax.com...

Like the rest of your delusions, it just evaporated into thin air.

LOL

"Harry Hope" <rivrvu@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:gt66s0h2ik7fne1rhv8ovis3utlnmar024@4ax.com...



Like the rest of your delusions, it just evaporated into thin air.


LOL


Jim E

Harry Hope wrote:

From The Tahlequah Daily Press, 12/17/04:

http://www.tahlequahdailypress.com/articles/2004/12/17/news/editorial/aaaaaaanovak.txt

Why isn't Novak in jail, too?


You can't have it both ways.

Not even if your name is Robert Novak.

When it comes to dirty tricks and unethical behavior, this

ultra-right

pundit skates about as close to the "evil" line as you can get

without

sprouting a pair of horns.

If he engaged in that kind of behavior in these parts, a couple of
folks might be tempted to use their "one free killin'" on him.

For those who are (mercifully) so sheltered they haven't had to

endure

this pompous blowhard on CNN's "The Capital Gang," he's the one who

in

2003 outed a CIA spy by the name of Valeria Plame.

Coincidentally, she's the wife of former U.S. Ambassador Joseph
Wilson, who had been openly critical of Bush's Iraq policy, and who
revealed how Bush ignored evidence that there were no WMDs.

It was obvious to Washington insiders that Novak published Plame's
name at the behest of someone close to the Bush administration, as
retaliation for her husband's temerity.

Many suspect Bush handler Karl Rove.

Competition being what it is, it wasn't long before other journalists
followed Novak's lead and published Plame's name.

But since it's illegal for government officials to name spooks, and
since Novak admits he got his information from high-level White House
sources, questions were naturally raised about who let the cat out of
the bag.

Subpoenas were issued, and lately, two reporters - Judith Miller of
the New York Times and Matthew Cooper of Time magazine - have been
cooling their heels in jail for refusing to disclose who leaked the
operative's name to them.

What happened to Novak?

Apparently nothing.

News stories continue to follow the cases of other journalists who
were subpoenaed for simply repeating Novak's information - and even
those who didn't actually use Plame's name.

But there's nary a word about any ramifications for the source of all
this grief.

According to the Los Angeles Times, Novak's ability to circumvent any
pressure to reveal his sources, while others are ordered to due so
under penalty of hoosegow, is the source of much speculation among

the

media.

They offer several theories.

Perhaps Novak was subpoenaed but refused to testify.

Those in the know consider this unlikely, since Novak's zeal for
self-promotion is legendary.

Miller and Cooper are now touted as "First Amendment heroes" for
refusing to testify, and those who know Novak say he would trip all
over himself to secure the martyr's mantle.

The Times points out Novak could have involved his Fifth Amendment
rights and stayed mum, or he might have received immunity for his
testimony.

That would apply if he were a criminal suspect, which legal experts
also consider unlikely.

The person who gave him the information broke the law, not Novak
himself.

On the other hand, if Novak were a suspect who had received immunity,
his Fifth Amendment protection would evaporate, and the prosecutors
would have the information they needed.

Why would they continue to fish?

Many journalists believe Novak - who has no real credibility with
anyone except the most ardent ultra-rightists - has already spilled
his guts to prosecutors.

Again, though, one must wonder why the investigation continues, and
why there have been no arrests.

And finally, some think Novak himself is a target of the probe.

This is perhaps wishful thinking, but it might explain certain

actions

on the part of prosecutors.

As for us, we're going with a fifth theory proposed by the Times:

That the Bush administration has ordered prosecutors to steer clear

of

any punitive action against their favorite media bedfellow.

Whatever happens in this case, it will certainly be included in media
case law of the future.

It will also reopen discussions about how far a journalist should go
to protect a source, and whether journalists should allow themselves
to be used as toadies by government officials.

National media icons spend far too much time these days cozying up to
elected officials.

That's a disservice to the public, and a dark chapter in history for
the Fourth Estate.

__________________________________________________________

Harry

Why are they hitting on the journalists??
Why not just put Karl River under oath and ASK HIM -- the way
they did Clinton. Karl has no immunity -- except of course
George would instantly pardon him because George can hardly
exist without Karl's brain.