Woodward: CIA leak not Bush

Will someone stuff a dirty sock in this guy's yap, please?

http://www.news24.com/News24/World/News/0,,2-10-1462_1838399,00.html

Washington - Reporter Bob Woodward, caught up in a scandal over the outing of a CIA agent, made clear that the president, vice-president and defence secretary had not divulged the spy's name to him.

In a lengthy interview with CNN, Washington Post reporter Woodward made clear that it was neither President George W Bush, vice-president Richard Cheney nor defence secretary Donald Rumsfeld who had revealed to him that the wife of an Iraq war critic worked undercover for the CIA.

He also indicated that his secret source was male, which clears secretary of state Condoleezza Rice and close Bush confidante Karen Hughes.

<snip>

"And so, I asked about Wilson, and he said this," Woodward said, revealing the source's gender.

...more...

This smarmy little game that Bozo Bob is playing get more disgusting every day.

At this point I don't think Woodward is a reliable historian.

I hope Fitz jails him for contempt if he keeps this up.

to Fitzgerald.

He's said several times that it's the public he's not released to tell his source's name to, not the prosecutor, and that he's told the prosecutor his source's (sources'?) name(s).

It was in fact bush.

Woodward lied before to cover their asses, what makes you think he is Joe Honest now.

Cheers
Drifter

I, too, think it's Boo$h.

finds the guy? what a dolt.

The source went to Fitz after Libby was indicted. The source told Woodward that he could testify about what the source said and Woodward did. But the source didn't give Woodward permission to tell the public who he was.

next book is going to sell better after all of this free publicity?

Bob may be getting free publicity, but its in the wrong direction, he's gotta be even turning the freepers off by now.

Fitz ought to pitch this garbage in the dumpster and tell the world that this man is completely insane.

well as positive publicity.

Rove was very close by.

Or just a desire for the spotlight? Something smells really bad.

What ever the cause of his actions is, it has ruined his credibility.
When I put my tin foil hat on, I see him under some kind of threat to keep his mouth shut. There seems to be a hidden story behind the public story we are seeing.

Not long ago there was an article posted regarding the Plame-gate investigation. I can't remember who all was involved in the interview, but I remember it quoting Lou Dobbs as saying he hoped it would remain under wraps - not his exact words.

I'm so sick of "elitist" journalists attempting to "save us from the truth". But then, think of who their masters are these days. Journalist and the media are no longer the watchdogs for the public, but rather the publicity puppets of the corporations that own and/or advertise with them.

Bloggers scare the crap out of them, which is why bloggers are made out to be :tinfoilhat: The majority of Murikans still get their news from the MSM to base their opinions on. There aren't a lot of people who research the net. They get their news from MSM or their stupid AOL or MSN homepage. I heard the front page of AOL today was about Brittany Spears! :eyes:

If the truth came out there might be rioting in the streets. There almost certainly would be calls for investigating what other crooked deeds this mal-admin has been up to, elections, illegal war, Medicare fiasco, almost got away with killing SS, surplus converted to the largest deficit in history in the first 2 or 3 years of this mal-admin, the list goes on and on and on. Then the complacency/in cahoots of the media comes out. Not good for an economy already balancing on the edge of a recession. Shit, it the end it's all about money and greed.

Bush was their (the Corporatists) man. Everything was perfect, set for a sweet, easy ride. They failed to realize Bush could be such a f-up. They're so deep in it all they've got no choice but to try and cover for him.

I'm breakin' out the tinfoil now. :tinfoilhat:

...for the right wing. And his good journalism of the past is all wiped out by his toadyism to the Bush cabal.

Too bad. NOT!

It's definitely Bush.

Compare this to the analysis over at dKos:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/11/22/84126/090

Which makes a compelling case that Woodward's source might indeed be Bush himself.

I scanned the transcript and can't see how the reporter (whoever it is since it's unsourced) could have come to the conclusion that Woodward *clearly* exonerated Bush. Even Cheney is only removed from the list via an indirect route by combining when the leak happened with his statement that he didn't interview Cheney during that period. I haven't looked closely enough w.r.t. Rumsfield, but there aren't many people who think he was involved anyways.

So am I crazy or is this article just completely nuts?

:hi:

Yes, indeed, this article is poorly written and is designed just add "chatter" to the mix.

Anyone read Plan of Attack? I'd like to see what credits he gave to Powell.

It's like he can't help himself.

Either tell the world who gave you the information, or get off the airwaves and shut up.

having invented this story from whole cloth. He has zero credibility at this point - I trust nothing he says...

What a sad spectacle this has become. One of the most respected names in journalism now resorting to parlor games, when it is clear to me that he was a willing participant in a federal offense. And why, since he has such inside access, did he never share this information with his readers?

in addition, if he was told not to reveal his source, and then he reveals who it isn't, that shows that he cannot be trusted

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2004/09/16/tsurumi/in...

Students who challenged and embarrassed Bush in class would then become the subject of a whispering campaign by him, Tsurumi said. "In class, he couldn't challenge them. But after class, he sometimes came up to me in the hallway and started bad-mouthing those students who had challenged him. He would complain that someone was drinking too much. It was innuendo and lies. So that's how I knew, behind his smile and his smirk, that he was a very insecure, cunning and vengeful guy."

Boy o boy Woodward just loves the attention.

Its all about him!!!

Is it bigger than a breadbox? Why would Woodward first say that the source wanted it to be "confidential", then proceed to name everyone it isn't? Isn't that revealing the name as well? Just say it's Stephen Hadley & get over it.

from him while selectively divulging facts. Fuck you.

:eyes:

with the Sealed Documents...

crap...it's definitely male...

(checks boxes on leaflet)