Ben Bradlee Defends Woodward's Actions in Plame Case

Former Washington Post Executive Editor Ben Bradlee today defended Bob Woodward, who revealed in a story Wednesday that he waited more than two years before disclosing to current Post editors a conversation he had in 2003 with a White House official about CIA Agent Valerie Plame.

"I don't see anything wrong with that," said Bradlee, who ran the Post during the turbulent Watergate coverage that made Woodward famous. "He doesn't have to disclose every goddamn thing he knows."

Woodward had shown Bradlee a copy of his statement on Tuesday before it was published. And he explained: "Woodward never has 'no involvement' because he is who he is."

Bradlee, who retired in 1991, but still maintains an office at the paper, made his comments following a story in today's Post about Woodward's recent testimony before special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald. The story revealed that Woodward testified Monday in a two-hour deposition before Fitzgerald, in which he disclosed that "a senior administration official told him about CIA operative Valerie Plame and her position at the agency nearly a month before her identity was disclosed." The story also revealed, however, that Woodward did not disclose this conversation to Executive Editor Leonard Downie Jr., until last month.

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001522433

but does NOT let anyone know he is part of it, YOU ARE DAMN RIGHT HE NEEDS TO DISCLOSE, OR NOT SAY ANYTHING about the case

investigation. Big difference.

can you write Bradlee what you just asked and see if you get a response? I think you brought up a very important point.

and if you are an honest and moral person
you don't stand by with information that
leads to the person who committed a crime.

period.

Not that they had much anymore,anyway.

What is with these "newspapers of record" playing sycophant and cover-your-ass-whilst-doing-it to the freaking Bush administration?

Jesus! We have got to get corporations out of the "reporting" business! Our media is sooooo corrupted with these lazy, greedy assholes.

Pravda(s) on the Potomac.

Do they know that we all see them as tools and they look absolutely ridiculous trying to defend their actions????

Or are cover-ups all the rage this season.:eyes:

as Woodward, especially since he divorced his first wife to marry his desperately upwardly-mobile wife, Sally Quinn -- who, oddly, set herself up in the Clinton years as not only the social, but the moral, arbiter of D.C.

I couldn't stand how Sally would be trotted out to commentate about the high mucky-mucks in the mucky-muck D.C. social scene. As if we peasants were hanging on her every golden word...

aiding and abetting a crime. It is one thing when a reporter is told by a confidential source about the nefarious activities of government officials. It is quite another thing when a reporter is used to conduct an act of political retribution - as Libby et al did with their campaign to punish Joe Wilson by destroying his wife's career in the CIA.

Fitzgerald made this distinction CRYSTAL CLEAR in his press stmt after Libby's indictment.

The reporters were the agents used to commit the crimes. To the extent that these individuals (the reporters) were aware how they were being used they are, at least ethically if not legally, complicit in the crimes committed.

No wonder Bob 'suckass'' Woodward doesn't think the Plame affair is any big deal. How could he think otherwise?

"I don't see anything wrong with that," said Bradlee, who ran the Post during the turbulent Watergate coverage that made Woodward famous. "He doesn't have to disclose every goddamn thing he knows."

THat is just sooo wrong on every level.

eom.

maliciousness of intent and the damage done to Plame and he sat there and DID NOTHING!!!

Ben you sticking up for him shows your a pathetic American!!!

A crime was commited guys and you stood and watched!!!

It is silly to paint with so broad a brush and on one dumb comment by Bradlee.

Woodward, on the other hand, hasn't been much of an investigative reporter for years, and functioned as Bush mouthpiece far too often.

Fuck this "insider" shit. I hate these bastards, Bradlee still thinks this is 1963 and journalists can still credibly cozy up to the powerful (as him with Kennedy), hear and keep their dirty personal and political laundry private and help mantain their power and privilege.

Kennedy was an insider, par excellence. Bradley couldn't kiss enough of his ass. I hope this whole fuckin' thing blows up in his and Booby's faces.

white house to-do's.. This is why old media was better..they were truly OUTSIDERS, feared by the politicians.. they were mostly white collar guys..middle class guys hungry for a takedown story..

The ones we have these days are millionaire friends of the powerful. They are golf buddies, dinnerparty pals..neighbors to the rich and powerful.. They have more in common with the people the report on, than most of their subscribers, and it shows..

They protect their sources, but not for the reasons that rule is there. It's supposed to allow honest people to come forward so the TRUTH can come out.. NOT so that propagandists can spew venomous nonsense without having to take the fall for their lies.

Okay, Benjy--and we don't have to listen to a goddamn thing he or his paper say. And we don't have to buy his goddamn books.

:evilgrin:

peace

The problem is, he'll just tell it to us in about five different (and mutually exclusive) versions!