Doesn't the CIA have caller id?

I've got questions.

How many of the other journalists contacted by the leaker went and contacted the CIA to confirm or deny Mrs. Wilsons ID?

Exactly how many copies of an agents file are kept? Is there more than one place, say a computer file and a hard copy? Back-ups? Isn't there a log-in or sign-in required for all of them?

Would Mr. Wilson's own employee file have a classified part that has his wife's real occupation?

When did Mr. Wilson make it known that he was going to write about his trip and debunk the Whitehouse?

Who knew the content of his story before it was printed?

What kind of time line was there between thought of writing the article and Novaks slime attack?

I just can't believe that article stating "hundreds" could have known about her.

Who requested files on Mrs. Wilson?

Does the WH have a database accessible only by high ranking people that can tap into CIA databases?

Wouldn't the CIA have records on every request for information on an employee, no matter what manner of communication was used?

I still refuse to believe the CIA would or could do anymore than respond to an inquiry with "Don't print" or "Do whatever you want." Novaks long winded version of the CIA confirmation has me bewildered.

I just don't get why they are making this out to be so hard. And if it really is true that hundreds may have known, I find that particularly scary. But for some reason, I think it's just more spin.

His impossibly gargantuan ego was played when he was favored with this interesting tidbit. He was so flattered to consider himself among the power brokers of this world instead of a pompous psychophant that his judgement went into suspended animation and he became a tool of the criminals in the junta. There is no privelege to protect evidence of criminal wrongdoing under the first amendment. Mr. Novak could be going to the slammer for an unspecified period. That is if there were a genuine effort to get to the bottom of this affair.

and that even a confession would have to include more than the fellow knew she was CIA when he outed her - he had to know she was an operative.

Interesting to see them all in lockstep preparing folks for the no-crime here memo Ashcroft has already written and will release next June.

But the term I'm referring to is for contempt of court for failure to disclose the sources. Some sort of legal action would have to be institigated first to yield the appropriate subpoena.