Andy Card is 2nd (of 3) WH officials that Woodward spoke to

Card to be named in tomorrow's paper, according to the Wash Post editor just on CNN with Wolf. 1st was Libby. Both, seemingly, didn't mention Plame, so candidate number 3 was the talker.

The 3rd person, still unamed (Hadley?), spoke to Fitz, and released Woodward to testify before the Grand Jury, but has not released Woodward to publish his identity.

This time, I wish Tweety and Spitball were right!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/16/AR2005111601286.html

Woodward said today he had gotten permission from one of his sources, White House chief of staff Andrew H. Card Jr., to disclose that he had testified that their June 20, 2003 conversation did not involve Plame, the wife of administration critic Joseph C. Wilson IV. He said he had "pushed" his other administration source, without success, to allow him to discuss that person's identity, but that the source has insisted that the waiver applies only to Woodward's testimony.

seemed to think it was news?

To me, the most important revelation by Woodward was that source #3 revealed Plame's role/identity in a very offhanded casual manner.

To me, that says that #3 was trying to not raise flags, but to slip the info in without suspicion. Surely #3 knew it was classified info, but his cavalier disemination of the info means something.

they had been talking about it amongst themselves often enough that it seemed "familiar" and the natural cautiosness had faded.

sit around the back room talking about who to knock off next -- doesn't matter if they didn't consider it a big deal, it's still illegal.

I hope Fitz really nails the whole dirty lot of 'em

OK, so whose this asshole Wilson that I keep hearing about? Yeah, the one with the sexy blonde babe. Both of them are assholes. Get 'em.

I think these schmucks were just so completely arrogant about their apparent omnipotence and untouchability that they felt there wasn't that much NEED to be too cautious. After all, they had EVERYBODY - the House, the Senate, THE MEDIA - EVERYBODY, and at that time, an angry and scared-out-of-its-wits majority of the American people after 9/11 - everybody wanting to "unite behind the president" and give bush the UNQUALIFIED benefit of the doubt. ANYONE who hesitated or tried to speak out or protest or object in any way was shouted down, bullied, demonized, and lacerated to shreds by the wrong-wing media loudmouths as being unamerican and unpatriotic and traitorous and Neville Chamberlains and Saddam lovers and Osama lovers and all the rest of it. Just ask Max Cleland about that Osama lover smear - that cost him his Senate seat. It was POWERFUL and at the time NO ONE DARED to make too much of a fuss about it.

AND THESE GUYS KNEW IT. SO I bet they just figured the coast was clear, PERMANENTLY, and because they did own everything as far as the eye can see, they didn't have to worry. THEY HAD ALREADY STACKED THE DECK TO MAKE SURE THEY WOULD GET AWAY WITH WHATEVER THEY NEEDED TO GET AWAY WITH.

Who was there to give them grief about this?

Brokaw? Jennings? Rather? Koppel? Russert? Stephanopolous? Blitzer? Matthews? ANYBODY? Larry King? ANYBODY?

AND THEY KNEW IT. It was gonna be clear sailing from then on, because they had their opponents face-down on the mat and everybody everywhere scrambling unquestioningly onto their bandwagon. When all you have railing against you is Boondocks and Gary Trudeau and "some nuts on the net," honestly, what do you care? They're nobodies, after all, and everybody else is piling on - on YOUR TEAM. So you're set, aren't you?

And they KEPT getting away with it for so frickin' long, I think they just got lazy and let their arrogance run away with them. They just assumed it was always gonna be this way, and they were just going to KEEP ON getting away with whatever it was. I suspected this the instant I saw bush taking those early questions about the leak case, and how he smirked his milquetoast lackadaisical response, oh-so-casually - well, we may never know who the leaker is... I'd like to know... He was CLEARLY not feeling any urgency OR any outrage. NOW I understand why. He knew EXACTLY what they'd pulled. Probably, judging from what I remember of his facial expressions, he was working extremely hard to keep a straight face and not give away his true feelings (and I don't think he did such a great job - seemed pretty damned obvious to me). I still remember shouting - "WHAT THE FUCK DO YOU MEAN 'WE MAY NEVER FIND OUT WHO THE LEAKER IS?!?!?!?!?!"

on junior's face, when he said, "we may never know who the leaker is.. I'd like to know...this is a big big staff" then he looked around the table like he was trying to find the culprit. It was so phony it stunk to high heaven.

Now the human memory game comes into play.

Ted Wells is playing it for all its worth. This guys come out like cock-a-roaches at the first smell of something rotten.

How can they claim to not be concerned with secret CIA prisons around the world (only the leaking of their existence)? And how can they be openly advocating an exemption to torture???

This is why they HAVE to win, and they will do anything to win (elections).

odd huh? To make a point of who *didn't* tell him?

they didn't mention Plame? I don't get it.

Perhaps Woodward testified about all meetings with WH officials during June 2003, and the other 2 came up?

word. Not one. Not until I give you written permission you understand?

If these guys can obstruct and obsfucate, so can I.

only different.

Woodward and the WaPo editor (keep forgetting his forgettable name) are actually saying that confidential sources are critical to keep, so they really honor them.

Well... except... these aint whistleblowers, these are the CRIMINALS that they are protecting.

It was a crime, maybe Fitz will go after Woodward for aiding and abetting? Because the Sr. Admin Offish who told him about Plame committed a crime, and Woodward, by the end of October this year, knew full well that was the case, and still waited until #3 spoke to Fitz first before he told anyone anything

(and his silly editor believes this was "the first time" Woodward has done anything like this... yeah...)

the hook? I can't tell if this is good for them or not!

It only invigorates Fitzgerald's investigation imho.

He's been indicted for lying.

Whether or not he was guilty of being the first to disclose a covert agent's identity, or the fourth, he still screwed up by being caught lying to a Grand Jury. There's not really anything that can come out that would change that (they have two sworn, contradictory statements from him).

exactly HOW MANY White House senior officials talked to the press about Plame?

I'd be greatly bothered by this, if I were him.