Time: "What Viveca Novak Told Fitzgerald"

In the next several minutes I will be assembling a list of pointers to the already considerable analysis of this pathetic story -- made even more pathetic by the details that remain unstated by a failed and unethical journalist.


Peace.

Viv is just one big bucket of poison ...


Peace.

... spent the past few years lying to the Washington Post?

Another great post by Jane at firedoglake:

http://firedoglake.blogspot.com/2005_12_01_firedoglake_archive.html#113442242607540843


Peace.

What Viveca Novak Told Fitzgerald about Rove and Luskin

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/12/11/94156/302

with this tidbit:

Correction: Dec. 10, 2005, Saturday:

An article on Dec. 2 about the C.I.A. leak investigation misstated a word in a quotation from an article about the case that appeared on Time magazine's Web site in July 2003. The Time article said "some government officials" - not "some administration officials" - had told Time and the syndicated columnist Robert Novak that "Valerie Plame is a C.I.A. official who monitors the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction." (Later developments in the leak case revealed that in fact the information had been disclosed by administration officials, I. Lewis Libby Jr. and Karl Rove.)

Wonder how many folk who've published leaker Luskin's stuff are a tad upset today ...


Peace.

Couldn't get past the 1st page. Too many of those paragraphs read like a damn soap opera, or Peyton Place without the sex. Yuck. No journalistic objectivity and distance for Viveca, huh?

I guess those are old-fashioned values no longer in fashion, or something.

In any case, the little I read was too disgusting. I can't go on.

Just what Rove does to Luskin will be one of the rather interesting sideline events in the coming months ...


Peace.

<snip>

But as it turns out, just for the sake of stalling Rove's indictment for a month or two, Luskin has torched Novak's career with Time (which notes as the end of her article that she is on a mutually agreed "leave of absence"). It seems that Viveca didn't tell her bosses about her chats with Luskin to begin with, nor even when she first was interviewed by Fitzgerald -- and when she did admit her involvement after being asked to testify under oath, they weren't happy.

There should be an object lesson there for Washington, D.C. reporters playing the "access journalism" game ... the sources who you're covering up for even as they give you lies and personal smears will burn you in the blink of an eye if it helps them in the slightest.

Then again, that seems to be a larger message that the Bushites are all too happy to send to the media. What the latter thought was merely an occasionally distasteful exchange of information was really a blackmail ring. In the Corleone administration, reporters aren't expected to keep quiet out of duty to the First Amendment -- they're expected to do so because they'll be destroyed by any means possible if they don't.

<snip>

I have so many questions:

What is it with professional journalists not being able to pin down something as simple as a date or where they heard "Valerie Flame"?

"Well, maybe it was January, or maybe it was May. Although, we did talk five times beginning in October of 2003. Sure, now that you mention it, it could have been March, also. Hmmm. I wonder when that was. I remember the whole conversation, but can't pin it down to a particular month or YEAR!"

Oy.

When did that e-mail really first appear to KKKarl and Luskin? In other words (TFH) what if they knew about it the whole time? Regardless, not coughing it up for at least five months in the best case scenario is bad news for KKKarl, no matter how you slice it.

Whose side is Luskin on? As I wondered aloud the other night, and people much brighter than I also scratch their heads at, why would you put up such a flimsy risky defense? Moving the clock back to allow more time for the recantation defense is nice and all, but Vivica's story ended up contradicting Luskin's own (well-kept secret of a) depostion. Ooopsie!

When was KKKarl's real second GJ appearance? Was it sometime between Feb and Oct, 2004? If so, and KKKarl STILL didn't disclose the email, again, oopsie!

How would Luskin know to mention Cooper in March if the subpoena specific to Cooper/Libby wasn't until May? I did see some discussion of this at thenexthurrah.com:

http://thenexthurrah.typepad.com/the_next_hurrah/2005/12/what_vivnovka_t.html#more

"Note what Luskin said closely. "Karl doesn't have a Cooper problem." He didn't say, "Karl's safe on this" or "Karl didn't talk to anyone;" he mentioned Cooper directly. Well, how did he know to raise the issue of Cooper? When records of conversations with Cooper were subpoenaed in January 2004, he was named along with several other Time reporters. So there'd be no way for Luskin to know, independently, that Cooper was the one who had received the WH leak. It wouldn't be until May 2004, when Cooper was subpoenaed, that Luskin could independently say, "Karl doesn't have a Cooper problem" as a way to spin Karl's innocence."

Thanks for the good work as always, ul!

More than anything, DU often helps to assure me that just because I can't figure something out right away, I'm not really stupid, it's just really that fucked up.

:)

... confused/perplexed about that one!

Sometimes I think Luskin has the most prominently displayed death-wish of any person in recent history.

And, I'm right there with you regarding "... DU often helps to assure me that just because I can't figure something out right away, I'm not really stupid, but it's that fucked up."

"It" (and that includes many categories of stuff) really is a colossal mess Bush and his neoconster buddies and their enablers have created -- just orders of magnitude mind-boggling. Millions of people are going to spend their entire career(s) repairing what these criminals have done.


Peace.

who the heck do "reporters" answer to these days? Clearly not the editors. This is not a good thing for the free press.

"confidentiality." As a journalist she doesn't have any confidentiality regarding whatever she blabbed to Luskin. She's just pissed that she stuck her foot in it and she could no longer keep it from her bosses and the prosecutors.

Also interesting is that her admission that if she told her editor, the word would get out. Just as apparently it did with what Cooper told his editor. (So much for journalists protecting "confidentiality" of info and sources.) Which underscores for me that journalists know a hell of a lot more than they ever let on even while spinning administration stories and other pablum for public consumption. Recall journalists giving info to Joseph Wilson. Some unnamed and others like Tweety and Andrea Mitchell. Libby and Rover knew if they leaked to journalists the info would get passed around even by those who didn't print it and thus create the "everyone knew" aura that Mitchell, for one, claimed. Although she recently tied herself up in contortions trying to "explain" her earlier statements regarding that "common knowledge" when it became clear it wasn't at all common knowledge in the media until the Administration started chatting to the press about it. Which makes it even more odd that Big Tim Russert, a quintessential DC insider, was out of the loop from the evident scuttlebutt even if he wasn't a direct recipient of a leak.

because he's mad at her too, for writing about it. :)

Remember Woodward's reason for not having come forward? He said he was trying to avoid being subpoenaed.

... is Rove. He's assembled a vast network of exceptionally skillful propagandists, he's got maestros like Rendon, and slue of other psy-ops, mis-information experts creating and coordinating the "message."

Guys like Pinch Sulzberger and Bill Keller are as much a part of the neoconster regime as Feith, Perle, Judith and all the rest of 'um.

If it weren't for the internet, the citizen activism and information exchange it has enabled, along with a number of senior government professionals like Mr. Fitzgerald, we'd have zero chance of bringing these criminals to justice peacefully.

We've met the enemy of our Republic and they currently are spending our money living in places like the White House and Naval Observatory. We'll still be supporting them when they are in prison, but at a significantly lower cost and vastly reduced risk to the well-being of humanity and the planet.


Peace.

That would imply that the journalists in question were honest and decent, up until about 2000, and then were transformed into skunks. If we take Bob Woodward alone, we find that model doesn't work. Look behind the puppet; focus on the puppeteer.

As regards the issue of puppeters -- the Bush crime family, Carlyle group, Cheney's Halliburton/Bechtel/... buddies, Ahmanson & Scaife, authors of "Clean Break" and their "Likud collaborators," .... for want of a better term, what I call the Neoconster Board of Directors.

Cheney is a member of the "executive committee" of that BoD, but I don't think he's the Chairman.

The Franklin case, the Abramoff case. and the Plame case may begin to reveal the composition of that BoD. Most Americans don't know the names Scaife and Ahmanson. Even among those that do, the name Bruce Kovner is likely not to be familiar. If Bruce is not Chairman of the Neoconster BoD, he's Vice Chair.

I agree with your wise advice -- "Look behind the puppet; focus on the puppeteer." Rove pulls a bunch of strings; but he's got more than one string attached to him that others control and GW Bush ain't one of those puppeters.


Peace.

I like it. Has more flair than "the committee."

... meetings you may enjoy:




Peace.

Is this the best that a Rhodes Scholar/Harvard Law Review guy can do?

I think he's made a bad error in judgment with a lousy case: The Hail Mary. Risky as this is on a perfect day, my goodness, don't do it if you don't know what will happen with you bombshell -- you have to call a play aiming for a touchdown. I'm sure it was a Mylanta Moment when he found out Vivica's testimony was contradictory to his. Even first year law students know not to ask the question if you don't already know the answer. If there was a chance she'd refer to any other meeting as a possibility, he should have known/expected that and countered it.

It will take years to unravel and years to correct the crimes and injustices this administration is responsible for. Some things will never be made right.

I see that Swopa has noticed the significance of the "I have known this for months ...":



Well, it's beyond highly likely that Mr. Fitzgerald and his staff were just as aware of persistent inside-the-beltway echo "it's Rove ... it's Rove ...," as well. And, that bit about sand being thrown in the umpire's face likely did not amuse Mr. Fitzgerald and his staff.

The big-hurt is coming Rover and Dickie and I just can't wait to see what Mr. Fitzgerald does to Georgie boy because we all know that all Georgie boy does is lie ....


Peace.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/11/AR2005121100400.html

<snip>

Novak says Luskin appeared surprised when told in 2004 of a possible Rove-Cooper conversation about the CIA status of Wilson's wife.

Luskin said in effect that "Karl doesn't have a Cooper problem. He was not a source for Matt," Novak wrote. "I responded instinctively, thinking he was trying to spin me."

<snip>

<snip>

Novak said the conversation with Luskin occurred anywhere from January 2004 to May 2004; she thinks it was perhaps in March.

It was not until October 2004 -- sometime between five months and nine months after Novak's conversation with Luskin -- that Rove disclosed his conversation with Cooper to the prosecutor.

<snip>

... a deeper hole for Rove than the one Rove was trying to escape.

One wonders if Luskin has created some legal jeopardy for himself -- let's face it, this is the guy who accepted gold bars from clients who .... I'm laughing so hard I can't even finish the sentence .... :rofl:


Peace.

and he can't keep up with the story either. At least we're not alone. :)

:thumbsup:

Thank you for putting this together. I think that people should appreciate what a skunk Ms. Novak is. This helps make the case.

Us in Ohio have our hands full with HB 3 legislation-little time for keeping current. Peace.

But some, when truth is at the door,
Would only wish to practice more.


With apologies to Sir Walter Scott.

I'm sure he'd be pleased as punch! :hi:

Her story is as believable as Smirky being a war hero. Time magazine may reveal itself to be fully corrupt at the top as other media enterprises have done in the BushCo years based on their decision to fire or keep Novak.

My question is how did Novak know that Cooper was Rove's contact at Time in regard to the Plame outing or that any Time staffer had conversations with Rove? Is this something the senior management at Time and Cooper would have shared with all the employees at Time and hope no one talks? It is beyond mind boggling to think that she would share this information, if she indeed learned about it at Time Magazine, with Luskin under any circumstances. It is downright deceitful for her to contribute to stories as late as a few weeks ago on the subject without revealing her involvement. Her story is simply not believable.

When and where did Viv get the Rove/cooper/plame info.

At least that is the way I read her story:

I wanted to know how she found out that Rove was Cooper's source. That's all I wanted to know from her. The crap she spews in the article does not impress me.

She seems to be weazle-wording by mentioning TIME in a glancing fashion. If TIME was who she found out about Rove from, doesn't TIME owe a lot of people their money back?

Can TIME just make up (or cover up) crap and sell it as news? Doesn't that type of fraud violate some kind of implied warranty of merchantability for their product?

Cooper told his editors right away about the super double secret source. They KNEW all about it. But with re-election looming near they just sat back and let the Neoconsters lie, and lie, and lie. I wish there was some way someone could sue the bastards.

Novakula's daughter?

Time's managing editor, Jim Kelly, said in a telephone interview: "I'm taking this seriously. I'm upset and she's upset," adding that her article "was full of regret about what happened."

Mr. Kelly suggested that were several issues of concern to editors, among them her failure to alert editors in a timely way about her conversation with Mr. Luskin and her dealings with the prosecutor. Mr. Kelly said that he would meet with Ms. Novak early next year to decide if further steps were warranted.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/11/politics/11cnd-leak.html?ex=1291957200&en=3028b91fa2e8c938&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

of opportunities to give her bosses notice. Only did so when it was clear it was coming out that she gave Luskin for free what Fitz and Time/Cooper were going to court over. And that she basically became an actor rather than an observer in the Plame case.

I am also happy to hear that Mr. Kelly plans to take this "seriously" as opposed to something else. One would have thought that conduct like Ms. Novak's would be so upsetting because it would cause her immediate termination as an employee at Time magazine. Her dishonesty with her employers coupled with her convenient "fuzziness" about the details is strong evidence to think that she is simply an asset being called out to fall on her sword to save Rove.

Appreciate that you have gathered so many Viveca articles in one thread.

Who would talk to these people? Who would employ them?

V. Novak says:

"I didn't tell anyone at TIME. Unrealistically, I hoped this would turn out to be an insignificant twist in the investigation and also figured that if people at TIME knew about it, it would be difficult to contain the information, and reporters would pounce on it--as I would have."

Oh, great. They just pay her rent. Doesn't mean she should do anything illegal or unethical but, holy cow, as Bart would say, give you boss a break. This is the first rule of employee loyalty, tell you boss what's going on. She didn't. Neither did Woodward. These people take Narcissism to a new level. Maybe we could start calling that personality disorder, "the reporters disease."

Recommended, highly!

while Vivie said nothing, pretending her leak to Luskin was "an insignificant twist in the investigation" and presumably not relevant to what Time was taking all the way to the Supreme Court? Doesn't pass the laugh test.

... the lesser of their faults.


Peace, my friend.

Is there a Media Whore of 2005 Award that we didn't know about? Does anybody in an excutive/management editorial capacity seek real information from the "reporters" that are supposed to work for them? Are media entities that conditioned to accept access trades as long as you don't get caught?

This speaks to a culture of corruption in the media that is beyond one organization or level of journalistic responsibility. We trust them to serve the public and they were either in Judyy's case screwing her sources in as many ways as possible - literally, in Armstong's case and others, being outright bribed, in another case, making dirty ass kissing the new art so Baghdad Bob would not jeopardize his own book deal, in Russerts case reporting when he is a main menu item and it just goes on and on!

Who is in charge of making the scorecard to track all of this media bullshit?

who wasn't told about the Plame/Wilson situation. It seems now days that Andrea, O'Donnel, etc. knew what was going on. Only we peons who try to get real info from these people are left in the dark.

arrogant , not reflective in any wrong doing..and just a baffoon!...now i am blonde , but this is the stuff that leads to dumb blonde jokes!!..and leads to the lying liars that lie!!
i guess this little twit thought she would get off and not be questioned under oath...and could fly under the radar...but when do any of these journalists get held accountable to our constitution??
if any of "us" did our jobs so poorly we would all be out of work..and have a damn hard time ever holding a position in decent employment there after!..and yet this little twit will probably resurface at faux mews!

without a media..we are doomed..and how will we get our media back??

i feel like i am living under nazi germany times...i just wonder when they will be coming to get some of us?>?

if this novak could be employed by Time...we are doomed...i really feel that..

the fla dem convention was held this weekend and the very people running the dem party in my county are angry and put out by those of us who even bring up voter fraud..they went so far as to go to a voter forum at the convention and walked out ..decrying that they are sick of conspiracy "theories"...now these very people i have sent every bit of info i can get my hands on about voter fraud..and yet they keep their heads in the sand and have made the messengers the problem...yes here in fla!!

and one holds a state dnc board seat!!

we can talk about all this till we are blue in the face..but those who are running our party are deliberately in my opinion ignoring the real problems...and in this how do we get this info out to the mass public..when even our state party leaders ignore the "facts"??

thanks UL for putting this all in one post...you are the best..but not feeling too positive here in fla ...

fly

Franklin County (home of Columbus and the long waits in dem precincts) say that the elections in Ohio were fair, and anyone who says otherwise is a CONSPIRACY THEORIST at a House Administration Hearing in March. The guys who developed the RON initiatives acted the same way. I don't get it!

... about OH.

That "and one holds a state dnc board seat!!" certainly describes one key, big problem we are confronting - clueless (willful or otherwise) individuals in positions that matter to our ability to conduct a valid election, ever again, in the Republic.

Thank you.


Peace.

wanted a false statement indictment for Rove with the last grand jury but they didn't vote it. I'm quite sure that's what the envelope had something to do with that was attached to the indictment handed up for Libby.

I am much liking the way I bet this grand jury is listening now. I would personally grab Rove by his pig nostrils and drag him out when they announce his. Love that Mr. Patrick Fitzgerald and how he works.

From the politicians, to the reporters, to the media to us.

Now we need protection from corrupt reporters. I hope Fitzgerald can use all of these strands to strengthen his case.

It helps to look at it from all the angles.

My brain feels like it has been playing chess in 20 games and I forgot to read the rule book.

It seems like the more they stink the more they try to call it perfume, and then do something stinkier.


Thanks for helping untangle the web of lies and deceit.

Great read on CRS*:




Peace.

Time is a tabloid - as important as US Weekly.