Fat Steve's Blatherings

Wednesday, July 20, 2005

Gee, I Wonder Why This Wasn't In All the Papers? II


      A big story concerning Nadagate, one that makes the Administration look good is known to the MSM, but they haven't really reported it.  How could that have happened?

At Length:

      Question, what do the following have in common?

  • ABC

  • The American Society of Magazine Editors

  • The American Society of Newspaper Editors

  • The Associated Press

  • CBS Broadcasting

  • Copley Press

  • Harper's Magazine

  • Hearst Corporation

  • Knight Ridder Newspapers

  • McGraw-Hill Companies

  • NBC

  • Newspaper Guild

  • Reuters

  • Washington Post

  • White House Correspondents

      Answer: They are among "36 major news organizations and professional groups representing journalists" who filed an amicus curiae brief (warning, evil PDF format) with the appeals court, saying Cooper and Miller should not have to disclose their sources.

      They make several arguments, but let me point out just one.  On p8 of "Argument," which is p31 of the PDF, they say:
      An article in the Washington Times indicated that Plame's identity was compromised twice prior to Novak's publication.  If this information is accurate -- a fact a court should explore -- there is an absolute defense to prosecution.

      The Washington Times article is here.  It alleges that:
      Mrs. Plame's identity as an undercover CIA officer was first disclosed to Russia in the mid-1990s by a Moscow spy, said officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

      In a second compromise, officials said a more recent inadvertent disclosure resulted in references to Mrs. Plame in confidential documents sent by the CIA to the U.S. Interests Section of the Swiss Embassy in Havana.

      The documents were supposed to be sealed from the Cuban government, but intelligence officials said the Cubans read the classified material and learned the secrets contained in them, the officials said.

      Well shucky darn, if Valerie was out for years, then Novak didn't do anything illegal or immoral in mentioning her.  And that means the whole prosecution should conceivably be dropped.

      Yet somehow, none of those big-name news organizations have ever said anything about this argument.  Why aren't they trumpeting this from the rooftops, defending the innocent Rove and Libby?

      Why, you might almost think the press didn't care about the truth.



Post a Comment

<< Home