Well, I hear what Wilson said Novak said. I also heard what Novak himself said.
Novak said that nobody in the Bush administration leaked the information to him.
This basically shot the Democratic attack off at the knees, but they're acting today like they don't know they're two feet shorter yet.
The only possible alley they can run down now is "Novak is lying to protect the administration." Maybe they'll run with that. Who knows?
This is all such a hoot, but you have to be an old fart to know why. Anybody remember why the laws were passed to protect agents from being exposed? And when they were passed? Anybody remember which congressmen fought against these laws? Anybody remember when Philip Agee was a glorious hero of the Left?
Listening to Democrats suddenly favoring independent counsels again, now that Clinton is history, is also a hoot.
Does it seem funny to anybody that a CIA agent would go undercover using her own real maiden name? If it were me, I might put a little more work into it. Or maybe she wasn't really undercover, but working a desk. Why isn't this known yet?
Current Events » in reply to A shred more info on Novak's sources
re: Novak's sources
