Posted on 02/15/2005 7:35:47 AM PST by KidGlock
Edited on 02/15/2005 8:17:37 AM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
Let me fill you in: Gannon interviewed Joe Wilson in October 2003 and asked him about a memo that proved that his wife in fact had recommended him for the trip (the point at issue in Novak's piece and a point now proven with the memo that did surface and Wilson denies to this day).
The left is using that question as evidence that Gannon had unique access to this memo. The problem is, he obviously based his question on a WSJ article of 10 days before which described the memo.
Gannon has been interviewed by the FBI for 90 minutes but not called (yet) to the grand jury.
How funny that the lefties wanted to make a big deal about Gannon being on the list of reporters the grand jury might call yet they ignore the significance of those reporters actually called. Matt Cooper has been called TWICE.
Good question. I would like to know too.
To those who come late to the thread...the thread started as breaking news and the article giving details was added later.
For all we know Novak has testified. The only reason we know these reporters were called is they're fighting the subpoena (Cooper did before, then made a deal to give limited testimony but the grand jury wants more).
Novak won't say if he's been called, so we can't say he's involved in a small way, though I suspect you're correct inasmuch as I don't think the main focus is his column or Plame's "name".
BTW, wanting testimony does not make that person a "target". It means they have information.
Following this story has been a tremendous lesson in delayed gratification; you know the end of the story will be very interesting and unpredictable, and it is torture to have to wait this long.
I trust Miller much more than Matt Cooper (who is married to a clintonista and for sure is not privy to WH "leaks", which are non-existant anyway).
My working theory that I have posted before is that Miller has valuable information and is more a witness than part of the "get Bush" scheme that this clearly was. Though if it turns out I'm wrong and she was involved I'll be "saddened" but accept it. But I don't think she was.
P.S. I've had Fox on and they have yet to report this story. I just listened to Bridget Quinn's news roundup. Nothing.
This is not the government controlling the press.
It's the press and rogue employees at State and the CIA trying to control the government.
Probalby, though now that she has taken itto this level, the "Silent Witness" has become co-conspirator....
yup.
Court: Reporters Must Testify in CIA Leak Case
Judge David Tatel wrote separately and said he might have quashed the subpoena "were the leak at issue in this case less harmful to national security or more vital to public debate."
~snip~
It would be interesting to read the entire decision.
I was born and raised in the D.C. area and have seen the rumor mill that thrives there. Remember honesty is best. A forthright person is not afraid to speak the truth but a slanderer never wants their words to be ascribed to themselves.
I tried the link AP provides for the Court but it doesn't work. Will try to find it later and read the decision.
"I trust the media..."
As in Rather, Brokaw, Jennings, NYTimes, WashPost, BostonGlobe, CNN etc and all their associated News Creators?
Let's have a poll on this forum and see how many agree with you.
There are already laws to protect "Whistleblowers". That does not mean that "Whistleblowers" should be anonymous. And "moles" planted inside govt by the media for sourcing information should be treated no differently than "moles" planted by KGB or any other foreign entity. Moles ferret out secrets, and that was, is, and must be illegal. In wartime such activity can be a capital offense.
This is a case where information has been illegally revealed. It is necessary that the perps be outted.
Actually, didn't Tim Russert already sing?
LOL -here is the recent DUmmie discussion:
DUmmies - 'Gannon' Interview: No Plame Subpoena, No Tie to White
It appears that anything 'gannon' is good troll bait. -the dems have no political power left -all they can do is whine and construct and promulgate conspiracy theories to attempt discrediting those in power -their political daddies!
Sorry, but I trust the Bush Government more than the new-creation arm of the Democratic party, known as OLD MEDIA.
I may be totally ignorant here, but why isn't Robert Novak who actually wrote the article that "outed" Valerie Plame, being forced to testify to HIS source?
If one first assumes the investigators know what they are doing THEN one might deduce they already know Novak's source and have determined no 'foul' to either the source and Novak -further that it has been confirmed that the source he/she/it was not the source for these other reporters. Hence, either there is a source yet to be revealed and investigated OR these other reporters are liars...
Re: The three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit sided with prosecutors in their attempt to compel Time magazine's Matthew Cooper and The New York Times' Judith Miller to testify before a federal grand jury about their confidential sources. "We agree with the District Court that there is no First Amendment privilege protecting the information sought," Judge David B. Sentelle said in the ruling, which was unanimous.
Fair enough. I also have those terms or phrases which get me to stop reading.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.