"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 16:42:27 +0000, NOYB wrote:


MURRAY: "Do we have any idea how widely known *IT* was in Washington
that
Joe Wilson's wife worked for the CIA?"

So "it" was referring to the following:

The fact "that Joe Wilson's wife worked for the CIA"!

So taken *in context*, it means a lot more than what she's now trying to
spin it to mean.




continued...
"But frankly, I wasn't aware of her actual role at the CIA and the fact
that she had a covert role involving weapons of mass destruction, not
until Bob Novak wrote it."


So Mitchell didn't:
a) know her (Plame's) role at the CIA (not that she didn't know her
identity nor that she worked at the CIA)
and
b) didn't know she had a role involving WMD (once again, not that she
didn't know who Plame was, and who it was that sent Joe Wilson).


Mitchell is now stuck defending Tim Russert's perjurious testimony in the
journalist-friendly press (and failing miserably I might add). Wait
until
she's forced to defend it on the witness stand.

You are overlooking the timeline. "It was widely known among those of us
who cover the intelligence community and who were actively engaged in
trying to track down who among the foreign service community was the envoy
to Niger."

"The envoy to Niger" wasn't an issue until May 6, 2003, when Kristof
published his article. Wilson's op-ed piece wasn't until July 6, 2003,
and Novak's article was July 14, 2003. Let's assume, Plame's employment
at the CIA was becoming known to elements of the Press during that time
period.



It is still quite possible that Russert did not know and, as
Fitzgerald said in the indictment, Plame's "affiliation with the CIA was
not common knowledge outside the intelligence community."

NBC reportter Andrea Mitchell knew, but the NBC Washington Bureau chief
didn't? Not likely.

Christof knew. Pincus knew. Mitchell knew. Russert knew. Russert lied to
the GJ about not knowing.



Elements of the Press are, I'm sure, not looking forward to this trial,
but, then, neither is anyone in this administration. They definitely have
more to loose.

Actually, the White House has already been convicted by the media and public
opinion. They stand more to gain than lose with this investigation.

Of course, if it's shown that Libby told the truth, and Russert and Wilson
lied, it might make page A21 of the NY times.



You seem to think Libby will be exonerated. I think that
is unlikely, but even if he is, the underlying issues will still be an
embarrassment to the White House.