Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Why isn't Novak being indicted?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
MessiahRp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-28-05 11:37 AM
Original message
Why isn't Novak being indicted?
Libby, Rove and Cheney certainly leaked this deal so they should be in trouble, but Novak has to know it's a crime to out an undercover CIA agent and yet he published that anyways. (Did Judith Miller do the same?)

Any reporter that published that information should be under investigation as well. If the question is whether or not Novak and others knew she was "undercover", from my recollection everyone in the news knew immediately what he had done in outing her so I don't believe he didn't know for a second.

Novak and others (Miller?) should be indicted today as well.

Rp
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
emulatorloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-28-05 11:38 AM
Response to Original message
1. because he sang to the grand jury, at least per this article
Edited on Fri Oct-28-05 11:40 AM by emulatorloo
wait a minute I will be back w a snip and a link:

<snip>

A critical early success for Fitzgerald was winning the cooperation of Robert D. Novak, the Chicago Sun-Times columnist who named Plame in a July 2003 story and attributed key information to "two senior administration officials." Legal sources said Novak avoided a fight and quietly helped the special counsel's inquiry, although neither the columnist nor his attorney have said so publicly.

<snip>

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/23/AR2005102301028_pf.html

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bryant69 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-28-05 11:39 AM
Response to Original message
2. They didn't have the information under priviileged circumstances
It's like if you loaned the company car to a friend and he plowed it into a tree - well you'd be fired.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MessiahRp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-28-05 11:41 AM
Response to Reply #2
7. Yeah but isn't it well known
that outing a CIA agent publically is a crime? Lord knows Novak has enough Bush connections and since Bush I made public statements about this, it would have to be obvious. Regardless of whether or not he was in the Administration, choosing to publish information that is illegal to release, is still a crime.

Rp
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bryant69 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-28-05 11:45 AM
Response to Reply #7
13. Which law ?
Which law makes it a crime for a reporter or columnist to reveal privileged information?

Bryant
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MessiahRp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-28-05 11:46 AM
Response to Reply #13
15. Isn't the law relating to CIA operatives
also applicable to civilians?

Rp
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bryant69 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-28-05 11:49 AM
Response to Reply #15
16. Not necessarily.
I mean if they were doing treason, yeah, I guess he could be tried for that. But if the crime is revealing priveleged information, it's only a crime if the person gets that information in a priviliged way.

Bryant
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AlCzervik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-28-05 11:39 AM
Response to Original message
3. He is not a government official, thats why.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
longship Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-28-05 11:40 AM
Response to Original message
4. Because he didn't break any law.
Edited on Fri Oct-28-05 11:40 AM by longship
He's still a scumbag, though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Norquist Nemesis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-28-05 11:40 AM
Response to Original message
5. Hmmm....good question
My guess would be that he was used. Unwittingly, the fuckwit listened to the criminals involved and it didn't occur to him to behave like a true journalist and check things out. He couldn't get to his PC fast enough to spew the lies for the team and do damage to those weak-willed Liberals.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
goodhue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-28-05 11:40 AM
Response to Original message
6. He is not a government official and he did not lie to grand jury.
The crime re outing CIA relates to government officials.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
progressoid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-28-05 11:41 AM
Response to Original message
8. Lets, hope that when this is all over, at least he will be unemployable
I know...wishful thinking.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bowens43 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-28-05 11:41 AM
Response to Original message
9. Imagine the chilling effect that would have on journalism.
no thanks
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MessiahRp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-28-05 11:44 AM
Response to Reply #9
12. I don't know that I call Novak or Miller
"journalists". Stenographers, maybe.

Journalists have a shred of moral clarity and know what information to disseminate. An undercover CIA operative's information re: political payback, is not journalism.

Rp
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wryter2000 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-28-05 11:41 AM
Response to Original message
10. The person who broke the law
The person who broke the law was the person who had clearance to know about her CIA status and told someone who didn't have clearance. Novak wasn't under any legal obligation to keep it secret (moral obligation is something else again). So, if he cooperated fully with the investigation, which it appears he did (real brave guy, huh?), he didn't do anything criminal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pithy Cherub Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-28-05 11:42 AM
Response to Original message
11. It was therapeutic to tell all he knew! Novak
has cooperated and co-opted his partners in crime. Interesting that his article was intended to hurt Plame and ended up targeting criminal republicans in the bush administration.

IRONY: Blowback is what the CIA calls it!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lone_Star_Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-28-05 11:45 AM
Response to Original message
14. Think of it this way.. Leaker bad.. tool of leaker... still just a tool
He must have cooperated with the investigation, however. (Translates to sang like a bird) Or he would have been one cell over from Miller.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
formernaderite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-28-05 11:59 AM
Response to Original message
17. Who gave up Plame to Novak? Not Scooter or Rove...
I want to know WHO!!! Tenant?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SoCalDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-28-05 11:59 AM
Response to Original message
18. He was the stool pigeon..
Edited on Fri Oct-28-05 12:00 PM by SoCalDem
He got immunity to sell out his friends

maybe he didn't "fall"..:evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun May 12th 2024, 11:13 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC