Suggested to whom, Cheny?

The Armitage leak does not yet change everything. Rove also leaked to Cooper. Libby leaked to Miller. It is beyond my belief that these two men, who were in daily contact, did not discuss it.

Not sure why you added this to your response to me: “You probably don’t like the Wall Street Journal editorial page”

The issue was whether or not something you stated is fact, and the following from the editorial established that. What I think of the WSJ editorial page is beside the point.

“Interviews and documents provided to the Committee indicate that his wife, a CPD [Counterproliferation Division] employee, suggested his name for the trip,” said the report.

As I said, hadn’t read that. Thanks for the link.

You probably don’t like the Wall Street Journal editorial page, but it reported that Wilson had been going on television saying the VP’s office sent him. It’s in the second paragraph of this editorial. If it had been proved not true, I’m sure the WSJ would have taken it down by now or the Wilsons would have demanded a retraction or sued the paper for defamation, in addition to everyone else they’re suing in Washington.

It’s only worth mentioning because I have never heard anyone on the left condemn Wilson’s false assertion (or a possible attempt to conceal nepotism, for that matter). But as I said, it would not justify Armitage’s disclosure, but it does expose a certain attitude of selective outrage on both sides.

In addition, it puts into context the Bush administration’s perceived need to discredit Wilson. Here was a guy getting face time on TV and telling lies about the VP’s office, so they overreacted and confirmed Armitage’s leak. It’s not an excuse but it does bring the whole thing into sharper focus.

I had not read that “Wilson falsely stating that he had been sent by the VP’s office to Niger (when it was actually his wife who recommended him).” I know this is what Chaney (or someone in the Bush Admin) said when this whole bruhaha started, but I didn’t know that it had been proven true. Have the Wilsons admitted this? I am not saying you are wrong, just that I had read this only in connection with things being said by the admin. which had some problems with truth v. lies, and the whole yellow cake episode.

I’m also wondering, however, what difference this makes. Plame could have recommended her husband, but she could not have been the one to send him. How is this issue relevant? Again, I am not saying you are wrong, but I don’t get how this matters.

To return to Mink: “And on July 11 — before Novak’s column appeared — Rove spoke to Time’s Cooper by phone and told him that Mrs. Wilson worked at the CIA in connection with weapons of mass destruction.” Does this not make Rove more culpable of outting Plame than the simple confirmation of her status to Novak?

As to this partisan-on-the-left wanting to blame Rove for everything I dislike about this admin, ‘fraid that’s not so. There’s Bush, himself, to blame, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Hadley, . . . .

Mink’s column makes some generalizations about writers who have been critical of those who jumped immediately onto the anti-Rove bandwagon.

Finally, there has been a strident insistence that Armitage’s admission earns presidential adviser Karl Rove an apology from anyone who criticized Rove’s actions in the Wilson affair, especially anyone in the media.

That’s certainly not what I wrote. The disclosure that Armitage was the original source of the information about Plame casts doubt on the contention by people like Conason and Blumenthal that this whole affair is the result of a smear campaign initiated by Rove and the VP’s office. That’s why I think likeminded pundits (not “anyone who criticized Rove’s actions”) owe him an apology. It certainly does not let Armitage off the hook, nor should it.

Let’s not forget it was Wilson falsely stating that he had been sent by the VP’s office to Niger (when it was actually his wife who recommended him) that set this whole thing in motion. That does not excuse Armitage’s actions, but I have yet to see anyone on the left criticize Wilson’s false claim. I refer you to a column today by Bob Novak that elaborates on Armitage’s disclosure, which Novak took to be deliberate.

Here’s a link to a St. Louis Post-Dispatch column by Eric Mink I wish to recommend. Sorry I don’t know how to use the tag. It’s Mink’s take on the question you posed: Does Rove deserve an apology? It’s the paragraph near the end, beginning “And on July 11 . . .” to which I’d like to hear your reaction

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/columnists.nsf/ericmink/story/79BED3F49C8E0E01862571E80001C928?OpenDocument

Rove’s sharing of Plame’s name consisted of saying to Novak, “I’ve heard that, too,” when the latter asked him about Joe Wilson’s wife being a CIA operative. Contrary to the prevailing CW for the last couple of years, Rove was not the leaker.

I am not trying to minimize the reprehensible nature of the leak; I just think those who immediately jumped to the conclusion that this was some sort of well orchestrated Bush admin attempt to smear Plame/Wilson should reassess their initial reaction. I have done so and have concluded I was wrong.

Thanks for the clarification. I’m of a firm mind that even commentators or those such as Blumenthal who are partisan hacks have an obligation to be fair and refrain from jumping to conclusions before the facts are in.