|
Consider (Exposing) the Source It isn't as uncommon as Bush's media defenders would have you believe! PLUS: What makes Krugman so darn good? by Tamara Baker
Oct. 6, 2003 -- SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA (apj.us) -- This whole Bushistas' leaks hoo-ha -- WilsonGate, IntimiGate, whatever you choose to call it -- is somewhat farcial on its face.
We have the Bush White House and Justice Department sitting on an urgent CIA request for over two months, only to be prodded into action when the CIA's rank-and-filers, apparently disgusted at Tenet's letting the Bushies get away with burning an operative, her network of informants, and the front company for which she and several others were officially working, pressured Tenet to pull his spine out of the sock drawer and confront the Rove-Cheney axis.
We have the FBI re-directing the focus of the probe away from Bob Novak and the Bush team to look instead at the State Department and two Newsday journalists who weren't leakers, but whistleblowers.
We have a whole host of press persons wringing their hands over who the leakers could be, when most of them know full well who the leakers are -- and many of them were in fact among the original recipients of the Plame leak -- but won't tell us.
Why?
The official reason is a sort of professional courtesy: Journalists never, ever, EVER, we are told, reveal their sources.
continued
|