Where There's Plame, There's a Liar
I don't claim to be a brainiac, though I'm usually successful at merging verbs and nouns to form understandable sentences. So I'm obviously not an idiot. But there is something I've yet to comprehend the logic behind. Perhaps you can help?
As you well know, columnist Robert Novak outted CIA operative Valerie Plame in his newspaper column. Now, I'm not going to go through the convoluted story as to why. The bottom line you well know already, because you have enough grey matter to be here on this site reading what I'm writing.
But the real mystery here is this: Novak's not going to jail. The people first in line to go to jail over this outing--Judith Miller and Matt Cooper--never published Ms. Plame's identity. These two New York Times reporters were told about Ms. Plame, but elected not to use that information.
Make sense? I didn't think so either.
If you're reading this late in the evening and are not in possession of all your faculties, let me re-state. Judith Miller and Matt Cooper were told about Valerie Plame, but decided not to use that info. Robert Novak wrote about Ms. Plame, revealing her identity to the entire world in his column.
Ms. Miller and Mr. Cooper are preparing to spend 18 months in jail.
Robert Novak continues to spew bilge from his Right Wingnut observation tower, apparently not threatened with a loss of freedom.
Now there's the late-breaking tidbit that Mr. Cooper won't be headed to the hoosegow.
Could it be that Novak--he who crows about being on the right side of freedom--won't have his threatened for outting a CIA operative? This may not be Denmark, but something does smell.
It's been said many times that the wheels of justice turn slowly, and at times, in the strangest fashion. When whoever said that said that, they musta been talking about this case. I gotta tell you truly, the logic, the justice, the sense of this case completely eludes me.
Like I started out saying, in the toolshed there are tools sharper than me. If you're one of them, please cause the logic of this case to come clear to me. Hearing that in fact our legal system isn't being blatantly subverted for political reasons--this time--would be most comforting to hear. I thank you in advance...
posted by VTexan @ 7:05 PM
3 comments
3 Comments:
I'm not claiming to be any sharper than you... and I haven't really followed thru the details of this case and was wondering exactly the same as you. I was blaming this 'gap' in my understanding on some 'obvious previous' piece of news that I managed to ignore or fail to notice... but the gap was getting bigger...
Hopefully history will prove me wrong, but I'm afraid that your fears about your legal system are just part of the symptoms spawning from the 'bananization' of your country and its institutions. Or have you failed to notice the Bush dynasty (father, son and looks like Jebb will apply for the job too). The Supreme Court is in for a rough ride. An assault on your education standards and the blurring of the church and state division... and so on?
My best wishes...
We in America tend to think of our system as unassailable. That our politicans are moving parts which come and go, but that the great system that the wisdom of the forefathers created (many think with the help of God) will continue on, safe because of its sound design.
I say NONSENSE! We're only as good and as strong as our key parts. If we allow crooks into government, they do crooked things. If we allow dynasties to emerge, we'll have dynasties. If our country behaves badly, we'll be a bad country. I sport no mythical illusions about the US of A. I'd love to, but I'm a no-nonsese, no-bullshit guy. In other words, I know better than that!
All interesting comments Xavier.
I'm constantly conflicted about politics because I think the right wing has never been more shrewd. 9-11 played right into their hands because a scared populace is NOT an intellectually critical one.
But with e-mail and the vast fund-raising and message-blanketing power of the internet, there's a possibility for a totally new kind of grass roots campaign. There's a new kind of pressure that can be exerted on politicans that "you're being watched."
I sent an e-mail to my congressman a while back telling him that, with apologies, if he voted a certain way, I would actively campaign to have him defeated. He voted that way nonetheless, but I can't help but feel that if a representative gets a large quantity of those e-mails it should at the very least give him pause.
I didn't just threaten to work against him without reason; it was a very important vote to me. And I WILL work for his defeat.
There is a level of connectivity in that process that, strangely, is like a new aspect of this being a representative democracy.
Sorry for the tangential thinking here...it's 6:20AM and I haven't had a cup of coffee yet.
Post a Comment
<< Home