Wednesday, November 16, 2005

Following up a bit on Tom Maguire's musings on the Woodward story today in the Post that someone had told him two years ago about Plame...

What led to Woodward testifying on Monday? I doubt that Woodward contacted Fitzgerald and said there was something he wanted to bring to Fitzgerald's attention. If I am right, then either Fitzgerald just recently received information about Woodward... or Fitzgerald just got around to talking with Woodward. Given Fitzgerald's reputation for thoroughness, I doubt the latter possibility.... so, Fitzgerald must have just learned that Woodward had had a conversaton with someone about Plame.

So, who could have fed this information to Fitzgerald? And why would they have done so? And why would they have done so just now (as opposed to anytime in the past two plus years)?

Me doubts it was Libby... and I doubt it was Rove.... for the same reason. Fitzgerald most certainly would have asked them both to detail any and all calls they had with reporters during the relevant time frame. If either of them had had a talk with Woodward, Fitzgerald would have chased down Woodward a long time ago to learn Woodward's side of the conversation.

Me doubts it was anyone at the Washington Post (although the idea of a whistleblower in the media does make me giggle). There's two things the MSM likes: protecting each other... and causing trouble for the Bush Administration. If, as Tom Maguire suggests, this news gums up a bit the Libby prosecution, it's the last thing anyone from the Post would want to let out.

So who was it? Me has no guess.