An important question about Bob Woodward's frogmarch.

[BuyingThyme]

Today we learned that Dick Cheney decided to “discredit” Joseph Wilson on March 9, 2003.

Now, if you’re a crazy conspiracy whacko like me, you understand that this is the decision which led to the outing of Wilson’s wife, Valerie Plame.

But what does this tell us about Bob Woodward’s story? Woodward claims to have learned of Plame’s CIA connection (but not about her covert status) in mid June of 2003, before any other “journalist.” He also claims to have held this information back for two years because he didn’t want to be subpoenaed before finishing his latest Bush book.

I, the conspiracy whacko, never believed Woodward’s story. If you want to sell a book, you don’t discredit yourself, and you don’t avoid the free promotion, material, and insider status which a subpoena would provide. (And, if you’re at all honest, and if you’re not the kind of person to get mixed up in a cover-up to the benefit of evil doers, you don’t hold back information which is relevant to the national security of your country.)

So, Woodward’s story is certainly bogus. He’s somehow gotten himself involved in a cover-up, obviously to the benefit of Dick Cheney.

So, my question is, how was Bob Woodard’s contention that he learned of Valerie Plame’s CIA affiliation in June of 2003 supposed to serve Cheney? Does it simply go to the “common knowledge” question? I can’t put my finger on it.


http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/020906J.shtml

[xiamiam]

1. neither can i ..but im glad you brought it up...a duer will have an answer

in a sec..

[BuyingThyme]

2. kcik

[BuyingThyme]

3. kcik