Why hasn't Novak been subpoenaed?

[Cyrano]

The NY Times and a Times reporter have been subpoenaed in relation to the Plame outing. Time magazine and a Time reporter have been subpoenaed. Tim Russert was subpoenaed, as have other journalists.

Whatever it is these journalists may or may not know, it's a fact that Novak knows which members of this administration contacted him and told him that Valerie Plame was an undercover CIA operative.

While Novak is a despicable turd, I don't believe that journalists should be forced to reveal their sources. (In Novak's case, I use the term "journalist" with some hesitation.) But in any case, if other journalists are being subpoenaed to appear before a grand jury, why not Novak?

Is this investigation just another Bush/Cheney/Ashcroft sham?

[prodigal_green]

1. I was wondering that too

Maybe because his source is protected because he published the story, but since the others chose not to out Ms. Plame, they aren't covered. I'm just guessing though.

[librechik]

2. maybe he has. He just won't say. n/t

[TacticalPeek]

3. 1. We don't know he hasn't. ("No comment.")

2. He's last in line.

3. His comment should not be needed.

:)

[hlthe2b]

9. Exactly... no one knows for sure whether he has or has not as of yet....

4. someone here has said it's because he's a suspect, not a witness

So they're waiting to indict him and not bothering to subpoeana him.

[Cyrano]

5. I wouldn't hold my breath to see him indicted while Bush is in power

[MidwestTransplant]

6. My thinking is that Fitzgerald want's the courts to finish

ruling in his favor once the other journalists have had a chance to appeal. Once the path is cleared, as soon as Novack is supoenaed and refuses to testify he will be thrown right in the pokey. See how fast he cracks then.

[Cyrano]

8. I don't think he'll ever crack.

Any journalist who cracks is finished and will never again be trusted by a source.

What's more likely is that, win or lose, Bush will pardon him. Which means that either way, he'd spend less than 90 days in jail as Bush would do it the instant the election is over.

Of course, the other possibility is that Bush loses in a landslide, totally forgets about Novak's existence, and leaves him to rot in a cell.

[MidwestTransplant]

12. Novack flipped on Hanson the FBI guy.

[Cyrano]

13. Don't remember. Details?

[MidwestTransplant]

18. Here ya go....

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/robertnovak/printrn20010712.shtml

[Cyrano]

20. Thanks for the clarification

Novak calling someone evil is like crap saying that skunks stink. This malignant dwarf gives hypocrisy a bad name. (Sorry, no insult meant to dwarfs.)

[Jane Austin]

7. If the other journalists who were contacted by the White House

had shared with each other the identity of whoever contacted them, then what's to protect?

At one time I spent a lot of time around reporters and after a beer or two, they freely shared that kind of information with each other.

It wouldn't surprise me at all if it is common knowledge who outed Valerie Plame.

If so, they probably should have to testify as to who it is.

[against all enemies]

10. NO ONE wants to listen to that piece of shit. He would only

lie through those stupid looking false teeth.

[TrustingDog]

11. as much distain I have for that slobbery idiot Novak....

I don't really think there's a solid case against Him....

[Ilsa]

14. This sort of came up on The News Hour a week or so ago.

Two attorneys discussed it and said that the prosecutors don't want to subpoena the author (Novak) until they have exhausted their other leads about who leaked the story. It is almost as if they know they will be pounded publicly if they send a reporter to jail for contempt and they don't exhaust those avenues first before directly asking Novak. Then his "confidential sources" defense should fall flat.

At least, that's what I got out of the discussion on PBS.

[wurzel]

17. These days I'm not sure prosecutors would be pounded.

After all the biggest protectors of the press has been Liberals and Dems. They have had little reward for it.

[yodermon]

15. I don't understand

Why is there such a flap about subpoenaing the journalists who were told Plame's secret identity? Most of the time, yes, journalists should have a right to protect their sources. Even if the leak contains information about a crime. But in this case:

the leak WAS the crime.

here, I'll say it again:

The leak WAS the crime!!

As soon as Karl told Russert/Matthews et. al. who Plame really was, BAM, crime committed. To me that is totally different than "a confidential source has admitted to me that he murdered Chandra Levy", which I think should be protected since the leak itself would not be crime.

The leak WAS the crime, and a treasonous one. Imagine if Scooter had told Novak "oh yeah, here are some top secret war plans for our upcoming attack on the Taliban" and then Novak *PUBLISHES* it... don't you think a crime has been committed (namely TREASON) and the subpoenaing of journalists w/ the identity of this leaker would be in order?

The Plame leak is absolutely of the same magnitude. She was a deep cover NOC (remember Mission Impossible? the "NOC list"?) and her cover company Brewster-Jennings & associates and alllllll their contacts are now worthless. Who knows what undercover operations have now been rendered useless.

Again, why the flap? It's a national security issue, trumping any 1st Amendment claims. IMO.

[Cyrano]

16. Works for me

Which explains why we'll never see Novack, or anyone from BushInc ever go to jail. As a guess, Bush will probably pardon more people that any other president in history, before he's dragged kicking and screaming from the White House.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

19. Will Chimp pardon Novak AND his eyebrows?

Two separate entities.