Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: KLP who wrote (10720)	10/4/2003 12:38:12 PM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793712

It's now clear that Novak's earlier leak, the July 14th column, has now produced this further problem. Any CIA agent who used the cover of this firm's name is now revealed. I didn't see Novak on yesterday's programs but I gather he identified the firm as a way to say she must not be a serious CIA agent if she used a non-existant firm as a cover for her campaign contribution. However, it turns out that's further evidence of the damage done by the leak. We are still on track for a scenario in which the Bush folk try to slow walk it along, increase the dangers of an active, aggressive coverup taking place, and set themselves up for that charge. I remain surprised they are handling it this way and can still only speculate that it's because this reaches into some place like the VP's office, to Scooter Libby and thus to Cheney. As Chuck Hegel openly implied.