Yesterday, Bob Novak died from brain cancer.
Novak was a challenging figure for those of us left of George HW Bush. He was a competent foil, a sometimes blustering side-stepper, but more often than not, one of the few people willing to be honest about their own party as well as the other side's foibles.
I sometimes seethed watching Novak on Crossfire, feeling any competent commentator could shred his arguments, but I equally respected a man who in his later years especially was willing to speak out against excesses in financial services, in government overreaching, and generally in the ever shrinking quality of actual journalism (journalism where who, what, where, when and why were actually reported, without editorial commentary, and without succumbing to the idea that if there are two arguments, but one is not competent, it doesn't mean there is controversy).
I respected Novak in the later years of his life and wish his soul God'd speed on it's way, and offer my sympathies (for what they are worth) to his family and friends.
God bless. Novak was a significant journalistic presence.
ReplyDeleteOf all the facets of Novak's career, I think the most prominent in recent years was the connection to revealing Valerie Plame's CIA cover.
No KR, it will not. It was a massive embarassment for Novak and CNN. He disclosed details which even he had a good idea were classified 'secret.'
ReplyDeleteHe was no better a journalist than Olbermann, but neither was he worse. He reported things as a toady for right-wing politicos, was known across Washington as being more interested in his 'access' than the truth (up until his later years). You may not like Olbermann, but he has NOT once ever violated state secrets that you or I know of, and has NO history of acting a an organ for his left-leaning political connections to the degree Novak did with Plame.
It was hardly much ado about nothing, it was the purposeful attempt to intimidate a reporter by destroying the career of his wife. If that's nothing to you, ok, but I can respectfully disagree and feel very confident in my belief.
K-Rod said...
ReplyDeleteTake it easy on the Kool-Aid.
KR, there was no useful journalistic purpose served by revealing the information about Plame. Like her or her husband or not, the CIA had an investment in her as an agent, and she had served overeas in a variety of capacities, including some in Greece which put her life in danger. It was wrong, and it was cowardly, to do what he did. It resulted in threats not only to her, but to her family which included very young twin children. At the very least, it would have been the decent thing to do to warn her that she was about to be exposed, but he didn't do that. He got paid for what he wrote; that is pretty shameless.
Regardless of what kind of historic attention his action receives, what he did was wrong, it would be wrong for any journalist to do, regardless of their politics or the politics of the person who was left vulnerable by the exposure.
KR wrote:
ReplyDelete"
"threats not only to her"
Over her not so secret book with her photo on the cover?
*cue x-files music*"
KR, there would be no book if Plame had a choice about remaining with the CIA; there would be no threats to her family. To claim that was ok to leak it, because once everything was already out in the open, essentially, she then wrote a book doesn't make sense, sound track or not.
KR,
ReplyDeleteYou might want to check the order of events here.
First, at the time Novak exposed her, she was still classified as an active operative, and her status was still 'secret'. While she was in fact stateside, and ya' know, we ALL understood her status long before you attempted to educate us, she was also still considered covert because her contacts OVERSEAS still needed protection from being exposed as having worked with the CIA. Her outting lead to, it is surmized, at least two deaths.
She wrote a book LONG after she was outted, and NO ONE, no one at all, knew she was a CIA operative when she was outted outside of the CIA and her family. Claims to the contrary were subsequently proven bogus.
KR wrote:
ReplyDeleteI'm callin 2-855-7448.
B as in B, S as in S.
People inside Washington knew, don't be so naive. "
No, KR, they did NOT.
It was a well kept secret. I refer you to the Scooter Libby trial.
That changed ONLY after Novak made it public. ONLY then. Shame on Mr. Novak, and those who encouraged him to do it.
I'm callin 2-855-7448.
ReplyDeleteSorry - I don't follow this reference.... please explain?
Actually I will have to find the reference but she was serving stateside at Langley because her cover was blown a few yrs before Novak and whoever outed her. We still communicate to Cuba through the Swiss and at some point the Swiss or the CIA screwed up and missed her name in a communication. The assumption inside the CIA was that she could no longer do overseas work because the Cubans now knew who she worked for. After that she normally used the public entrance to Langley so anyone who wanted could see her enter the gates 5 days a week. I am not saying her name should have been leaked but it was highly unlikely it put her life in danger any more than it was already.
ReplyDeleteI am not saying her name should have been leaked but it was highly unlikely it put her life in danger any more than it was already."
ReplyDeleteNeither she nor her family had received death threats prior to the leak, nor had the CIA had to take fairly dramatic protective measures prior to the leak. There is a big difference between thinking that someone might know, and being published in a newspaper.
Also - she came back to Langley for other reasons, or so I've read, having to do with oportunitities to rise within the organization, her husband retiring from his government job, tarting a family, etc.
Dog Gone, no doubt his family is grieving, as are others. It does nothing constructive on behalf of Robert Novak's memory, or his family and friends and admirers to say these things at this moment of loss.
ReplyDeleteYou disagree; so be it.
I feel at greater peace with myself NOT joining you; grieving deserves a little more kindness and consideraion.
K-Rod said...
ReplyDeleteDog Gone, no doubt his family is grieving, as are others. It does nothing constructive on behalf of Robert Novak's memory, or his family and friends and admirers to say these things at this moment of loss.
KR point taken; however may I call to your attention that there is a big difference in DEGREE between respectfully criticizing Novak re: Plame in an otherwise positive context, and statements blaming Kennedy for someone's death without any positive context?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletePenigma rote:- YOU brought that up - it should have been left alone,
ReplyDeleteNo, Pen, KR was correct - I brought that up and I should have let it alone, for the same reasons I wrote about Kennedy. KR shouldn't get faulted for that. He corrected me, and rightly so.
Then I apologize to KR with respect to the Plame affair.
ReplyDeleteThe complaint sitll stands regarding flaming Olbermann, but in looking at it, his reply was probably a reaction to your post.
Ok, I'm sorry KR.
KR, actually, Cheney's chief of staff IS serving time for lying about this affair.
ReplyDeleteIf you consider outing an operative much ado about nothing, fine, but it's illegal, was referred for investigation for prosecution by the CIA and DOJ, and that investigation was only stopped by stone-walling by Scooter Libby.
The thing about the whole Plame thing is that if Scooter Libby had told the truth no one would have gone to jail. The only charges ever filed against anyone were against him for lying to agents during the investigation. During his trial they found out that the leak came ultimately from Cheney and no charges were filed, mainly because CIA reports to the president, it might be wrong for him to reveal their identity but it is not against the law since he ultimately decides what is classified and what is not. Of course most investigations in Washington end up with the charges all being due to someone lying to investigators, this is true of democrats and republicans. They are usually lying because what they did would get them voted out of office and after the FBI spends thousands of hours and dollars to find out no crime was committed and if no one had lied it would have taken 10 minutes to figure out they send the liars to jail.
ReplyDeleteTuck,
ReplyDeleteI don't know we can conclude that - Libby covered for some acts which might well have lead to indictment.
Whether or not someone did something illegal, they DEFINETELY did something highly unethical.
Revealing the name of an undercover operative to a third party is a violation of US Law. However, once someone had leaked that information to Novak, Novak's right to report that information is protected under the 1st amendment to the Constitution, freedom of the press. While I think it was of questionable ethics to reveal her name, Mr. Novak didn't commit any crime. Those who leaked the information to him certainly did.
ReplyDeleteKR,
ReplyDeleteAre you incapable of grasping facts, or merely purposefully ducking what was pointed out to you?
The Plame investigation died with Libby - he stone-walled it, get it? To protect his bosses, get it? And Bush commuted his sentence, get it? To keep Libby from testifying further, get it?
Jeesuz.