I think it is clear that the author-journalist role he has been playing has had clear conflicts of interest. I still see it as an issue between him and his employer though. I don't think that anyone has questioned the accuracy of any of his writing. Well, not because of this. There were those denials at the time that Powell and Cheney were feuding. According to Powell's chief of staff's recent interviews, it would seem that Woodward in fact got this right. I see this latest revelation as posing questions about how you handle a confidential source for a book when you are also trying to run a major newspaper.
Does it reflect on his honesty? As a journalist, mmm, as far as I know, pending further evidence, no. As a broadcast talking head -- well, in a world where there is Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh, not really. He engaged in a bit of wishful thinking. Haven't we all at times. Would the administration like to question his credibility over this, sure. CBS's mishandling of the National Guard forgeries allowed them to totally avoid the question of whether or not the charges the forgeries were supposed to substantiate were in fact true. Remember that even that guy who forged them still said such documents HAD existed. Bushies would love for this to be about Woodward. While he may not have played a glorious role in this, what the hell, he saw a mess and stayed out. I avoided an accident on my way over here. Rushing in where wise men fear to tread may be glorious but it often also leads to train wrecks, and car wrecks, and quagmires. As for the reconvening of the grand jury -- I would speculate -- all of this is speculation by the way, if I have not made that clear -- that he thinks he may be able to either indict Libby on additional charges or, more likely, indict another person. Dana On 11/19/05, Gruss Gott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Dana wrote: > > Despite where it is it is an AP story. So perhaps it is not Cheney. > > > > Just speculating, I don't think it's Cheney. However, Mr. Fitzgerald > is asking for a 2nd Grand Jury, but it's hard to see how this plays > for either side. > > It would seem like a negative and, personally, I think previous to the > Woodward admission Mr. Fitzgerald had his sites set on Cheney. That > was somewhat clear from his press conference and indictment. > > Where's he going now, I don't know. He could have renewed vigor for > Cheney or he be heading in a totally different direction - starting > from scratch. > > As for Libby I think it may be a net negative. While he can feel good > that the 95% case against him fell to 65%, move investigation may bump > it to 100% with new charges. Further, if his trial is pushed back > past a new elections, and a Dem wins, he better start sweating. At > that point I think you'd see a full deal from him. > > Finally, as for Mr. Woodward, I think PBS' WashingtonWeek got this > right when the began a piece on him by showing his picture and saying, > "What was this man thinking?" The journalists were equally critical > of him. One of his colleagues saved a sliver of room for his career > but, for me, his credibility is in the toilet. > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble Ticket application http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:183231 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
