Novak Sang, As Expected

Howard Kurtz gives a nice rundown of the media hubbub in the Plame/Rove affair (now, that would be newsworthy), which culminated in the reporterly explosion in the White House briefing room the other day. (See transcript a few posts below.) Within his article, he details the work of a freelance investigative reporter named Murray Waas, who has possibly the first report on Novak's role in the whole mess—something I know I’ve been really wondering about:

"Columnist Robert Novak provided detailed accounts to federal prosecutors of his conversations with Bush administration officials who were sources for his controversial July 11, 2003 column identifying Valerie Plame as a clandestine CIA officer, according to attorneys familiar with the matter. . . .

"Novak had claimed to the investigators that the Bush administration officials with whom he spoke did not identify Plame as a covert operative, and that use of the word 'operative' was his formulation and not theirs, according to those familiar with Novak's accounts to the investigators."

Before I sign off, I also want to take issue with this statement from Michael Goodwin in the New York Daily News, as quoted by Kurtz (out of context here):

“With Dems reduced to Howard Dean's rants and Hillary Clinton's juvenile jab that President Bush looks like Mad magazine's Alfred E. Neuman, somebody has to offer a substantive alternative.”

From everything else I’ve read on Hill and these Mad mag comments, she never compared how Bush and Neuman look, just that they both have a “What me worry?” attitude. So get it right before you counter-bash, reportron.