Novak, Corn, and Plamegate

| Wed Aug. 19, 2009 7:33 AM PDT
novak-2.jpg

At the time, Robert Novak couldn't have know that, despite a half century of covering Washington, one little line would ignite the scandal that would come to dominate his legacy: "Wilson never worked for the CIA, but his wife, Valerie Plame, is an agency operative on weapons of mass destruction." Following the conservative columnist's death yesterday at the age of 78, mentions of his role in outing the CIA operative were ubiquitous in the numerous obits commemorating his life.

Our DC bureau chief, David Corn, played a unique role in the Plamegate saga, too. Then working for the Nation, he was the first to raise the possibility that Bush administration officials, bent on smearing diplomat Joseph Wilson, had broken the law by leaking the identity of Wilson's wife. Let's just say that David's role in breaking this news did not endear to him Novak, with whom he'd enjoyed a friendly enough relationship over the years. Over at Politics Daily, David recalls his interactions with Novak pre- and-post Plamegate:

I learned of the death of Bob Novak from an e-mail sent to me by an NPR reporter looking for a comment. And I felt awkward, for my last public exchange with the conservative columnist and TV pundit who relished his "Prince of Darkness" nickname had been an ugly one. There is, of course, the don't-speak-ill-of-the-dead rule. But what could I say about a fellow who had blasted me on national television as an ideological hack?

There wasn't always bad blood between us. Years earlier, as a substitute host on CNN's "Crossfire," I had come to enjoy wrestling with Novak. When I began that gig, though, he barely paid any attention to me before or after tapings, adopting an attitude that seemed to say, "Show me your stuff, kid." He acted as if I were an irritant, not a sparring partner who deserved to be in the ring with him. But I didn't expect much from Novak. For years, I had thought he used his column and cable appearances to do favors for conservative allies and to sully (sometimes unfairly) liberals. Eventually, he warmed up -- well, as much as he could -- and started pumping me for information on what Democrats and liberals in Washington were thinking. I hardly held any top-secret information in that regard, but we did what most political reporters in D.C. do when forced to spend time together: trade tidbits, gossip and half-stories. And in his 2000 book, "Completing the Revolution" (as in: the "conservative revolution"), he described me as a "bright, young, left-wing journalist." (Given his age, I suppose someone in his early 40s was "young.")

Advertisement

Advertisement

By 2006, Novak was describing David in a much different light. On CSPAN, he said:

Mr. Corn is a nasty piece of work -- let me tell you that. And he was the one who really built this story up. He is in what I think is a deliciously ironic situation because he was one of the people -- much more, I believe, than Chris Matthews -- [responsible] for building this story up from the outset...

He also blasted David as a "left wing ideologue" and said "I don't think he's really interested in getting facts. He's interested in getting out a line." David writes:

I was...saddened that Novak, who had admirably been a skeptic of the Bush-Cheney administration's decision to invade Iraq, had now become an apologist for the Bush White House (and Rove) on the CIA leak story. He was miscasting facts and repeatedly refusing to acknowledge that the Bush-Cheney gang had tried to undermine Joe Wilson -- and that this effort had included disseminating information about Valerie Wilson's CIA employment. (By the way, the Bush White House issued the false statement that Rove was not connected to the leak -- and never corrected itself.)

After this dust-up, I didn't have much to do with Novak. His career certainly has entailed much more than the CIA leak case. So what to tell the NPR reporter? I noted that, ideology aside, Novak had been one of the most successful practitioners of insider journalism in Washington for decades, yet it seemed to me that he had too often allowed his bias to shape his reporting -- as opposed to using his reporting to support his bias. But in its short piece, NPR didn't have space for that. (I'm not complaining; three minutes is not much time.) Instead, NPR used my observation that for many people the CIA leak case "was an event that came to define" Novak. My hunch is that Novak realized that and hated it -- and that's why he came to dislike me so much, blaming the reporter for the facts reported.

Follow Daniel Schulman on Twitter.

Daniel Schulman is Mother Jones' Washington-based news editor. For more of his stories, click here. To follow him on Twitter, click here.

Get Mother Jones by Email - Free. Like what you're reading? Get the best of MoJo three times a week.

Comments

Glad your gone you partisan

Glad your gone you partisan prick!

Novak was a special type of

Novak was a special type of agitator. His "super-power" was to utilize sound bites that made his cause sound like the injured and aggrieved party, whereas in reality his was the oppressive position.
He was not the most annoying pundit, just the most arrogant. Everyone else who disagreed was a coward and loser, in his view. The last time I saw him on cable TV, the subject was school lunches. He turned to the moderator and said: "I just had pot-roast for lunch with béarnaise sauce, fried potatoes and an ice cream parfait for desert. What is wrong with that?" Well, nothing if the net effect is that now we are rid of you.

Blame the messenger.

Those with less than full integrity who have committed an act for which they are less than proud respond by blaming the messenger, never themselves. Novak's blame the messenger responses say a lot about Robert Novak. Sort of par for the course in the Washington scene.

russian dating now this

russian dating now this appearance became more and more distributed. Many foreign rich men wish to get married on an common Russian or Ukrainian woman. Why do alien millionaires want to live only with Russian lady? All over the world there are many beautiful ladies, so why do they select only Russians? No one knows answer for this important russian dating and joyful question, but this note can show you a little truth. What do you think about Russian and Ukrainian ladies. Let me tell you. They are beautiful beautiful, kind, cheerful, funny and clever. Many them are very smart, but they choose a joyful family against their russian dating profession. Most of them wish to get married on a nice person and to raise a kid. They love their parents, they will help everybody who need them. In a dialog with common Russian or Ukrainian lady you will find many good feelings. russian dating Conversation with them is funnyly and simple. russian dating Russian or Ukrainian girl are fond of cooking, their delicatessens are really tasty. russian dating Russian lady will wait you after your work with russian dating your child, she will love you. She will do all flat housecleaning while you are at work, she would take care of your kid; family life with her will be like a fairy. Look russian dating at ordinary American russian dating woman and tell me her good russian dating characterizations. I think that you won't russian dating find them. American women are lazy and rude. They are fond of beer, cigarettes, russian dating simple stupid series on the TV and they prefer to discuss them with their girls. It isn't interesting to talk and live with them, they can't grow a kid. That's why really clever men don't want to get russian dating married on them. Russian or Ukrainian ladies are much better then American. So if you want to start a really good family life with really good lady, the best method for you is to find a woman in Russia or Ukraine. Nowadays there are lots of ways of dating in the web, so prospecting of Russian or Ukrainian girl will be really simple for you. russian dating

Another detail

In all the "tributes," I haven't heard anyone mention this story. Perhaps you need to live in the DC area to know the story. Google Novak hit and run. Prince of Darkness indeed.

Journalist? What Journalist?

Let's call a spade a spade. He was a paid propagandist for the elite corporate right-wing agenda. Just as the government works for the corporations, he worked for New World Order multi-national corporate rulers. He is and was a toady to the upper crust, and an enemy of the people. Goodbye Mr. Novak, your lies and deliberate misinformation will be missed - but not for long, there are many more cowardly sycophants waiting in the wings to take your place, eager to lick the boots of the obscenely wealthy, the powerful and the corrupt.

robert novak

the world is as far better place without elitest syncopants.

Burn in hell, Bob Novak.

Burn in hell, Bob Novak. Assholes like you I am more than happy to see go. You used your "journalist" title to push conservative crap. I'm no journalist, and neither were you.

I see someone was finally

I see someone was finally able to drive a stake of holly in that black heart. Some people cause misery in the world by accident; some relish it. Novak did both.

Novak

I'm glad he's dead. The Prince of Dickness. Good riddance.

Novak was

Novak was a traitor to his country and should have swung from the gallows in the public square.

Many have gotten Novak's

Many have gotten Novak's "goat" over the years, always a pleasure to watch. I cannot verify an attributed Novak quote which may describe him well. It is, "I ruined a wonderful Thanksgiving Dinner, watching all those homeless people outside the window."
Can anyone verify?

Remember

As someone who has worked

As someone who has worked for the federal government and been granted a security clearance I have never ceased to be amazed at a person who would PUBLISH THE NAME OF A NON-OFFICIAL COVER CIA OPERATIVE PURELY FOR POLITICAL GAIN. If I had done such a thing I would have lost my clearance, lost my job, and likely have gone to jail. And deservedly so.

Lisa

Lisa, I think it's not as

Lisa, I think it's not as much about publishing the name, but those who leaked it in the first place (not just to Novak but Miller, etc.) and their motivations for doing so. DS

GHW Bush Defined GW Bush White House Treason

David Corn is absolutely correct, and he is backed up totally by what GEORGE H.W. BUSH said in his 1999 Speech to the CIA: “I have nothing but contempt and anger for those who betray the trust by exposing the name of our sources. They are, in my view, the most insidious of traitors.”

The fact is that the entire Bush White House committed treason with their Plame exposure.

Treason against U.S. Military and CIA Heroes and Patriots is the Bush White House’s paramount cultural value, which history shall document.

Post new comment

Alternately, you may login to or register an account
The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <ul> <ol> <li> <blockquote>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

MoJo Comments: Send Us Your Feedback

We changed our spam software to better filter comments. Should you encounter any issues, please let us know.

Photo Essays

The chaos and humanity of war.
The craftspeople and musicians of Appalachia.
A selection of '70s ads depicting African-Americans.
As climate change melts the permafrost, native villages slip into the sea, taking a way of life with them.