Wednesday, October 01, 2003

Threat matrix: (for the Plame scandal)




Too complicated / too many facts Reynolds weblog
  Volokh weblog
Doesn't make any sense Sullivan weblog
  Reynolds weblog
Wilson is partisan / far-left May National Review
  Podhoretz New York Post
Not a "leak", but arose in conversation Robbins National Review
Nobody called Novak with the tip Robbins National Review
  Hannity radio
White House didn't leak (according to Novak) Limbaugh radio
Rove wasn't involved McClennan White House
Explains why "unreliable" Wilson went to Niger (CIA/Plame responsible) Podhoretz New York Post
Not an "operative" or "agent", but an "analyst" Robbins National Review
(usually citing Novak), Luskin weblog
or not sure if she was covert Sullivan weblog
or not covert abroad Limbaugh website
  Boot Los Angeles Times
Lots of folks knew Plame was CIA Robbins National Review
  Novak column
  May National Review
Not a risk to Plame because she's not posted overseas Reynolds weblog
Wilson is not in danger Limbaugh website
It's a partisan issue Hannity radio
  Reynolds weblog
Outing CIA happens 50 times a year, no big deal Limbaugh radio
Plame's name was in the public domain Limbaugh radio
(usually listed as wife of Wilson) Limbaugh website
  Luskin weblog
"Manufactured" scandal / outrage Limbaugh website
  Robbins National Review
  Reynolds weblog
Paying attention to Plame undermines war on terrorism editors New York Post
  Hannity radio
Wilson was a bad choice to investigate Niger story Robbins National Review
(incompetent, unqualified, or untrustworthy) May National Review
  Reynolds weblog
Wilson is a jerk Sullivan weblog
It's Wilson's fault (for making such a fuss about the Niger issue) Levin National Review
Wilson lied when he said his mission was a request by Cheney May National Review
CIA participated in exposing Plame Luskin weblog
This is minor, real scandal is CIA intelligence failures Boot Los Angeles Times
Wilson's whole act is a fraud Podhoretz New York Post
OBSERVATION: So far, the only big name media outlet putting up much of a defense is the National Review (but we'll be on the lookout for more and update the table when appropriate). UPDATE: Which we have just done.

NOTE OF THANKS: We couldn't have done this without tapping into the resources provided by Calpundit, Mark A. R. Kleiman, and Josh Marshall's Talking Points Memo. (That's what weblogs are good for!)


Post a Comment