Interesting note (John Podesta, Wash. Post)

[Grins]

This comment caught my eye:

"And while it is standard practice for the White House to review documents demanded in a criminal investigation, …the two-week review process the White House is undertaking suggests that either the White House has far more documentation on the defamation of Joe Wilson than it should….”

I know they are busy trying to cover-up Bush/Cheney malfeasance, but just how much material can there possibly be about Wilson?

<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A10891-2003Oct10.html>

[Cha]

1. Kick

:kick:

[jbfam4]

2. I posted this yesterday

in editorials and articles, but failed to put Podesta's name in the subject line. It didn't get much of a response, so glad you posted it again.

Podesta was just on Late addition .......he was really stressing this part of the article...

"If the administration opts to handle the matter proactively, it should take three immediate steps. First, it would be wise for the president to require everyone in the White House to sign a certification that he or she was not the source of the original leak to columnist Robert Novak or involved in "pushing the story" once Novak published. The latter may itself be a criminal violation if the person "pushing" knew that the United States was taking measures to conceal Mrs. Wilson's identity. Falsifying such a certification would be subject to penalty under Title 18, Section 1001 of the U.S. Criminal Code. "