Reply #61: After six months...?

[Virginian]

Why didn't he do that a long time ago?

Will this ever move forward?
Bush as much as told the reporters involved that they had better not divulge the source when he said 'it would probably never be solved because reporters never divulge their sources'.

To get around this, "Reporter_A" tells "Reporter_B" the identity of the senior White House officials who leaked the information.
"Reporter_B" reports on the leak, but can keep the identity of "Reporter_A" confidential.

I believe there were possibly six "Reporter_A"s who were called by the senior White House officials. The problem here is that they probably all work for Faux News or else the leaks wouldn't have been given to them. They might think protecting the administration is more important than protecting a CIA operation that was keeping us safe from rogue nuclear weapons.

Do I feel any safer than two years ago? Not when this White House feels it is OK to expose a covert operation this important to our national security for their personal political revenge.

Who would have ever thought anyone that close to the seat of power would be so irresponsibly partisan to even consider compromising national security for the politics of personal destruction. Those people have done damage that leaves us all exposed to a higher terror threat. They have to be removed from access to any more information immediately. Leaving them in place for the past six months may have given them the opportunity to pass along more secrets to our enemies. They may not be over zealous partisans, they may actually be working for our enemies.

This is where the Patriot act might have been used effectively.