Russert Needs to Clear the Record

The other day Bloomberg reported the following:

"Lewis 'Scooter' Libby, Vice President Dick Cheney's
chief of staff, told special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald
that he first learned from NBC News reporter Tim
Russert of the identity of Central Intelligence Agency
operative Valerie Plame, the wife of former
ambassador and Bush administration critic Joseph
Wilson, one person said. Russert has testified before
Fitzgerald that he didn't tell Libby of Plame's identity,
the person said."

The clear implication here is that Libby was either lying or mistaken when he told Fitzgerald that he learned about Plame from Russert, and this may well turn out be the case. But as Bob Somerby (and others) have pointed out, NBC's public statement about Russert's testimony seems to employ some obvious "Luskinisms." Somerby quotes a Los Angeles Times story from August 2004 which reports the following:

"'Mr. Russert told the special prosecutor that, at the
time of that conversation, he did not know Ms. Plame's
name or that she was a CIA operative, and that he did
not provide that information to Mr. Libby,' the NBC
statement said.
'Mr. Russert said that he first learned Ms. Plame's
name and her role at the CIA when he read a column
written by Robert Novak later that month.'"

In light of what we know now, having already parsed through Robert Luskin's carefully chosen words describing Karl Rove's involvement in this affair, the NBC statement looks suspiciously like a non-denial denial. For instance, did Russert tell Libby that "Joe Wilson's wife" worked for the CIA? I don't know. But I do know that the NBC statement doesn't rule out that possibility.

Today, on Meet the Press, Russert commented, albeit in passing, on his own role in the leak investigation. Russert said that "even if it [Plame's identity] came from a reporter, the reporter got it from some place." He then added "but I was asked what I said. I did not know" (for full transcript click here). Russert's comment seemed to imply that he had nothing to do with this affair. But, again, his statement was far from clear. What exactly didn't he know? Plame's name? Her job title? Anything about her at all? The reason this is important is that, fair or not, Libby is right now being tried in the court of public opinion. Russert's statements to date leave one with the clear impression that Libby lied to federal investigators (which may be correct). But if Russert did in fact tell Libby that "Wilson's wife worked at the Agency," or something similar, then it is totally unacceptable for Russert to be making literally true but very misleading statements about his own involvement in this affair. This is especially true considering Russert has no obligation to stay silent and almost surely faces no potential criminal charges, no matter what his involvement may have been. The same is clearly not true of Libby.

So if Russert really did say nothing at all about Plame to Libby, he should say so. If he did say something, he should tell us what exactly he said. Either way, he needs to clear the record. Otherwise, it's totally unacceptable for him to continue to cover this issue every Sunday.