Whatever happened to Robert Novak?

There's a Monty Python sketch called "The Value of Not Being Seen" in which a man hidden behind a bush is asked to expose himself.

As soon as the man reveals himself, there is a loud gunshot. He holds his stomach, cringes, then falls over dead. John Cleese pipes up, "Thus demonstrates the value of not being seen."

There are indeed many advantages to not being seen. This, one would imagine, would hold especially true for those engaged in undercover CIA work. Incidentally, compromising the concealment of an undercover CIA operative might just result in a scenario not all that dissimilar to what John Cleese was trying to prove.

It must have been terribly disconcerting for Valeria Plame, a CIA operative, when in the July 14, 2003 edition of his widely read conservative column, Robert Novak (seen often on CNN's "Crossfire" - yes, the corpulent one) gave her name and listed clearly her official affiliation to the CIA. Though claiming ignorance (as ignorant as anyone willing to compromise the life of another human being can be), Novak was acting as the medium for a message directed not at Plame, but at her husband Joseph Wilson, the former ambassador to Niger. Wilson criticized the Bush administration for the invasion of Iraq, which was justified by the assumption Saddam Hussein had possession of WMDs. Their primary evidence was a claim Hussein had purchased large amounts of uranium from Niger, which Wilson in all his dealings with the country knew to be completely unfounded.

In his article, Novak mentions this information was leaked to him by "two senior administration officials," yet neglects to mention who they are. Recently, two journalists who were leaked the same information but did not publish it are facing prison sentences for not revealing their sources. The question is simple: why isn't Robert Novak in jail?

The answer seems to be that after nearly two years of controversy over the nature of journalistic ethics and the responsibility of the media, America has simply forgotten or perhaps forgiven Novak. Generally, the American justice system works on the principle one is to be punished for breaking the law. However, as this incident points out, there is a gaping loophole in the system to the extent that if one is able to drum up enough controversy and keep everyone arguing with everyone else for long enough, he can slip out the back door in the heat of the fray.

It is almost Bush-esque: getting away with a blatant disregard for the law, ethics and the life of another human being for the sake of helping settle a political vendetta on a personal level. If one thing can be said about Novak's writing, it is that it lacks, above all else, certain elements of subtlety. Novak probably would be hesitant to admit his article was written on behalf of someone else, though it is obvious it was. The mentioning of Plame and her position are not intricately woven into an argument, but are haphazardly tossed into an existing one. He included her name not to support his argument, but for the sole purpose of exposing her.

It's clear the Bush administration's justification for the entry into Iraq was threatened by Wilson's legitimate criticism. At this point all the pieces fall into place: Novak obsequiously answered the call to arms against the unarmed and the rest is CNN history. So, how is it, again, Novak has simply been forgotten about and is not being held accountable for nearly costing an innocent woman her life (one working for the CIA no less; with the way American foreign policy is going it's not like the U.S. government can afford to lose anyone else)?

Very simply, the scandal flared up, kept FOX News busy, gave the New York Times' op-ed staff a field day and then disappeared. Disappeared the way the Enron scandal disappeared and the criticism over the appointment of Halliburton to run the reconstruction of Iraq disappeared - disappeared faster than the people taken away to Guantanamo Bay disappeared. One is left to suppose wealthy conservatives like Novak just have that magic touch that can make things disappear.

It's a good thing for Novak that Americans aren't equipped with a memory capable of retaining every news fragment that scrolls across CNN during the commercials of "Survivor." After all, the knowledge the First Amendment is for all intents and purposes conditional and any protection you may presume to have against the spiteful repercussions from those who don't like what you have to say is a delusion. And it has some stiff competition with whatever comes on as soon as you change the channel.