In the cross examination of Tim Russert this week we learned that although he'd made quite a show of fighting the prosecution's subpoena, asserting he did not ever and could not ever violate the principle of source confidentiality, he had on one or two occasions revealed to an FBI investigator over the phone the details of that Libby conversation prior to his charade of fighting the subpoena. He had in fact filed a false affidavit.
Yet Mr. Russert beat-up on Robert Novak
when Novak revealed on Meet the Press
that he had talked to the FBI without a subpoena. Here are some choice bits from the Meet the Press
transcript captured by Raw Story
Russert asked Novak why he seemingly gave up so quickly without a fight.
"We were subpoenaed at NBC," Russert said. "We fought the subpoenas. Time Magazine subpoenaed, fought the subpoenas. The New York Times was subpoenaed, fought the subpoena. Why didn't you fight the subpoena?"
Novak had not disclosed his source for three years at the request of the special prosecutor. Russert, who kept his informal cooperation secret until this week (even hiding it in a sworn statement to a federal court) had the gall to question Novak about keeping silent about Novak's own cooperation with the prosecution:
Russert had the resources of NBC News available to fight his own subpoena. Novak did not. Russert waited far longer than Novak to reveal his own cooperation. So on what basis does Russert berate Novak while keeping secret his own voluntary cooperation wit the investigation? "A pot calling the kettle black" doesn't begin to capture the breathtaking hypocrisy of NBC News' premier Washington journalist
Russert asked why it took so long for him to say anything about his testimony.
"When I was subpoenaed, we announced it," said Russert. "When I testified before Patrick Fitzgerald, we announced that in what I had said and so, too, with Time Magazine and The New York Times.
"Why did you wait almost three years to tell the public that you had been subpoenaed and what you said?" Russert asked.