Reading notes

Sidney Blumenthal provides the clearest explanation and backstory I’ve seen yet of the “disclosure of the identity of an undercover CIA operative” case (elsewhere variously called the “Rove leak,” Plamegate, Treasongate, Rovegate, and to a lesser extent, though still my favorite, Turdgate — in honor of President Bush’s longstanding nickname for Karl Rove, “Turdblossom”).

What’s being exposed is vile by any standard of decency and morality I know of. What’s being exposed is the Republican culture of corruption. (I say this as a once-but-never-again GOP voter.) As this case reveals, the situation is not that hard to understand.

Hence I think it’s well worth the small hassle of getting a Salon day pass to read, even if you don’t have a Salon account.

I can’t begin to summarize better than Sidney has, so read him directly.

Sidney’s conclusion:

The sound and fury of Rove’s defenders will soon subside. The last word, the only word that matters, will belong to the prosecutor. So far, he has said very, very little. Unlike the unprofessional, inexperienced and weak Ken Starr, he does not leak illegally to the press. But he has commented publicly on his understanding of the case. “This case,” he said, “is not about a whistle-blower. It’s about a potential retaliation against a whistle-blower.”

[via VL]

2005-07-17 update:
Now this strikes me as thorough reporting, a worthy equal, seems to me, of Sidney’s piece: a Washington Post article self-described as “an effort to step back from the rapidly unfolding events of recent weeks and clarify what is known about the Plame affair and what key factors are still obscure” [via JMM].

My first impression is that this is what journalism is meant to be. Now it may be that I’m so starved for intelligent journalistic piecing together a story’s facts that I’m reading too much into this particular piecing together a story’s facts. But I don’t think so.