What Media Bias?

The Coverts, Joseph Wilson and wife, "undercover" CIA agent Valerie Plame, keeping a low profile in Vogue. This photo was taken about the time that "treasonous" Joe Wilson outed her identity in his entry in Who's Who.

A few months ago a Democrat asked me what I thought about the treasonous act of outing a "covert" CIA agent. I made a simple reply, that no agent was "covert" if they worked at a desk job in CIA Headquarters at Langley for over the past five years. That was not opinion on my part, but a statement of relevant law.

Now a classified program of surveillance of international communications by suspected terrorists, with some of the communications originating or terminating in the United States, has been leaked to the press. This compromise of classified information should be pursued with far more zeal than the Valerie Plame tempest, because it actually damages the security interests of the United States.

A Special Prosecutor must be assigned to subpoena reporters for their testimony to enable the identification and punishment of the leakers.

I am sure the Main Stream Media will pursue this with the same vigor as the Plame "case," because of course they are objective and unbiased.

(In a just released UCLA study of 20 major media outlets, 18 scored left of the average voter, with CBS' "Evening News," The New York Times and the Los Angeles Times ranking second, third and fourth most liberal behind the news pages of The Wall Street Journal.)

What media bias?

UPDATE:

Finally it is revealed on Captains Quarters that Valerie Plame was outed by - her husband, Joseph Wilson, in his entry in Who's Who! Of course, that doesn't change the Democrats in their position that outing her was a treasonous act by the Bush administration, even though all the testimony shows Joseph Wilson lied about his wife's involvement in getting him the "yellow cake uranium" assignment, and about what he found concerning Iraqi attempts to purchase it.

Now the San Francisco Chronicle watch begins. Will they report this, as they breathlessly reported all the allegations about Karl Rove? If they report it, how deeply in the paper will they bury it? And of most import, will they draw a parallel between Democrat's charges of treason vis-a-vis the Plame disclosure, and the New York Times disclosure of significant classified information on the National Security Agency monitoring and the SWIFT terrorist financial transactions tracking?

I bet the Chronicle practices its usual policy of selective outrage, reserving it only for bashing the Bush administration.

Ladies and gentlemen, place your bets.

UPDATE 2:

The San Francisco Chronicle ran the Washington Post article about Valerie Plame and her husband suing the White House figures without once mentioning that Robert Novack said he got her identity from her husband via Who's Who.

So far, the only mention in the Chronicle was on the Editorial Page, where a Robert Novack column explained his involvement and that he found Valerie Plame's identity in Joseph Wilson's entry in Who's Who. Not surprisingly, the Chronicle didn't find that newsworthy, although anything previously that even hinted of Bush administration involvement merited front page converage. It's amazing how little news sense is found in the Chronicle's newsroom. You would think it would be a huge story that the Special Prosectutor Fitzgerald spent over a year and a lot of taxpayer money on nothing.

Sometimes you learn more from what isn't reported than from what is.