November 17, 2005

Bob Woodward is in the news.

I haven't been following the Plame story closely. The infusion of Bob Woodward into it excites some folks, but I've always found Woodward frightfully dull. Maybe he gets his stories by being so gray that people don't notice him. But I ran across a drawing I did of him a while back, saying something so quintessentially Woodwardish. I have no idea what he was talking about, but I love the maddening blandness of it.

Bob Woodward

32 comments:

XWL said...

How could something that is undefinable/indefinable (it would seem enough people make the substitution that undefinable has become acceptable, though indefinable is preferred) be described as clear.

Clarity can't be a quality of something that can't be defined, the very definition of indefinable precludes that which deserves description as being indefinable as being clear.

Unless you are talking about the quote itself cause clearly, it's undefinable.

(and nice drawing by the way, sort of Crumb meets Cocteau in my opinion)

And I think Scooter might be off the hook since Chris Matthews went with Sen. Kerry pontificating about how much better we would be with him making decisions about Iraq (and did he forget to mention that he served in Vietnam, why no he didn't forget, he even managed to mention Vice-President Cheney's five deferments since somehow that's relevant to a discussion about Iraq policy).

Matthews has been all Plame all the time for quite some time, so now that a potentially major revelation counter to his own views on the matter has arisen, he's changed topics.

Mark said...

Scooter's off the hook? That's hilarious.

MD said...

I love your drawings....you should sell prints of the doodlings!

PatCA said...

I admit I've lost interest in the case, or maybe it's so labrynthine I simply don't have the time to figure it out, but I don't see that this has any impact on Scooter's case. He's not being prosecuted for leaking; he's being prosecuted like Martha was, for lying about the lie...er, alleged lie. See, I'm lost!

The big macro picture that's developing is the incestuous and cynical relationship that the press has with government. They are hangers on and users, not whistleblowers, and stars like Woodward or Miller use their access for private gain as much as for a sense of dedication to journalism.

PatCA said...

Oh, I like the drawing, too, especially with the text!

EddieP said...

As Woodward has stated, the entire Plame thing is back fence and water fountain gossip. However, I don't expect that Fitz will let go yet.

Reggie said...

I think you figured out what your critics don't like. Ugh. Leave drawing to the School of Design.

vbspurs said...

(and nice drawing by the way, sort of Crumb meets Cocteau in my opinion)

Wow, XWL -- you hit the nail on the cuticle!

Crumb meets Cocteau. Perfect.

I propose Ann do a sketch for Christmas, for her Althouse readers.

Cheers,
Victoria

reader_iam said...

Victoria:

I second that motion. All in favor, say "aye"!

Darn, I wish I could draw.

vbspurs said...

I think you figured out what your critics don't like. Ugh. Leave drawing to the School of Design.

I propose we send Reggie to Barbizon, to show us how it's done.

Cheers,
VIctoria

reader_iam said...

And the text in the bubble is priceless! Seems so Woodwardian.

He was one of my early-teen heroes, but I've been so over him since the "Veil" era.

Bruce Hayden said...

Enjoyed the drawing.

I, too, don't really see this as changing the Libby case. This does push back the timeline a bit, and adds to the suggestion that at least some in the Administration thought that she was working for the DI, not the DO, side of the CIA in WMD. But BFD.

It is going to be fun though. Libby's lawyers have every incentive to plow through whatever remains of a press privilege. I fully expect a good chunk of the Wash. D.C. and national press crowd to get involved somehow, either reporting, or testifying, or in Chris Mattews situation, no doubt both. It should be exp. enlightening as he talks in the 3rd person with his guests about the trial, in which he is the star prosecution witness.

But back to Woodward and Libby. Nada.

mrbungle2103 said...

I get the feeling that Bob Woodward spied another opportunity to keep a man's name a secret for another 20 years.

Balfegor said...

Re: the pic -- But Bob Woodward has such a wrinkly face! How, as an artist, can you resist all those wrinkles? Wrinkles are such a joy to draw!

Ann Althouse said...

Balfegor: The picture is a good 10 or 12 years old.

Goesh said...

sinister looking sketch

wildaboutharrie said...

The indictment says Libby lied when he said he was just passing along what he learned from reporters. Fitzgerald said that wasn't true, as Libby was the first to leak. So this helps Libby's defense. Also helping - Woodward said he told Pincus, and Pincus says "No way, I would remember that" - so the whole question of who knew what when becomes less clear.

I read Plan of Attack, and it was odd that Woodward could have long, direct quotes from supposedly top secret meetings.

I like the sketch. I third the call for a holiday drawing.

Ann Althouse said...

A holiday drawing? What the hell are you talking about?

tefta said...

Something decidedly odd about Fitzgerald's demeanor. For an experienced prosecutor he seemed uneasy during the famous Libby news briefing a couple of weeks ago when he couldn't look the camera in the eye and last night on Fox News he got testy when asked whether Woodward's revelation would change anything about Libby's indictment and said no, Libby lied and he lied repeatedly!

I hope the charges against Libby aren't dropped and everyone involved in this fiasco is subpoenaed to testify under oath about the machinations of the media and their unholy alliance with the fifth columnists in the CIA and state department.

wildaboutharrie said...

Um...are you taking issue with my saying holiday drawing instead of Christmas sketch? I certainly didn't mean to offend, I just substituted the words in my mind. It's an old habit - I'm a public school teacher by trade, and we had to be careful to say "holiday break" instead of "Christmas". I went back and read the thread and saw my error.

Many apologies.

reader_iam said...

Ann, in Victoria's comment, she called for a holiday drawing (well, sketch) from you, which I seconded, and then I called for a vote. Poor Wild just jumped on the bandwagon.

wildaboutharrie said...

"Poor Wild" should know better than to bandwagon. I thought was was too PC. It's an occupational hazzard.

Ann Althouse said...

No, I just can't see why you picture me doing such a drawing. I wasn't thinking about the Christmas/holiday issue.

wildaboutharrie said...

I have no idea. I thought it would be rude to post about Woodward's place in the Plame story (which I know doesn't interest you) without commenting on the picture (the topic of the thread). There, now I'm being frightfully dull. Take no notice.

sonicfrog said...

WOW! That's almost Greenspanspeak!

wildaboutharrie said...

(Sonic, I'm thinking Rumsfeld in terms of logic, except R is never dull.)

PatCA said...

"It is going to be fun though. Libby's lawyers have every incentive to plow through whatever remains of a press privilege."

Amen. Perhaps this is why Woodward has been denigrating the investigation. I can't wait for the veil to be lifted, once and for all!

Performing Bear said...

Fitzgerald justified the jailing of Judith Miller for refusing to testify before the grand jury because the conversation was part of the res gestae.

Why, then, hasn't Fitzgerald subpoened Woodward?

Performing Bear said...

An addendum:

To support his exercise of prosecutorial discretion in charging Libby, Fitzgerald stated (in his press conference) that Plame's identity was not widely known before Libby spoke to Judith Miller.

At the very least, Woodward's revelation undercuts Fitzgerald's case for charging Libby.

Of course, talking to Bob Woodward is not exactly contributing to the widely known body of information. Ask Deep Throat.

wildaboutharrie said...

A new grand jury is forthcoming...

The WSJ said "Vice President Dick Cheney isn't believed to have talked to Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald since last year, nor has he given a waiver to Mr. Woodward. That removes him as Mr. Woodward's source."

But Woodward said he had NOT received a waiver to reveal his source publicly. So, I'd say this does not exclude Cheney at all.

vbspurs said...

A holiday drawing? What the hell are you talking about?

Aww.

I guess this means our Christmas drawing petition has been rubbished.

Well pfui on you, Ann!

And that drawing looks nothing like Bob Redford, either.

Cheers,
Victoria

XWL said...

You just have to know how to ask.

A holiday drawing with Santa mulling an important legal question while some sort of discharge flows from a bodily orifice might get a response.

(and a tastefully disgusting, and instructive drawing)

And the Hardball promos today have been hyping the fundraising for Libby's defense fund ($5M and counting, which evil corporations donated, tune in at 7pm EST to find out!) and Mo Dowd of all people is supposed to have an important new angle on the case (cause she is well known as an investigative journalist?).

Thank god, I was worried that he was going to drop this case, I prefer that he be distracted by the current bright and shiny object than spread half-truths about the War in Iraq or the Alito nomination.

And Woodward has been compared to Chance the gardener from Being There, that has always seemed apt.