The D-G editorial page today joins the right wing non sequitur chorus (a measure or two late on its expected entrance) that says because Richard Armitage was Robert Novak's first leak on Valerie Plame, it's all a big non-story and the evil Karl Rove is somehow owed an apology. Facts and logic are lacking in this and other apologia for Rove and Dickey Cheney, who were busily disseminating the information independently to trash Joseph Wilson and out Plame. It was the Bush administration, remember, that chummed up the report that Armitage quoted from in the first place. The smearing mission was accomplished any way you look at it and long forgotten is Bush's promise to rid the White House of any person who leaked such information. And are we to forgive lying to Grand Jury? It's simple for the Rove apologists -- yes when it's Libby lying about compromising national security; no when it's Clinton evading questions about sex.
But whatever Mr. Armitage did, or says he did, in no way alters what Mr. Rove and Mr. Libby did in the days that followed, nor does it change their intentions. It’s a simple concept—two people or more can commit a similar act for entirely different reasons—but evidently it has flummoxed the great minds of contemporary journalism.