« Question | Main | The Power of First »

May 31, 2005

Deep Throat Revealed!

It was W. Mark Felt, the FBI's #2 at the time. The upcoming Vanity Fair has a long interview with the newly named source, and the Capitol Buzz points us towards an advance copy of the article. It's pdf, but this is a big fucking moment. Off you go.

May 31, 2005 | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c572d53ef00d83458174b69e2

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Deep Throat Revealed!:

» Deep Throat from B12 Partners Solipsism
If you are interested, Vanity Fair's upcoming issue reveals who “Deep Throat' was: W. [Read More]

Tracked on May 31, 2005 12:31:28 PM

» 'Deep Throat' Reportedly Comes Forward from Unpartisan.com Political News and Blog Aggregator
A former FBI official says he was the source called "Deep Throat" who leaked secrets about President [Read More]

Tracked on May 31, 2005 12:40:00 PM

» Deep Throat - Not The Dog from i'm just waiting for the robot invasion
Per Vanity Fair, via Capital Buuz>, via Ezra Klein (who may or may not be Ezra today), comes the smashing news that Deep Throat has been revealed - and no, it's not as interesting and scandalous as we might have hoped. For all the speculation, I was al... [Read More]

Tracked on May 31, 2005 12:52:45 PM

» Deep Throat from Nonplussed
It's hard to think of an example of anything similar to what Felt did. The man who holds Felt's old job today is John Pistole and he made his bones in the FBI counterterrorism division. What would the world be like today if Pistole -- or his peer at ... [Read More]

Tracked on Jun 1, 2005 10:43:28 AM

Comments

Wow. Just...wow. It's nice to have a name and face for the guy I've considered a true American hero for 30+ years.

Posted by: Tom Hilton | May 31, 2005 11:54:57 AM

Mark Felt, not John. Specifically, W. Mark Felt.

Posted by: Patrick Nielsen Hayden | May 31, 2005 12:07:24 PM

Most interesting to me: that the Deputy Director of the FBI knew of illegal acts and lies by the President and his staff and did nothing. (Well, being DT helped a bit). If Felt knew, many other FBI people must have known, and were silent.

We should be questioning whether the Attorney General should be a political appointment. With an AG (like Mitchell, Ashcroft, Gonzales, etc.) that is just a criminal facilitator, "a nation of laws, not of men" is just a saying. Yes, Watergate does partly show 'that the system works', but it came very close to not working and didn't work for a long time before Nixon waved from the helicopter steps.

Posted by: JimPortlandOR | May 31, 2005 1:14:55 PM

On the same day you dismiss efforts to pursue a formal inquiry on the basis of the Downing Street Memo you declare the revelation of the identity of Deep Throat as "a big fucking moment"?! LOL - Ezra, you've lost your mind! (Or, at minimum, your sense of irony.)

Posted by: Shakespeare's Sister | May 31, 2005 3:02:08 PM

OT:

http://tinyurl.com/9rjkd

PARIS, May 30 - The shock waves of France's rejection of a constitution for Europe reverberated throughout the Continent on Monday, with Britain suggesting that it might cancel its own popular vote on the document and the naysayers in the Netherlands gaining even more confidence that a no vote will prevail in a referendum there on Wednesday.

Posted by: Robert Zimmerman | May 31, 2005 3:06:12 PM

1) No Democratic congress.

2) Party that's already suffering from being weak on national defense and insufficiently supportive of the troops. Gotta pick your battles.

Speaking of which -- anyone heard anything on Plame recently?

Posted by: Ezra | May 31, 2005 3:14:24 PM

Party that's already suffering from being weak on national defense and insufficiently supportive of the troops.

Again, maybe I'm just being foolish (or to be generous, let's call it hopeful), but I think part of it is a framing issue. Getting to the truth of why and how the troops were sent to war is perhaps one of the best ways of supporting them, no? Yeah, I know - media spin not on our side on that one. Fuck it; it feels important to me. Newsweek didn't, for example. That was a big yawn for me. This seems different. This seems like an opportunity to pursue some much-needed accountability.

Posted by: Shakespeare's Sister | May 31, 2005 3:31:52 PM

Well, I wish you the best with it. If you're able to impeach him or even dent his poll numbers a bit, I will thank you till the end of time.

Posted by: Ezra | May 31, 2005 3:45:54 PM

Well, I wish you the best with it. If you're able to impeach him or even dent his poll numbers a bit, I will thank you till the end of time.

That seems a bit smug. Don't do anything unless it leads to impeachment?

And with regards to your #2 reason for not supporting this, I think you fall into the same dangerous mindset that is already crippling our side of the political spectrum. You accept the notion that bringing up things that are negative of this Administration is not supporting the troops. That's bullshit. The whole point of the Downing Street Memo is to show that this Administration put aside the welfare of our military to fulfill their unneccessary and unwise agenda.

We're never going to lose our perception of being weak on national security and not supporting the troops if people like you continue to give it credence by calculating not to support an important and verifiable story because it will make us look like we don't love the troops. But, on the other hand, your mindset is a great way to ensure your place in the Washington media.

Speaking of which -- anyone heard anything on Plame recently?
And what makes you think we're going to get anywhere with that, and not the Downing Street Memo?

Posted by: John | May 31, 2005 6:08:39 PM

It may be smug (though it's not meant to be), but it's not because of the impeachment thing. After all, the sentence you quote identifies a poll number dent as a terrific outcome as well. As for the rest of it, it's a political judgment: I think it'll hurt our side more than help. Others, like SS, feel differently. Plame, at least, doesn't have a downside for us (and I was actually curious), and has an ongioing grand jury investigation.

Posted by: Ezra | May 31, 2005 11:51:41 PM

Ok -- I've got a bit of a problem with the VF story...it's this quote from the beginning of the article:

"The man said his name was Bob Woodward. Woodward’s name did not register with Joan, and she assumed he was no different from a number of other reporters, who had called that week."

OK, so this guy's daughter, who says she has been aware of the rumors about her dad being "Deep Throat," DOESN'T RECOGNIZE BOB WOODWARD'S NAME???????????????

Am I the only one bothered by this? She's in her early 60s, so she was an adult then, plus she's a college prof, which presumes a bit of intelligence...it just doesn't make sense. If she had never heard the rumors about her dad, and if she was some dim bulb who just watched soap operas and ate bon-bons all day, then maybe -- HELL, EVEN THEN IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE!!!

This is a great story and a good article in VF, but I'm really having a hard time getting past the first part of the piece because of that part about her not knowing who Woodward was. It defies all logic!

Is it just me? I've heard nobody else comment on this...

I'm perplexed...

Posted by: Jim Tanner | Jun 1, 2005 3:57:40 AM

Jim, we political junkies may overestimate the general population's political awareness. It is pretty surprising, though.

Posted by: Neil the Werewolf | Jun 1, 2005 4:36:02 AM

Neil -- You're right about folks like us having greater awareness of political history and lore, but it still blows my mind. If she knew her dad was rumored to be "Deep Throat," you'd think she has some idea what he was alleged to have done...which inevitably leads you to know who Bob Woodward is....amazing...

Like I said, in the grand scheme of things, this doesn't take away from this amazing story, but it did throw me for a loop while reading the VF story...I kept trying to focus on the other parts of the story farther along, but all I could think was, "How could she not know who Bob Woodward was????"


Oh, well, strange things happen every day, I guess...

Posted by: Jim | Jun 1, 2005 2:45:14 PM

托盘
托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
木托盘
木制托盘
纸托盘
木塑托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
钢托盘
木托盘
钢制托盘
托盘
塑料托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
木托盘
南京托盘
南京钢托盘
上海托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
木托盘
南京托盘
南京钢托盘
上海托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
木托盘
纸托盘
南京托盘
上海托盘
北京托盘
广州托盘
杭州托盘
成都托盘
武汉托盘
长沙托盘
合肥托盘
苏州托盘
无锡托盘
昆山托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
木托盘
纸托盘
南京托盘
南京钢制托盘
南京钢托盘
上海托盘
北京托盘

托盘
托盘
托盘
托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
塑料托盘
塑料托盘

托盘
塑料托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
铁托盘
托盘
钢托盘
铁托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘

托盘
钢托盘
铁托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
托盘
钢托盘
铁托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘

托盘
托盘
钢托盘
钢托盘
铁托盘
铁托盘
钢制托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
塑料托盘

托盘
钢托盘
铁托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
托盘
钢托盘
铁托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
托盘
钢托盘
铁托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘

托盘
钢托盘
铁托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
托盘
托盘
托盘
钢托盘
铁托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
铁托盘
塑料托盘
木托盘
木制托盘
纸托盘
木塑托盘
柱式托盘
波纹托盘
镀锌托盘
南京托盘
上海托盘
北京托盘
广州托盘
托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
铁托盘
塑料托盘
木托盘
木制托盘
纸托盘
木塑托盘
柱式托盘
波纹板托盘
镀锌托盘
南京托盘
上海托盘
北京托盘
广州托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
铁托盘
塑料托盘
木托盘
木制托盘
纸托盘
木塑托盘
柱式托盘
波纹托盘
镀锌托盘
南京托盘
上海托盘
北京托盘
广州托盘
托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
铁托盘
木托盘
塑料托盘
木塑托盘
柱式托盘
波纹板托盘
镀锌托盘
南京托盘
上海托盘
北京托盘
广州托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
铁托盘
塑料托盘
木托盘
木制托盘
纸托盘
木塑托盘
柱式托盘
波纹托盘
镀锌托盘
南京托盘
上海托盘
北京托盘
广州托盘
托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
铁托盘
塑料托盘
木托盘
纸托盘
木塑托盘
柱式托盘
波纹板托盘
镀锌托盘
南京托盘
上海托盘
北京托盘
广州托盘


托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
托盘
塑料托盘

Posted by: peter.w | Sep 15, 2007 10:26:03 AM

The comments to this entry are closed.