What strikes me as peculiar is that six reporters got phone calls that outed a CIA agent and yet none of them reported that they had witnessed a crime by a member of the White House. I'm sure if they had witnessed someone in the White House killing someone they would immediately be on their respective media reporting what they saw and who did it, but when the crime is oral they clam up. What happened to who, what, where, when, how, and how much?
Is the story that Ms. Plame was a CIA agent, or is the story that the someone from the White House committed a crime? I know what the story should have been, but it looks to me like the six reporters who got the call simply dropped the ball and failed to recognize a story that walked to their doorsteps, or am I missing something. Evidently, the journalistic code is that if the crime is committed by a potential source for past and or futures sources, we don't report crimes they committed in our presence. Journalistic integrity?