Was a political operative behind the fall of New York Governor Eliot Spitzer?

Intrigue: Novak suggests GOP operative behind Spitzer fallJohn Byrne

Was a political operative behind the fall of New York Governor Eliot Spitzer?

That's the suggestion in a Sunday column by conservative columnist Robert Novak. A Republican operative, he's found, predicted the governor's fall specifically -- several months in advance.

"Republican political operative Roger Stone, Eliot Spitzer's longtime antagonist, predicted his political demise more than three months in advance," Novak writes. "Spitzer's entrapment by federal authorities investigating a prostitution ring raised speculation that Stone, with a 40-year record as a political hit man, somehow was behind it."

"Eliot Spitzer will not serve out his term as governor of the state of New York,'' Stone said Dec. 6 on Michael Smerconish's radio talk show," Novak added. "He gave no details."

Novak's post was titled "GOP strategists at work."

In an interview last week, Stone cheered the governor's demise, and hinted further that he'd known about the governor's fall.

"I didn't make him go to a prostitution ring," Stone told a Newsday columnist Mar. 12. "He did that all on his own."

Asked whether he had a hand in Spitzer's woes, Stone said, "No comment."

"I will say I knew it was coming," he added. "That's why I wasn't too upset about the results of the special election," where a Democrat won control of a formerly Republican seat in the State Senate, where the Republicans have a one-vote margin.

Speaking of the scandal Stone added cryptically: "My work isn't done there. Just watch."

Stone now runs an anti-Clinton political 527 group, Citizens United Not Timid, the acronym of which has sparked fury among liberal groups.

Alan Dershowitz, writing last week in the Wall Street Journal, averred that the story of Spitzer's 'capture' doesn't entirely ring true to career prosecutors.

"There is no hard evidence that Eliot Spitzer was targeted for investigation, but the story of how he was caught does not ring entirely true to many experienced former prosecutors and current criminal lawyers," Dershowitz wrote. "The New York Times reported that the revelations began with a routine tax inquiry by revenue agents 'conducting a routine examination of suspicious financial transactions reported to them by banks.' This investigation allegedly found 'several unusual movements of cash involving the Governor of New York.' But the movement of the amounts of cash required to pay prostitutes, even high-priced prostitutes over a long period of time, does not commonly generate a full-scale investigation."

"We are talking about thousands, not millions, of dollars. We are also talking about a man who is a multimillionaire with numerous investments and purchases," he added. "The idea that federal investigators would focus on a few transactions to corporations -- that were not themselves under investigation -- raises as many questions as answers."

Novak: Wilson didn't strongly object to wife's name being revealed

Novak: Wilson didn't strongly object to wife's name being revealed
Nick JulianoPublished: Tuesday October 9,

Wilson: Novak 'going to hell for his lies'
Conservative columnist Robert Novak said he did not hear forceful objection from the husband of a then-undercover CIA agent before her name was printed in his infamous column that sparked a years-long legal battle over his sources.

“He was not terribly exercised about it,” Novak said, referring to Ambassador Joseph Wilson, whose wife Valerie Plame Wilson was outed in his July 2003 column. Novak's comments to the Society of Professional Journalists convention were reported Monday in The Hill.

Wilson refuted that charge in an interview with RAW STORY Monday.
"I hope he's going to confession, because if not he's surely going to Hell for his lies," Wilson said.
Wilson, who had just published a column undercutting the Bush administrations claims about Iraq's weapons capabilities, asked Novak before the column appeared not to portray him simply as a war critic, the Hill reported. And Novak told the crowd that Wilson stressed that his wife went by his last name, rather than her maiden name (Novak's column reported her name as Valerie Plame).

"The question of my wife's last name never came up," Wilson said.
Rather, he says he asked Novak to stop telling people around Washington that his wife worked for the CIA.

"It is a compromise of my family's personal responsibility and safety ... not to mention treasonous," said Wilson, who did not confirm to Novak that Valerie Wilson was a CIA agent.
Novak slammed his critics for attacking his ethics, saying they really had a problem with his ideology. He said his case demonstrates the need for a federal shield law to protect journalists.
“I was stunned by how little editorial support I received. I was under assault from editorial writers from across the country,” Novak said. “It is startling how little is known about this case by the people who are commenting on it.”

The Senate Judiciary Committee last week approved a reporters' shield law, that would protect journalists from having to disclose the identities of confidential sources or hand over to authorities any records, documents or notes from confidential sources. The Washington Post reports that the new law would have a broad definition of who was covered that would include, reporters, columnists and bloggers but could exclude employees of news organizations owned by foreign governments, such as al-Jazeera or the BBC.

Novak defended his reporting Valerie Wilson's name, and said the disclosure was not part of a Bush administration effort to smear a prominent war critic. He also said it is "hypocritical" for his critics to support a shield law "that would have saved me from three years of confrontation."
To Wilson, Novak's "I'm a victim" defense is little more than a last resort aimed more at upping his book sales than setting the record straight.

"He's trying to flog his book," Wilson charged, "on my back and my wife's back."