"Well, if Larisa's right (about hadley being woodward's source), then add one Patrick Fitzgerald to the list of people who don't know who Woodward's source is.i can only say that larisa seems to be adamant about it. i totally respect/admire the 'redaction analysis' that everyone is doing - the only thing that i can think of is that we attribute obe-wan-kenobe powers to fitz - thinking 4 steps ahead, and all that - and we like to think that he is watching us and looking to us for insight - it wouldnt surprise me to learn that he is also pre-empting 'our' analysis. we can no longer be considered 'objective observers' in a 'Schroeder's Cat' sense.
There is no way that Hadley, Stephen Hadley, Mr. Hadley or any permutation thereof will fit properly in the redacted spaces in Fitz's recent affidavit. Armitage seems to fit pretty darn well. Unless Fitz is playing games by putting a lot of extra spaces in under the redactions, I gotta stick with Armitage no matter how weird it is."
if fitz has a mind anywhere near as tight as emptywheel's - then he won't have ignored the redaction analyis scenario - and i suspect (and i suspect that he suspects) that libby's team will be trying to utilize the same.
ftr - i doubt that armitage is as 'pure' or as 'State' that everyone likes to claim - so i wouldnt be surprised if it was him (for either nefarious reasons, or for anodyne reasons as outlined by EW)- but i would be surprised if Fitz hadnt realized that people could 'reverse-engineer' names based on 'what fits'
No comments:
Post a Comment