five trips to the grand jury for trips that were incons quent dwral, we knew richard armitage. we now know that richard armitage leaked her name to bob novak and there was no -- no violation of law. >>> the more painful thing is the time line here. in july of '03, with the robert novak story and by october, three months later, in '03, it is special prosecutor knew about it and spent 3 years investigating people, grand juries and spending taxpayers' money. but anyway, we will move on to another topic. anyway -- >> please, please move on. >> greta: another topic. now to the presidential campaign and this might hit home again for karl. has president obama changed his campaign strategy to blame the bush administration? here's what he told supporters in baltimore. >> this notion that somehow we caused the deficit is just wrong. it's just not true. and anybody who looks at the math will tell you it is not true. and if they start -- trying to give you a bunch of facts and figures suggesting that it's true, what they are not telling you is that they baked this into the cake with the ta

remember, in the instance involving the leak of valerie plame by richard armitage, the under-secretary of state, which i got caught up in, thees in, as soon as my name was associated with it, demanded a special prosecutor, that was not a covert agent and not an intelligence secret and where the special prosecutor knew within days of taking his responsibilities who had leaked it -- richard armitage and knew the details and knew that the advantage was not a covert agent. but the democrats insisted on a special prosecutor because they were concerned, if it were not a special prosecutor would have oversight on whoever is doing the investigation and it could be compromised. here, we have a much more serious issue -- and the democrats are saying -- >> greta: i would in some ways expect to you say that a special prosecutor was not a good idea because in thyour case, the leak-- the valerie plame information came out in july of 2003, 3 months later, richard armitage told the fbi, he was the source of the leak. a special prosecutor didn't have to answer to anybody, to the attorney general, anyon

the commission the day after richard clark the attack we have on the deputy secretary of state richard armitage who ended up being responsible for a lot more than we knew at the time coming and he was asked whether or not he had read the book and his answer was i gave it a washington, d.c. read. >> we need to go through one episode which is a part of the history of the state and that is the discussion of the deficit and the budget. in the ronald reagan administration a spirited debate on the budget broke out and i made some kind of comment. i worry about the resources available with the diminishing number of newspapers and the political correspondence who is going to be double to right as detailed a biography of christine gregoire, whoever comes after. i think we all have to treasure the history link crosscut and the like but when i cover the legislature in 1966 there were more than 30 credential reporters there comes wallpapers included in the record. we covered it and it's a much fenner resource out there today than it was when we start all those years ago. so support your local newspaper. we

operative that was not a covert operative and they knew from the beginning who the leaker was, richard armitage. what's worse, the outing of plame, not a covert operative, or divulging the secrets of our military operations, the president putting out kill lists and joint operations with the israelis in terms of cyber attacks they are using against iran's nuclear facility. what's worse? >> first of all, you are totally wrong about the valerie plame situation-- >>> she was not a covert operative. >> let me tell you something, i don't know where you get your information from. but patrick fitzgerald who investigated it, concluded in his final report that her identity was in fact covert. so i mean, that's a fact. -- >>> that's not a fact. >> check it out. check it out-- >>> wait a minute. we are talking about national security secrets. you tell me, you explain to this audience why an obama donor, who worked for eric holder, appointed by eric holder, why he should get that position. tell me you don't agree with this conflict of interest. >> there is no conflict of interest. ron machin is an excellent

the media was ballistic over one individual whose identity was revealed and it ended up being richard armitageut this was a scandal upon scandals. they made movies about this. >> rightly so. you should never reveal classified information. this is not a good idea and it's not something that this administration would authorize. and when this -- it will be exhaustively investigated and when it comes to truth, when the truth comes out, it will be very -- absolutely and i think the president supports that. the hill is going to look at it. but you have to look at the big picture. the story that's unveiled here is extraordinary. this is an administration that is protecting americans by making sure that al-qaida is decapitated, dismantled. >> laura: are we hurt by the release of the information? the story right now is people aren't going to work with us because their identities might be compromised because somebody in the white house is leaking information i guess to make the president look good. >> we don't know that anyone in the white house is leaking information. >> laura: somebody at the very top

we had the deputy secretary of state, richard armitage, who ended up being responsible for a lot morehan when you at the time, and he was asked whether or not he read dick clark's book. and his answer was, i gave it a washington, d.c. read. i look for my name in the index. >> we need to go through one episode which is part of the oral history of the state, and that is the discussion of the deficit and the budget that caused reagan to break his pencil. >> i was in a republican group, and this was fairly early in the reagan administration, and he spirited debate on the budget broke out and i made some kind of comment that caused him to break a pencil biden have. i don't remember the content. [laughter] spink and here we thought the guy was disengaged. >> i had to put a plug in here for newspapers. i was a newspaper man for 42 years, and i worry about the resources available with the diminishing number of newspapers and clinical correspondence, who's going to be able to write as detailed a biography as christie greg moore, or whoever comes after the i would think with all ought to treasu

times reporter and that was wrong -- >> it would be wrong -- [overlapping dialogue] >> sean: richard armitageo the leaker was -- which is worse, that or leaking information -- >> national security information, i served on a privacy board that president bush appointed where we had access to national security information. i took the oath to keep that secret very, very carefully. there should be an investigation. i don't agree with my friend ollie, i think that eric holder is a man of great integrity. >> sean: you are dreaming itch the fact that a partisan republican congress-- >>> partisan, he has not been forthcoming with documents, colonel i. on top of that, this is the same eric holder that wanted to try the 9/11 masterminds here in new york city. i mean -- >> you talk about a 10-year or the stone between your ears, this is a guy who has describes as workplace violence, the atrocity that happened at ft. hood with major asawn. fox files 10:00 p.m. friday will take a very close look at all of this. what have you is, it strikes me, an administration that has literally lost its balance. i mean t

richard armitage came forward and say it was me. i think i was the leak.ork and that -- >> all right. i want you to hear from senator lieberman yesterday. he was asked that. he's independent joe. >> we do need a special counsel. we need a special counsel because it avoids any look of special investigation, where people might reach a conclusion that u.s. investigators working for the attorney general who was appointed by the president cannot independently and without bias investigate high officials of their own government. >> that's right. and keep in mind, this is an election year and so many people are saying can this administration essentially investigate itself before a presidential election? it could but just remove, you know, any onus of there could be something going on. if nobody broke any rules, what's the problem? >> senator mccain echoing the same thing. echoing the same thing you said. look at that. >> maybe i heard him say it. >> i think you did. let's get to the headlines and begin with the fox news alert. crews on the scene of the school bus