Meaning: The quote you provided comes from journalist Michael Isikoff and is related to the investigation into the leak of CIA operative Valerie Plame's identity in 2003. The quote implies that based on the available evidence, it is not feasible to exclude journalist Robert Novak from having provided information either through his lawyer or by testifying directly in relation to the case.

In order to understand the significance of this quote, it is important to delve into the background of the Valerie Plame affair. Valerie Plame was a covert CIA officer whose identity was leaked to the press in 2003, leading to a significant scandal and a federal investigation. The leak was seen as an attempt to discredit Plame's husband, former diplomat Joseph Wilson, who had publicly criticized the Bush administration's claims about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction.

Robert Novak, a prominent conservative columnist, was the first to publicly reveal Plame's identity in a 2003 column. This revelation sparked the investigation into the leak and raised questions about the potential involvement of high-ranking officials in the White House.

Michael Isikoff, a well-respected investigative journalist, is known for his work on high-profile cases and his meticulous approach to uncovering the truth. In the context of the Plame affair, Isikoff's quote suggests that based on the available evidence, it is difficult to imagine a scenario in which Novak did not play a significant role in providing information related to the leak.

Isikoff's assertion that there is "simply no plausible construction of the known evidence" without Novak's involvement underscores the importance of Novak's potential testimony or proffer in shedding light on the events surrounding the leak. It suggests that Novak's testimony or information provided through his lawyer could be crucial in understanding the full extent of his knowledge about the leak and his interactions with key figures involved.

The quote also raises questions about the potential legal and ethical implications of Novak's actions in relation to the leak. If Novak did indeed provide a proffer through his lawyer or testify directly, it would have significant implications for the investigation and could potentially lead to further legal consequences for those involved in the leak.

In the broader context of investigative journalism and the pursuit of truth, Isikoff's quote serves as a reminder of the importance of thoroughly examining all available evidence and considering the potential involvement of key individuals in high-profile cases. It highlights the need for journalists and investigators to rigorously pursue leads and consider all plausible scenarios in order to uncover the full truth behind complex and politically sensitive events.

In conclusion, Michael Isikoff's quote regarding the involvement of journalist Robert Novak in the Valerie Plame affair underscores the significance of Novak's potential testimony or proffer in shedding light on the events surrounding the leak. It raises important questions about the legal and ethical implications of Novak's actions and serves as a reminder of the importance of thorough investigative work in uncovering the truth behind complex and politically sensitive cases.