Look at the WaPo site tonight tomorrow.

From Laura Rozen's site:

Dana Priest is on MSNBC right now saying we'll have to wait for tomorrow's paper to find out why he resigned.

So, it is a Washington Post story tomorrow, although I'd be surprised if the lid stays on that long. (Later: Here's the vid clip in question. )

Maybe Dana Priest didn't take too kindly to her friend Mary McCarthy being scapegoated by Goss on the secret prisons story. Whattya think?

(And, note, that if it's a Dana Priest article, it may well not be about Wilkes, etc. I still think that's the likely cause, but she hasn't been writing about Wilkes, etc, and her beat is normally national security, so don't rule out other possibilities.)

UPDATE: ThinkProgress points out just how sudden this is.

In fact, Porter Goss was apparently supposed to attend a regularly scheduled afternoon meeting that takes place right about this time in the afternoon. The Defense Department has representatives there and, according to sources, none of the people at that meeting had any advance word that Porter Goss was going to be tendering his resignation.

So it indicates the sudden nature that this took place, and again it just fuels the speculation of what the real backstory is here.

So, here's my working theory at this point. Dana Priest is working a major story. She has the story written and contacts Goss's office for a comment this morning. And within hours Goss is sitting with Bush resigning. So, what's the story so explosive that he would resign same day....?

Also, Negroponte, Goss's nominal boss, didn't know either when they met this morning?

UPDATE: Huffington Post has a one liner up, We're Hearing... Resignation Of A Pentagon Under-Secretary Also Imminent...

Also, although Goss's resignation letter doesn't address any cause which is a little suspicious, he does say he intends to stick around the CIA for a couple of weeks, which tamps down my belief of a megascandal somewhat. But if that was the case, wouldn't Negroponte know. (Bill Kristol points out that it is "sticking around for a few weeks," not serving until a new director is confirmed. That's a good point.)