Rove the Valeria Plame leak?

[John Reynolds]

http://www.mediainfo.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000972839

Now that Time Inc. has turned over documents to federal court, presumably revealing who its reporter, Matt Cooper, identified as his source in the Valerie Plame/CIA case, speculation runs rampant on the name of that source, and what might happen to him or her. Tonight, on the syndicated McLaughlin Group political talk show, Lawrence O'Donnell, senior MSNBC political analyst, claimed to know that name--and it is, according to him, top White House mastermind Karl Rove.

If true, should be fun watching the WH spin how Rove did this on his own and none of the top brass were even remotely aware of his actions.

[extarbags]

Good God, I hope this is true.

[John Reynolds]

I love the partisan defense I'm already seeing to protect Rove. You gotta prove intent! Plame's identity was already published! Plame was 'out' to her circle of friends, so everyone already knew about her! Ugh. I don't understand how people can be so damn one-sided. Whatever happened to wrong is wrong?

[chet]

I don't mind if it doesn't go past rove, as long as they charge him with what they should - treason.

[triggercut]

Lawrence O'Donnell today:

"I revealed in yesterday's taping of the McLaughlin Group that Time magazine's emails will reveal that Karl Rove was Matt Cooper's source. I have known this for months but didn't want to say it at a time that would risk me getting dragged into the grand jury.

McLaughlin is seen in some markets on Friday night, so some websites have picked it up, including Drudge, but I don't expect it to have much impact because McLaughlin is not considered a news show and it will be pre-empted in the big markets on Sunday because of tennis.

Since I revealed the big scoop, I have had it reconfirmed by yet another highly authoritative source. Too many people know this. It should break wide open this week. I know Newsweek is working on an 'It's Rove!' story and will probably break it tomorrow."

Sounds like multiple sourcing for this story.

If nothing else, wouldn't Rove's "It wasn't me!" testimony put him in line for perjury?

[Desslock]

Lawrence O'Donnell is the guy who went hysterical during the last election and started yelling "liar liar" at people, so it may be a tad prudent to wait for confirmation.

[triggercut]

Lawrence O'Donnell is the guy who went hysterical during the last election and started yelling "liar liar" at people, so it may be a tad prudent to wait for confirmation.

First step: Denial.

Good work!

[Desslock]

Lawrence O'Donnell is the guy who went hysterical during the last election and started yelling "liar liar" at people, so it may be a tad prudent to wait for confirmation.

First step: Denial.

No, I think it's probably true, since it would be utterly crazy to misrepresent something when it's going to revealed in 48 hours anyway - but O'Donnell's a clown, so I'd rather wait those hours before concluding anything.

No matter who it is, if he's guilty of breaking the law, he should be held accountable. If Rove broke the law, that will deservedly reflect badly on this administration, since he's a key advisor.

[DennyA]

If it is Rove, betcha he gets off with a slap on the wrist after some obligatory hearings

[Huzurdaddi]

Lawrence O'Donnell is the guy who went hysterical during the last election and started yelling "liar liar" at people, so it may be a tad prudent to wait for confirmation.

Let me get this straight: you are trotting out his attack on John O'Neill on Scarborough as a reason why we should *not* listen to him?

You are bat shit insane. Period end of story. You are 100% completely divorced from reality.

[Jasper]

I don't mind if it doesn't go past rove, as long as they charge him with what they should - treason.
Amen. Get a Rope! Obviously there should be due process and all, but would it really surprise anyone if an ends-justifies-the-means demagogue like Rove did this? It probably wouldn't even occur to him that it was wrong.

[Andrew Mayer]

IF this turns out to be true there are huge ethical issues that must be faced not only by Rove, but by the President, our press, and the country.

They're going to do their best to put a lid on this and call it a non-iissue, but it deals directly with the web of lies and partisan political deception that have been part of this presidency since the 2000 election. Once it begins to unravel, if we are truly still a nation of laws, it's hard to know where it will end.

[forgeforsaken]

The newsweek story
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8445696/site/newsweek/

[Jasper]

You're much more optimistic than I. I don't see how this could possibly link past the person actually doing the leak. Perhaps if it were somehow shown those higher up knew who had done it, and yet did nothing about it?

[Woolen Horde]

The newsweek story
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8445696/site/newsweek/

Now watch Dessklok discount this story because it was written by Isikoff.

[Desslock]

The newsweek story
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8445696/site/newsweek/

Now watch Dessklok discount this story because it was written by Isikoff.

That seems like a pretty even-handed account, actually -- in other words "wait and see".

[John Reynolds]

In early October 2003, NEWSWEEK reported that immediately after Novak's column appeared in July, Rove called MSNBC "Hardball" host Chris Matthews and told him that Wilson's wife was "fair game." But White House spokesman Scott McClellan told reporters at the time that any suggestion that Rove had played a role in outing Plame was "totally ridiculous." On Oct. 10, McClellan was asked directly if Rove and two other White House aides had ever discussed Valerie Plame with any reporters. McClellan said he had spoken with all three, and "those individuals assured me they were not involved in this."

Anyone ever read transcripts from whitehouse.gov when McClellan is interacting with the press? It's almost surreal reading the string of lies, half-truths, and pure bullshit spin the man weaves in every other sentence.

[Ranulf]

So is Novak considered "clean" of any wrongdoing now?

[Jonathan Blow]

McClellan said he had spoken with all three, and "those individuals assured me they were not involved in this."

I love that quote. It's so guilty. He basically said, "they're not involved in any way, except if you find out that they are, it's their personal fault, not the administration's."

[Midnight Son]

Will this be Rasputin's downfall? Stay tuned!

[SpoofyChop]

You are bat shit insane. Period end of story. You are 100% completely divorced from reality.

First, there's no space in "batshit." Second, there should be a period after "period." Third, the poverty of your grammar skills is only matched by the hysterical nature of your absurd hyperboles.


Don't let the rabble keep you down Dessklock.

:lol:

[wildpokerman]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=1598618&mesg_id=1598663

[SolomonGrundy]

Um...I think Bat shit would be two words...you don't write dogpoo or babyshit right?

That said why am I not shocked about this revelation...the Rove thing, not the bat shit thing.

[Donald L.]

If it is Rove, betcha he gets off with a slap on the wrist after some obligatory hearings

Congressman and Senators will have to answer for it during re-election. The President on the other hand can issue a Presidential Pardon.

[Midnight Son]

Don't you mean Royal Pardon?

[chet]

If it is Rove, betcha he gets off with a slap on the wrist after some obligatory hearings

Congressman and Senators will have to answer for it during re-election.

If only things worked that way.

[noun]

If it is Rove, betcha he gets off with a slap on the wrist after some obligatory hearings

Congressman and Senators will have to answer for it during re-election.

If only things worked that way.

Seriously. But the situation's even worse than the usual "all politicians are scum" response; it's not like you can easily vote in a replacement. Most state primary systems are restrictive as hell to voters, and forget about the amount of cash a challenger needs to successfully challenge an incumbent and get their name on the ballot instead. Chances are pretty goddamn minimal if the existing senator or representative is still alive and wanting to keep the job.

[noun]

Back on topic. If the evidence proves Rove is guilty, and he escapes without penalty, then it's about time for an insurgency.

[Desslock]

Lawrence O'Donnell is the guy who went hysterical during the last election and started yelling "liar liar" at people, so it may be a tad prudent to wait for confirmation.

Let me get this straight: you are trotting out his attack on John O'Neill on Scarborough as a reason why we should *not* listen to him?

The dude ranted like a lunatic, yelling "liar" over and over again, and not letting O'Neill speak without being interrupted -- it was the most disgusting display I've ever seen from a "reporter" ever, so how can anyone take anything that guy says seriously, when he is so obviously exceptionally unprofessional and biased. If he's oversold Rove's involvement, we'll see who's "batshit insane" for thinking this guy's credible -- it's all going to come out and be very clear whether or not Rove did anything wrong.

[John Reynolds]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/theblog/archive/lawrence-odonnell/update-on-rove_3584.html

On Friday, I broke the story that the e-mails that Time turned over to the prosecutor that day reveal that Karl Rove is the source Matt Cooper is protecting. That provoked Rove’s lawyer, Robert Luskin, to interrupt his holiday weekend to do a little defense work with Newsweek and the Los Angeles Times. On Saturday, Luskin decided to reveal that Rove did have at least one conversation with Cooper, but Luskin told the Times he would not “characterize the substance of the conversation.”

Luskin claimed that the prosecutor “asked us not to talk about what Karl has had to say.” This is highly unlikely. Prosecutors have absolutely no control over what witnesses say when they leave the grand jury room. Rove can tell us word-for-word what he said to the grand jury and would if he thought it would help him. And notice that Luskin just did reveal part of Rove’s grand jury testimony, the fact that he had a conversation with Cooper. Rove would not let me get one day of traction on this story if he could stop me. If what I have reported is not true, if Karl Rove is not Matt Cooper’s source, Rove could prove that instantly by telling us what he told the grand jury. Nothing prevents him from doing that, except a good lawyer who is trying to keep him out of jail.

[magnet]

First, there's no space in "batshit." Second, there should be a period after "period." Third, the poverty of your grammer skills is only matched by the hysterical nature of your absurd hyperboles.

You misspelled "grammar." Draw your own conclusions.

[steve]

it was the most disgusting display I've ever seen from a "reporter" ever, so how can anyone take anything that guy says seriously, when he is so obviously exceptionally unprofessional and biased.
So if someone posts every single instance of a right-winger behaving in this manner--and that's going to be pretty easy--will you also refuse to take anything they say seriously? Even if they're people you respect, or share your own position?

[Jasper]

Are you kidding? Tracking down every single instance of a right winger running an abusive interview would take an herculean effort!

[Desslock]

it was the most disgusting display I've ever seen from a "reporter" ever, so how can anyone take anything that guy says seriously, when he is so obviously exceptionally unprofessional and biased.

So if someone posts every single instance of a right-winger behaving in this manner--and that's going to be pretty easy--will you also refuse to take anything they say seriously? Even if they're people you respect, or share your own position?

That's easy -- someone who behaves in "that manner" will never be someone I respect, and I will always question the veracity of anything hs/she subsequently says -- I saw someone on Foxnews this week be sarcastic to a democratic senator, who was making some conspiracy theory allegations about the Bush Administration -- I thought the senator's comments were ludicrous, but I also thought it was incredibly unprofessional for a "reporter" to openly mock them -- it just inappropriately interjects himself into the story that they should be objectively reporting. If they want to provide an opinion column-type summary at the end, well o.k., but that sort of baggering and mockery reduces credibility.

[SpoofyChop]

You misspelled "grammar." Draw your own conclusions.

HA! That's awesome.

Anyway, I didn't say I was good at spelling.

:D

[Rasputin]

Will this be Rasputin's downfall? Stay tuned!

Wha? Hey! Leave me out of this!

Question is, if true, can this be made to stick, or will this mad genius spin his way out of it?

[flyinj]

Not surprised at all it was Rove.

That guy is, seriously, one of the evilist and most vile people ever to grace the planet.

He's the master of the master/blaster Bush dynamo, and the thought of him just makes me sick.

Also, he's going to get away with it.

Unfortunately, this country is 50% people just like Desslock.

Think about that for a second.

[soondifferent]

I can't remember where I read it, but I seem to recall that Rove and Wilson attend the same church. That's model christian conduct, there.

edit: oops, apparently it's Plame and Rove who attends the same church.

[John Reynolds]

I can't remember where I read it, but I seem to recall that Rove and Wilson attend the same church. That's model christian conduct, there.

Wonder if they sit on the same side of the aisle, and if so do they sit on the same pew? :P

[flyinj]

After thinking about this a bit more

You know what really makes me sick about this whole thing?

This is blatant evidence that this administration is criminal and corrupt.

This is TREASON.

The thing that makes me sick is, I thought Clinton was a decent president. He lied in front of a grand jury, and I thought he was a scumbag. But, putting things in perspective (lying about a blowjob), it just seemed to be too personal... and not a threat to the nation itself.

Now, if Clinton's top advisor leaked the name of a CIA operative in retaliation for disagreeing with his policies, I'd be out in the street screaming for his resignation.

I can't believe any true-blooded, patriotic american could let any president get away with something like this.

He's corrupted the very fabric of the american way.

[Jasper]

Not surprised at all it was Rove.

That guy is, seriously, one of the evilist and most vile people ever to grace the planet.
He's sure one nasty demagogue, but that seems like hyperbole to me. He's just not responsible for enough body count to make that list, and instead only gets on the list of self-serving ends-justify-the-means no-holds-barred bastards -- which is pretty long. People like Kissinger, Rumsfeld, Cheney, etc. are way worse than a mere political hatchet man like Rove.

[flyinj]

Why is this story not the front page of CNN or any other major news source?

Granted, the comet probe is front page (which is odd, as it may run contrary to the party line of creationism... why does the scientific community have any funding at all these days?)

[steve]

Why is this story not the front page of CNN or any other major news source?
Because right now, they're reporting that Newsweek is reporting it. Until there's some other confirmation, it'll only be on the front page of... Newsweek.

[Tyrion Lannister]

No. It is not on the front page because Rove briefed them against doing it.

Honestly, some people.

[Midnight Son]

Hey, doesn't anyone trust our present govt. anymore?! Some people are so cynical......

:lol:

[Andrew Mayer]

Unfortunately, this country is 50% people just like Desslock.

Think about that for a second.

If by "this country" you mean the USA, well Desslock doesn't even live here!

Think about that for a second!

[Midnight Son]

He's such a fascist USA wannabe!

[MikeSofaer]

I was thinking about this in the car:

How can Rove be the leak? Why would he have been cleared for such sensitive information?

If he was the guy who leaked to the press, he's not the leak in a legal sense. It would be interesting to see him in front of a judge, threatened with contempt unless he reveals his source.

[Brian Rucker]

You'd think a political advisor wouldn't have that kind of clearance but, guess what, Rove's also a policy advisor who's got an office just down the hall from the Oval Office. This probably means he does have legal clearance to get almost any information he wants. I say probably because I don't know for certain but it does seem quite likely.

[milo]

So far, I haven't heard anyone in the press suggesting that Rove committed treason. Just perjury.

[Ben Sones]

Which is weird, since if he did commit perjury, it was because he lied about whether or not he committed an act of treason.

[milo]

Which is weird, since if he did commit perjury, it was because he lied about whether or not he committed an act of treason.
No, apparently (according to the letter of the law) only the original leaker (the person who was properly cleared for the information and shared it with an uncleared party) has committed treason. If Rove was just repeating something he picked up on the Washington cocktail circuit, he would be no more guilty of treason than you or I are for posting Plame's secret identity in this thread. He was just passing it along from one uncleared party to another. He would still be guilty of perjury for lying to a grand jury, but the activity he was lying about may have been "merely" unsavory, but not illegal.

That said, I am not a lawyer, and the above interpretation of the law is just something I read on the Internet. It does seem to be consistent with the behavior so far in the press - who may also be simply proceeding with caution at this point.

Have you heard or read any reputable person use the T word in connection with Rove?

[Jasper]

Treason charges suppose Rove was the initial leak, which may be very hard to prove (especially if the journalists involved remain tight lipped). The idea is that he gave the information to a naive sap to publish, and then once leaked circulated the information. Purely speculation at this point but it fits Rove's character (along with alot of his confederates).

At any rate it seems clear that someone from the administration leaked this, and that possibly there was a conspiracy to do so.

I wonder if the tool of a journalist involved counts as the initial source if he doesn't reveal his source? If so, just how far is he willing to go to preserve the anonymity of his source? Maybe the threat of a treason conviction will loosen his lips...

[Troy S Goodfellow]

If we are talking legal treason and not just figurative descriptive language, treason is very hard to prove in a US court and has been ever since Aaron Burr got acquitted. And I'm not sure that outing a covert agent who is working at a desk to slime her husband rises to the legal threshhold of treason, since the intention isn't to undermine the United States. Treason, IIRC, requires guilty intent for the act.

Plus, the Constitution defines treason pretty specifically: " Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort." (Art 3: Sec 3)

So all the giddy "try him for treason" talk should be left aside.

And I don't think Rove is the guy. I still think Scooter Libby is a more likely leak source. The fact that Rove is confirmed as one of the sources for Matt Cooper - a White House reporter who deals with Rove regularly - is not a smoking gun for me. As distasteful as Rove is to me, and as vindictive as he has proven himself to be, he doesn't seem dim enough to put himself in a perjury position this easily. Counting on reporters to hold firm to their "confidential source" credo is a pretty big gamble, and he had absolved all reporters who wished to confirm him as a source on the Plame story.

Troy

[Troy S Goodfellow]

Then again.... (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8417075/)

Cooper has agreed to cooperate with prosecutors after getting permission from the source to reveal their discussions.

Miller, on the other hand, is going to jail.

Troy

[Jasper]

I don't doubt it'd be a difficult conviction, but it's not that far out there. Outing covert operatives does aid the US's enemies, and the outing was clearly intentional...

Ok, it's a stretch! Still, the way law plays out can be surprising so there is a slim threat -- which may be enough to get a journalist to talk, especialy if they feel they've been used as a tool and then hung out to dry.

[Edit]Of course, since it's Judith Miller were talking about... She seems perfectly happy being a tool. Certainly a few months jail time isn't going to make her talk.
[Edit2] D'oh! I'm mixing up tool journalists. Novak is the guy I'm thinking of. I'm curious to see what he actually does.

[invitroman]

Unfortunately, this country is 50% people just like Desslock.

just a minor correction, but down here in the states, the average neocon is fucking criminally retarded compared to desslock. At least Desslock makes an attempt to justify his points; you attack or put any neocon on the intellectual spotlight here and they immediately regress into a sweaty xenophobe rage... or they stick their head into the sand. Granted, most of Dess's retorts are merely mimicry copied from someone else... but you all have pointed that out before. And beat's the fuck out of what most right-wingers can come up with over here.

[Andrew Mayer]

Yes, yes he was. (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8525978/site/newsweek/)

And now the White House goes into spin overdrive.
We are indeed living in interesting times.

[Samurai]

Yes, yes he was. (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8525978/site/newsweek/)

And now the White House goes into spin overdrive.
We are indeed living in interesting times.

Nothing in the Cooper e-mail suggests that Rove used Plame's name or knew she was a covert operative. Nonetheless, it is significant that Rove was speaking to Cooper before Novak's column appeared; in other words, before Plame's identity had been published. Fitzgerald has been looking for evidence that Rove spoke to other reporters as well. "Karl Rove has shared with Fitzgerald all the information he has about any potentially relevant contacts he has had with any reporters, including Matt Cooper," Luskin told NEWSWEEK.

A source close to Rove, who declined to be identified because he did not wish to run afoul of the prosecutor or government investigators, added that there was "absolutely no inconsistency" between Cooper's e-mail and what Rove has testified to during his three grand-jury appearances in the case. "A fair reading of the e-mail makes clear that the information conveyed was not part of an organized effort to disclose Plame's identity, but was an effort to discourage Time from publishing things that turned out to be false," the source said, referring to claims in circulation at the time that Cheney and high-level CIA officials arranged for Wilson's trip to Africa.

Are we reading the same article? How does this prove anything?

[forgeforsaken]

Maybe you missed this part
Cooper wrote that Rove offered him a "big warning" not to "get too far out on Wilson." Rove told Cooper that Wilson's trip had not been authorized by "DCIA"—CIA Director George Tenet—or Vice President Dick Cheney. Rather, "it was, KR said, wilson's wife, who apparently works at the agency on wmd [weapons of mass destruction] issues who authorized the trip."

So he never used her name, but really are we confused about who Wilson is married to?

[Ed Solomon]

"Spoke to Rove on double super secret background for about two mins before he went on vacation ..."

It appears Dean Wormer really did influence a generation of reporters.

[triggercut]

A little context for Rove's words/actions:

Cooper was preparing an online piece that called into question whether the Administration had listened to it's own people on "yellowcake" uranium in Niger, and Saddam's plan to purchase same. That piece was going to rely heavily on Wilson's trip and subsequent findings.

Rove's admonishment to "not go too far out" on Wilson basically meant: "don't pin the premise of your story on what this guy says". Don't go out on a limb with him, because Rove was prepared to call into question the motivations for the trip in the first place.

...so yeah, he did "out her"...but there'll be all sorts of legalese as to why it wasn't illegal and why he didn't violate the 1977 classified information act, and this is going to be a very interesting news item for a while.

[triggercut]

New defense for Rove from his lawyer, as cited in today's frontpage of the Washington Post.

Rove apparently did indeed commit the leak...but he outed "Joe Wilson's wife", not "Valerie Plame".

That's an even worse defense than "I did not have sex with that woman."

[Ben Sones]

From the Post article:

"Luskin said yesterday that Rove did not know Plame's name and was not actively trying to push the information into the public realm."

Whether or not he knew her name is irrelevant. He knew that she was a secret operative, and he revealed her identity to a member of the freakin' press, for chrissakes. Just giving that information to Cooper constitutes "pushing the information into the public realm," and is a federal crime. If there is any justice in the world, Rove will serve jail time for that.

[antlers]

From the Post article:

"Luskin said yesterday that Rove did not know Plame's name and was not actively trying to push the information into the public realm."

Whether or not he knew her name is irrelevant. He knew that she was a secret operative, and he revealed her identity to a member of the freakin' press, for chrissakes. Just giving that information to Cooper constitutes "pushing the information into the public realm," and is a federal crime. If there is any justice in the world, Rove will serve jail time for that.

For it to be a crime, he would have had to have known that she was undercover. He can't really deny that he leaked her identity, but he can at least plausibly deny that he knew she was undercover. Sleazy and dishonest, but not illegal.

[Brian Rucker]

On MSNBC, Bob Kur reported out of this morning's off-camera gaggle with McClellan: "Well, they're being pummeled with questions here this morning. Very interesting turn of events. The White House spokesman just a few minutes ago was asked about the latest developments about Karl Rove and he says he can't comment because it's an ongoing criminal investigation -- and yet reporters went after him with questions saying that during this ongoing investigation at earlier stages, he was willing to stand at the podium and say flat out that Karl Rove was not involved in the leak of the C.I.A. operative's identity.

"Well, so those are some tough questions to be answered here at the White House today." http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/linkset/2005/04/11/LI2005041100879.html

[chet]

The spin.

He didn't expose her, because he thought she was exposed, and that is why he thought it was okay to expose her.

Why didn't he just come forward?

Because he was too innocent, with nothing to hide, he also felt there was nothing to admit. If anything this shows this administration is about laws, not about men. It has traced back an investigation to one of the administrations top officials. This administration is not scared of scrutiny, they welcome it so that we can all see not only is Rove innocent, but this administration is vindicated of any wrong doing, for anything, ever!

So now Rove will go back to work, and we will all thank god that we live in a country where an investigation like this can reach right into the whitehouse. That our free society is able to withstand such scrutiny, no matter how high up it leads.

Rove is not a criminal, he is a a hero and Bush will be giving him the presidential medal of freedom for his work in demonstrating the power of freedom in the united states. Bush will also give one to himself for leading a great country that allows such an investigation into the highest reaches of this government.

Chet

[Ben Sones]

For it to be a crime, he would have had to have known that she was undercover. He can't really deny that he leaked her identity, but he can at least plausibly deny that he knew she was undercover. Sleazy and dishonest, but not illegal.

I'm not a lawyer, but the text of the law in question is pretty short, and that does indeed seem to be how it works. If that's his defense, however, you'd think he'd just start out by saying that, rather than having his lawyer produce this mind-bogglingly inane statement about how he never said Plume's name. I mean, that sort of semantic sleight of hand just makes Rove look guilty. "I didn't know she was undercover" is a much, much better defense, both in PR terms and (I'd guess) legal terms. The fact that his lawyer used the former and not the latter in a public statement suggests that the latter defense is not an option that Rove has at his disposal, possibly because there is evidence that he did know that Plume was undercover.

I'm just guessing, of course, but that whole "I just said 'Wilson's wife'" song and dance reeks of desperation.

[SpoofyChop]

Well this just goes to show that if you play with knives you're gonna get cut. The Bush administration's PR handling of the WMD issue has been pathetic from beginning to end.

It's really too bad that such an objective good (the liberation of Iraq) has been predicated on BS.

:(

[EDIT: I connect this whole Plame thing to the WMD PR based on the fact that the Plame leak was about the Yellowcake Uranium thing. Didn't want this to look like a non-sequitur.]

[SpoofyChop]

After reading this (http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/07/11/cia.leaks.ap/index.html) CNN article I'm going to say that absolutely irregardless of the legality (or not) of what Rove did he should absolutely be fired.

I also find it very difficult to believe that Bush didn't know about this. "What did the president know and when did he know it" and all.

[EDIT]

I wanted to see what some conservative bloggers had to say. Here's some comments from PowerLineBlog.com (at the bottom of their Rove comments.)


DEACON adds: The media feeding frenzy will, indeed, be massive. But absent a serious claim of a statutory violation or perjury, it's questionable whether anyone apart from liberal bloggers and other pre-existing Bush haters will partake in the media's dog food. This isn't a top presidential aide accepting an expensive gift, or engaging in lewd sexual conduct. It's a top aide providing truthful information to journalists in response to lies told to embarrass the administration and our government. And, as John suggests, Valerie Plame isn't very convincing as a covert agent of the United States, although she did fairly well as an agent of her husband and the president's other enemies.

SCOTT adds: Hilail Gildin writes: "Andrea Mitchell was asked, on MSNBC, whether it was generally known to news people, before the hullabaloo, that Ms. Plame worked for the CIA. She answered, somewhat reluctantly, that it was. In the light of this, I don't understand the ensuing fuss."

I think it's doubtful that you guys will buy into their reasoning because you all generally think that conservatives doing anything is pretty much the height of calumny and all. I think the conservative talking heads may have some valid points but I wanted to point out why I actually agree with you on this one instead of them.

What average conservatives hated so much about Clinton was how unbelievably dishonest he was. I just saw a "Book-TV" on CSPAN where a conservative female author was talking about a book she just wrote about all the women Clinton came on to or assaulted and how he smeared them but was later basically forced to admit to most of the conduct. The fact that the administration would lie about Rove as the source of the leak for years makes them about as trustworthy.

Given the comments from Powerline, that Plame was well know as an "undercover operative" (how completely and utterly stupid is it for an undercover operative to be well known) it seems that the administration should have simply come out at the time and said "This is what Rove said, this is why he said it. She was not undercover, this is a story about nothing." But now Rove is going to get his ass handed to him and Bush's credibility has taken another hit.

I am just as disgusted by this kind of shitty political lying as you guys are. (I've always been extremely angered by the WMD fibs/fabrications/whoppers (however you want to classify them) although I think you guys ignore the mitigating factors) But just like you guys were always forced to take the good with the bad with Clinton, we're forced to live with the crappy features of the Bush administration just as we are happy that O'Connor and almost certainly Renquist will be replaced with conservatives.

This is why politics sucks and shouldn't be trusted. Politics is about ambition, lies, power, compromises, and egos. It's just too bad that Bush has turned out to be just as bad as some democrats in this department. In general I would argue that conservatives are generally less hypocritcal than liberals. I'm sure you will all think that's a real howler.

Oh well.

[Donald L.]

Scott McClellan responds to questions about Karl Rove (http://movies.crooksandliars.com/Scotty_Rove.mov)

Quicktime file.

[soondifferent]

Given the comments from Powerline, that Plame was well know as an "undercover operative" (how completely and utterly stupid is it for an undercover operative to be well known) it seems that the administration should have simply come out at the time and said "This is what Rove said, this is why he said it. She was not undercover, this is a story about nothing." But now Rove is going to get his ass handed to him and Bush's credibility has taken another hit.



I'm curious about this. When this thing first made news I remember reading that her identity as a covert operative was not well known, that close friends had no idea etc. I can't imagine Plame being a hot news topic, pre-"hullaballoo". And if it did become "generally known" (for seemingly no reason at all), how, and who?

[chet]

Whew... good thing this is just about treason, not about a lewd act. I mean if this was about a lewd act, that could compromise the national security... also nice bit that Bush's Africa nuke lie was not a lie.

I love that press clip. It should be in the dictionary as an example for the word, "squirm".

Chet

[SpoofyChop]

What's really unbelievable about you guys is that you manage to turn even the bestestest wins into losses with your overheated rhetoric.

There's no way the whole "treason" angle is going to stick and it's not worth going down that route but I'm sure plenty of the liberal talking heads will try anyway.

[chet]

Sorry.

I sure hope they get rove for shoplifting.

Is that better?

[Huzurdaddi]

There's no way the whole "treason" angle is going to stick and it's not worth going down that route but I'm sure plenty of the liberal talking heads will try anyway.

Of course not. The media is owned lock stock and barrel by the right so OF COURSE this story will not have legs.

You can rest assured SpoofyChop that your lord and saviour "W" and all of his apostles will suffer no harm. Praise be!

[SolomonGrundy]

1. The offense of attempting to overthrow the government of
the state to which the offender owes allegiance, or of
betraying the state into the hands of a foreign power;
disloyalty; treachery.

well, letting out a name of an active undercover operative, is that betraying the state into the hands of a foreign power? Quite possibly. What if this came out when she was overseas on an operation?

She was not well known. Even her husband didn't know until they were almost married, and she had him checked out. And he is was an Ambassidor.
According to him, only half a dozen people in washington had any idea of what she did for a living.
Think of the access she had to other countires- oh...im just his wife.

and just to get it out here the law (http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode50/usc_sec_50_00000421----000-.html)

[Andrew Mayer]

What's really unbelievable about you guys is that you manage to turn even the bestestest wins into losses with your overheated rhetoric.

Who the hell are "you guys"? If you think that Chet is part of some liberal block you're living in your own us vs. them fantasy land.

[forgeforsaken]

I'm starting to hear more of "Karl Rove did us a favor because Wilson was a no good dirty liar" from right wing pundits. Seems like they are going to at least toy with playing it that way.

That press conference was awesome.

[Bren]

The Capitol Gang's coverage of this ought to be freakin gold.

[forgeforsaken]

The Capitol Gang's coverage of this ought to be freakin gold.

Too bad it was cancelled.

[Bren]

The Capitol Gang's coverage of this ought to be freakin gold.

Too bad it was cancelled.

Ought to have been, then, or something. :)

[Andrew Mayer]

I'm starting to hear more of "Karl Rove did us a favor because Wilson was a no good dirty liar" from right wing pundits. Seems like they are going to at least toy with playing it that way.

That press conference was awesome.

It is amazing. Basically Cheney was using Plame as a way to prove that Wilson was lying when he said that Cheney was lying about Wilson's report.

If the press gets going on this they'll just succeed in ripping open the whole Niger thing again on top of the possible legal charges.

[chet]

What's really unbelievable about you guys is that you manage to turn even the bestestest wins into losses with your overheated rhetoric.

Who the hell are "you guys"? If you think that Chet is part of some liberal block you're living in your own us vs. them fantasy land.

Damn. ostracized from another group. Where will I find my home?

[Jonathan Blow]

That video is the fricking bomb but believe it or not, it's not even the whole thing. It goes on and gets even a little more ridiculous....

here's a transcript.

http://scoop.agonist.org/story/2005/7/11/113133/188

[Andrew Mayer]

What's really unbelievable about you guys is that you manage to turn even the bestestest wins into losses with your overheated rhetoric.

Who the hell are "you guys"? If you think that Chet is part of some liberal block you're living in your own us vs. them fantasy land.

Damn. ostracized from another group. Where will I find my home?

I can tell you're all broken up about it.

[Oppressor]

What's really unbelievable about you guys is that you manage to turn even the bestestest wins into losses with your overheated rhetoric.

There's no way the whole "treason" angle is going to stick and it's not worth going down that route but I'm sure plenty of the liberal talking heads will try anyway.

Who cares? Who's saying it's a loss? Fatass Drug Addict Limbaugh? Ass-to-Ass Coulter? Or Bill O'Lielly? Consider the source. Just like I did when Jesse Helms threatened President Clinton's life a few years back.

Besides, maybe now we'll get to find out if Biggy Piggy was the one catching the shrapnel shots from the Gannon Cannon...

And I'm not blind - there's no way Rove's going to jail. In the best possible scenario where he's rightly charged with treason, he'll get pardoned, but it's long past time the no-mistakes-ever Bush administration finally chokes on its own bullshit. Today's press conferences was magnificent.

[Oppressor]

What's really unbelievable about you guys is that you manage to turn even the bestestest wins into losses with your overheated rhetoric.

There's no way the whole "treason" angle is going to stick and it's not worth going down that route but I'm sure plenty of the liberal talking heads will try anyway.

Who cares? Who's saying it's a loss? Fatass Drug Addict Limbaugh? Ass-to-Ass Coulter? Or Bill O'Lielly? Consider the source. Just like I did when Jesse Helms threatened President Clinton's life a few years back.

Besides, maybe now we'll get to find out if Biggy Piggy was the one catching the shrapnel shots from the Gannon Cannon...

And I'm not blind - there's no way Rove's going to jail. In the best possible scenario where he's rightly charged with treason, he'll get pardoned, but it's long past time the no-mistakes-ever Bush administration finally chokes on its own bullshit. Today's press conference was magnificent.

[flyinj]

So, let me get this straight:

1. Bush said that Iraq was trying to buy yellowcake
2. This was proved to be completely false
3. One of the people who testified that it was false had his wife outed as a CIA agent.
4. It turns out Karl Rove, Bush's #1 advisor, outed this person's wife


I don't get it.

How much clearer does it have to be for anyone to realize that this administration is completely corrupt?

I mean, they OUTED A CIA AGENT IN RETALIATION FOR SOMEONE DISAGREEING WITH THEM.

And the person that disagreed with them WAS RIGHT THE WHOLE TIME.

What more do you need???

[triggercut]

So, let me get this straight:

1. Bush said that Iraq was trying to buy yellowcake
2. This was proved to be completely false
3. One of the people who testified that it was false had his wife outed as a CIA agent.
4. It turns out Karl Rove, Bush's #1 advisor, outed this person's wife


I don't get it.

How much clearer does it have to be for anyone to realize that this administration is completely corrupt?

I mean, they OUTED A CIA AGENT IN RETALIATION FOR SOMEONE DISAGREEING WITH THEM.

And the person that disagreed with them WAS RIGHT THE WHOLE TIME.

What more do you need???

Wilson was right....but he didn't have the evidence to prove it, and frankly he probably reported on stuff he didn't see (like the forged documents--Wilson never saw them, and although the prove the "yellowcake" buy was horribly done planted evidence, he had no business including it in his Niger report.)

[Jonathan Blow]

So Wilson not having as much evidence as you would like (??? Is this some new Neocon talking point???) magically makes the administration NOT CORRUPT?

[chet]

So, let me get this straight:

1. Bush said that Iraq was trying to buy yellowcake
2. This was proved to be completely false
3. One of the people who testified that it was false had his wife outed as a CIA agent.
4. It turns out Karl Rove, Bush's #1 advisor, outed this person's wife


I don't get it.

How much clearer does it have to be for anyone to realize that this administration is completely corrupt?

I mean, they OUTED A CIA AGENT IN RETALIATION FOR SOMEONE DISAGREEING WITH THEM.

And the person that disagreed with them WAS RIGHT THE WHOLE TIME.

What more do you need???

You have spun this all wrong.

1. Bush warned the american public of a grave danger.
2. Some media elite commie bastard spoke badly of warning the american public. THE AMERICAN PUBLIC, that means your mom and your grandma! Bush was warning them about nuclear material, do you want your mom to have to feed your grandma nuclear waste?
3. The commie liberal media bastard's wife was a cia undercover operative, you know the same people who sold crack to the queen of england and killed babies in central america. Do you mean to tell me you side with the people who killed 4 nuns in central america? Why do you hate nuns?
4. First, Karl rove never mentions this woman by name, so it could have been one of the commie elite bastard's other wives, we all know these scum don't believe in the sanctity of marriage, they all probably have 50 wives.

Second, while he did do it, since an independent investigation that president bush himself called for, that ari flescher himself said bush would fire this person if caught, caught him. That shows he is while not innocent, not really needing punishment. BECAUSE THE SYSTEM WORKS!!!

Get it now? the system works!

Chet

[chumpface]

The question I'd like to see asked to Mr. Return Dignity to the White House is this:

So you said Karl Rove told you that he wasn't involved in the outing of Plame. It's now clear that he was. So either Karl Rove lied to you, or you lied to us. Which is it?

[chet]

The question I'd like to see asked to Mr. Return Dignity to the White House is this:

So you said Karl Rove told you that he wasn't involved in the outing of Plame. It's now clear that he was. So either Karl Rove lied to you, or you lied to us. Which is it?

Why can't you get it straight already? Way to twist it mr liberal media. He outed wilson's wife - HE NEVER OUTED PLAME!!! You liberals and your lies.

Bringing freepers to QT3, one post at a time...

[triggercut]

So Wilson not having as much evidence as you would like (??? Is this some new Neocon talking point???) magically makes the administration NOT CORRUPT?

What in hell's name are you fucking talking about?

As a point of order, I just want to make damn sure that we put it out there that it ultimately isn't Wilson's trip report that invalidated the "yellowcake" uranium exporting of Niger to Iraq. We know that was a bullshit story now, but if you lay that finding at Wilson's feet you're going to give the neo-cons something to slap you down with and apologize Rove's actions away with.

[SolomonGrundy]

I think the why Rove did it is not the issue. the only reason to out an agent is if they are traitors. He outed an agent. He should go to jail. If you or i did it we would right? What holds him above the law?
At the very least, he should loose his job, anyone else who knew about this and didn't fess up should also loose thier job or go to jail. Why? well, isn't it against the law to cover for a felon? Again you or I would go to jail for that.
It amy not have been wilson's trip that uncovered 'yellowcakegate', but it sure was Wilson that called them on it.

[Brian Rucker]

I finally found time to read through the full transcript and view some clips from the press conference.

I have to say I miss Ari Fleischer. That was a slickass rat bastard you wouldn't feel bad about smearing with honey and tossing into a nest of fireants. Scott McClellan, my god, it looked like he was about to cry out there. I wanted to tell the press corps to give the kid's bicycle back and knock it off with the wedgies.

Then I remembered exactly how many lies and distortions over how many years have been spread out by this administration. And this guy had to know it'd be a tough job with the shit finally hit the fan. Because once the press corps finally has its jaws around your skeevy throat it's going to be maddened enough not to let go. Getting caught in a distortion and then refusing to comment...that's just plain suicide and from the look in Scott's eyes I think he knows it. Finally reporters seem to be listening to folks accusing them of cowardice as much as those accusing them of bias. I'd prefer my reporters unbiased but that only works if they've got intestinal fortitude and the willingness to call bullshit when they see it.

I honestly don't know if Rove committed a crime here based on my reading. It's clear he was involved in skullduggery of the precise sort that he was hired to perform and has a lengthy track record of. But once in a while even a professional hitman forgets to put on gloves. I hope they nail the sleezy fucker myself. But if they don't, I really hope Bush keeps him around at least long enough for a photo op with himself and Tom DeLay. These guys are classing up Washington.

[Troy S Goodfellow]

Yeah, Fleischer was a master of the art. He would have never been caught out commenting on the case to begin with, but this sort of storm he would have found a way to sail through, I'm sure.

Troy

[Brian Rucker]

I dunno. Fleischer might have been told to say something clearing Rove. We don't know what McClellan's marching orders are really.

What I'm getting at with that is that I'd love to see Fleischer burn for the lies and spin he put out. Instead it's McClellan that's taking the heat for the accumulated bad karma of this administration. Of course, he's just as bad. You can't read the daily transcripts without wondering why the press even goes through the motions. Still, he lacks that smugness that was so infuriating in Ari and it's possible to feel sorry for him.

[quatoria]

The question I'd like to see asked to Mr. Return Dignity to the White House is this:

So you said Karl Rove told you that he wasn't involved in the outing of Plame. It's now clear that he was. So either Karl Rove lied to you, or you lied to us. Which is it?

Why can't you get it straight already? Way to twist it mr liberal media. He outed wilson's wife - HE NEVER OUTED PLAME!!! You liberals and your lies.

Bringing freepers to QT3, one post at a time...

http://planetwebdesign.com/americacries1agc.jpg

[tronnc]

At least the administration is being consistent. Don't they always do this? When someone in the administration fucks up all they do is say "we think he's doing a good job."

http://tinyurl.com/9h3ye

White House: Bush Has Confidence in Rove
AP - 1 hour, 36 minutes ago
WASHINGTON - After two days of questions, the White House said Tuesday that President Bush continues to have confidence in Karl Rove, the presidential adviser at the center of the investigation into the leak identifying a female CIA officer. Meanwhile, two prominent Democrats called on Rove to resign. Bush did not respond to a question Tuesday about whether he would fire Rove, in keeping with a June 2004 pledge to dismiss any leakers of Valerie Plame's identity.

[XtienMurawski]

If this has already been posted, I apologize. I followed the link to partial video of the press conference on that "Crooks and Liars" site. For those who care, if you go to C-SPAN.org, you can listen to the entire press conferences from yesterday and today.

Click on "Bush Administration" under "Featured Topics" on the left hand side.

God this is so frustrating. I'm about halfway through yesterday's press conference. Even in a denial/dodge of a pretty big scandal, it's amazing how good they are at the holier-than-thou tone.

I tuned in to a bit of talk radio this morning. We've got a local guy named Al Rantel at one of the stations (KABC...the company he keeps includes O'Reilly and Hannity, just to set the tone). Rantel--which is a great name for a radio talk guy--is a conservative host (phony surprise) who is outspoken about the fact that he is gay (actual surprise). Anyway, it was fun to hear him pontificating about this possible scandal with his guest (Newsmax guy, Carl Limbacher). They couldn't bring up "Clinton's eight years of scandals" enough times.

I just think that's beautiful.

"Do you realize what this means? It means bankruptcy and scandal and prison. That's what it means. One of us is going to jail--well it's not gonna be me."

-Amanpour

[Brian Rucker]

QUESTION: You say you won’t discuss it, but the Republican National Committee and others working obviously on behalf of the White House, they put out this Wilson-Rove research and talking points, distributed to Republican surrogates, which include things like: Karl Rove discouraged a reporter from writing a false story.

QUESTION: And then other Republican surrogates are getting information such as: Cooper, the Time reporter, called Rove on the pretense of discussing welfare reform. Bill Kristol on Fox News, a friendly news channel to you, said that the conversation lasted for two minutes and it was just at the end that Rove discussed this.

So someone is providing this information. Are you, behind the scenes, directing a response to this story?

MCCLELLAN: You can talk to the RNC about what they put out. I’ll let them speak to that.
What I know is that the president directed the White House to cooperate fully with the investigation. And as part of cooperating fully with that investigation, that means supporting the efforts by the investigators to come to a successful conclusion.

And that means not commenting on it from this podium.

QUESTION: Well…

MCCLELLAN: And, no, I understand your question.

QUESTION: … Fox News and other Republican surrogates are essentially saying that the conversation lasted for two minutes and that the subject was ostensibly welfare reform. They’re getting that information from here, from Karl Rove.

MCCLELLAN: And, again, you’re asking questions that are related to news reports about an ongoing, continuing investigation. And you’ve had my response on that… http://thinkprogress.org/2005/07/12/july-12-briefing/

[Jason McCullough]

This is ridiculous. The administration decided to set fire to a CIA agent because they're corrupt fools. It's their MO. No idea what's complicated about this. Similar past incidents that make this blatantly fucking obvious:

Ads comparing Max Cleland, who went to Vietnam and got multiple limbs blown off in the process, to Osama bin Laden.
Spreading rumors in South Carolina that John McCain had a secret black love child.
Getting *Richard Nixon's* old slimey hit man to find people to pretend to have served with John Kerry in Vietnam and call him a psychopathic traitor.
Running ads pretending John McCain voted against breast cancer research funding.

I could go on, but give me a break. Sleazy political tactics (Willie Horton, then blaming the Horton ads on Al Gore years later!) are the Bush family political tactic in the same way cheating on his wife is a Clinton personal pecadillo - blatantly goddamn obvious. If you can't see it you might want to step away from politics for a while and get some perspective.

[SpoofyChop]

Getting *Richard Nixon's* old slimey hit man to find people to pretend to have served with John Kerry in Vietnam and call him a psychopathic traitor.

Who exactly are you talking about? Are you talking about the entire "Swife Boat Vets" group or some specifc incident.

I mean, the guy did claim to be in Cambodia and Akron on like the same day.

Why are you so incensed by Bush's lying but completely fine when Democrats lie? I really feel like I could respect you guys if you weren't so incredibly hypocritical about the honesty issue.

Liberals, it seems, cannot tell lies.


:evil:

[Bren]

Why are you so incensed by Bush's lying but completely fine when Democrats lie? I really feel like I could respect you guys if you weren't so incredibly hypocritical about the honesty issue.

Liberals, it seems, cannot tell lies.

Flip that complaint, and exactly the same thing has been said by Dems/Libs/Lefts/what-have-you on these very forums.

Clinton was impeached, FFS. Justice served. So let's go after the crook of the day, OK?

The partisan BS on these forums is really overplayed.

[flyinj]

This is ridiculous. The administration decided to set fire to a CIA agent because they're corrupt fools. It's their MO. No idea what's complicated about this. Similar past incidents that make this blatantly fucking obvious:

Ads comparing Max Cleland, who went to Vietnam and got multiple limbs blown off in the process, to Osama bin Laden.
Spreading rumors in South Carolina that John McCain had a secret black love child.
Getting *Richard Nixon's* old slimey hit man to find people to pretend to have served with John Kerry in Vietnam and call him a psychopathic traitor.
Running ads pretending John McCain voted against breast cancer research funding.

I could go on, but give me a break. Sleazy political tactics (Willie Horton, then blaming the Horton ads on Al Gore years later!) are the Bush family political tactic in the same way cheating on his wife is a Clinton personal pecadillo - blatantly goddamn obvious. If you can't see it you might want to step away from politics for a while and get some perspective.

Hey, don't forget:

John McCain was a stool pigeon while a POW in Vietnam.

[Jason McCullough]

Spoofychop, the Swift Boat Vets were basically run by John O' Neill; he was repeating his little disinformation stab-in-the-back theory veterans group project Nixon had him run in the 1970s. No, I'm not going to argue about did Kerry say X or exaggerated Y; my point is that O' Neill was clearly a political hit man for Nixon and Bush thought it'd be a grand idea to bring him back for a repeat.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200405040004
http://mediamatters.org/items/200408250002

Yes, I get outraged when Democrats do this stuff too, but it's comparatively rare, has more of a nugget of truth to it, and mild when it does occur. Can you name *anything* a Democratic presidential campaign has done in the last, I dunno, 30 years that's comparable to spreading rumors about McCain's black love child? I guess the NAACP doing that ad of a noose dragging behind a truck was pretty bad, but it's a kindergarden slapfight compared to this shit. Of course to some extent all politician make ridiculous accusations and smears; it's par for the course. Bush, however, like his father, is out there with Jesse Helms as one the most depraved of politicians about it.

What really amazes me, and the reason I made that last post, is that *anyone* could spin the web of cognitive dissonance necessary to keep themselves from noticing this - it's the equivalent of someone pretending Clinton has always been faithful to his wife and refusing to believe he'd gotten a hummer from Monica when a) the evidence sure as hell pointed that way, it totally fit with past behavior, and matched his political persona exactly. Yes, yes, we all overlook the faults of people we like, but good fucking god.

[SpoofyChop]

Yes, I get outraged when Democrats do this stuff too, but it's comparatively rare, has more of a nugget of truth to it, and mild when it does occur.

I guess we each just pick which side we want to have congnitive dissonance with then. I don't feel up to researching and reciting democratic liars for you.

I will agree that smear campaigns are horrible.

[flyinj]

I think it would be interesting to compile a list of democratic smear campaigns and republican ones... then compare and contrast them.


It seems much easier for both sides to remember specific republican smear campaigns, but it requires a bit of research to remember democratic ones.

[Bren]

There's an attempt here (http://www.mpturner.net/blogs/index.php?cat=18).

First Google hit for "Democrat lies", incidentally.

EDIT: Funny, the category with the most entries is War on Terror. The second? Cats.

[Jason McCullough]

Spoofy, the issue isn't lying; it's *sleazy smears*. If it would make a politician's wife cry, I guess, is how you tell the difference. As a "Democratic" example, I guess - depends on how you consider Al Sharpton in the party structure - see his appalling behavior on the Tawana Brawley case. I'm pretty much of opinion this is how you can whether someone's a good guy who makes mistakes or a total fuckhead, for what it's worth.

Lying: Creative games to pretend your opponent is saying something else about social security; calling him culturally out of touch; the missile gap; pretty much everything Truman said about Greece; calling him a hillbilly, etc.

Sleaze: Pandering to southern racists by inventing a mulatto love child. Saying your opponent opposes breast cancer research when he so, so doesn't. Sharpton's behavior and total refusal to apologize for it on Tawana Brawley. Calling a guy who got three limbs blown off in Vietnam unpatriotic.

[Jason McCullough]

Anyway, on the Rove/Plame thing Cole's comments are the best I've seen:

http://www.juancole.com/2005/07/rove-unfit-for-public-office-whether.html

But Rove's revenge on Wilson was the ultimate. Plame was undercover as an employee of a phony energy company. She was actually investigating illegal proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. When Rove blew her cover to the US press, everyone who had ever been seen with her in Africa or Asia was put in extreme danger. It is said that some of her contacts may have been killed. Imagine the setback to the US struggle against weapons of mass destruction proliferation that this represents. Rove marched us off to Iraq, where there weren't any. But he disrupted a major effort by the CIA to fight WMD that really did exist.

Moreover, the whole thing only makes sense if Rove is a wild-eyed conspiracy theorist to begin with. Why would it matter that Valerie Plame suggested to the CIA that they send her husband Joe Wilson to Niger? Wilson had excellent credentials for the mission, which the CIA immediately recognized.

Rove can only have thought it would discredit Wilson to associate his mission with the CIA if he viewed the CIA as the enemy. This is the Richard Perle line. If Wilson was sent to Niger on the recommendation of a CIA operative, then he was not an objective ex-ambassador but a CIA plant of some sort, attempting to undermine the Bush administration and the military occupation of Iraq.

This theory is that of a crackpot. The actions are those of a traitor. What is the difference between Robert Hanssen revealing key secret information for money to the Soviets and Karl Rove revealing it to the proliferators for political gain for the Republican Party and the Bush White House? Both are traitors who traded secrets for gain.

A man who would do what Rove did should not be in the White House in any capacity. And no person who tolerates a man like Rove in the White House should be commander in chief of American security.

[John Reynolds]

While I personally think Rove played a key role in the Novak story as a source, Cole's rhetoric is a bit too excessive considering that not a single charge/indictment has been issued against anyone involved in this sordid affair.

[Bren]

What about Judith Miller (http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/07/06/reporters.contempt/)?

[John Reynolds]

What about Judith Miller (http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/07/06/reporters.contempt/)?

Well, contempt of court for refusing to cooperate with a grand jury investigation isn't the same as a charge of perjury or even treason being brought against someone.

[Bren]

What about Judith Miller (http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/07/06/reporters.contempt/)?

Well, contempt of court for refusing to cooperate with a grand jury investigation isn't the same as a charge of perjury or even treason being brought against someone.

Right, it isn't the same, but it's close. But I took what you said as underestimating how seriously this sordid affair is being taken. The fact that someone involved has been jailed for refusing to cooperate with the investigation indicates it is being taken very seriously.

Cole's "rhetoric" is merely speculation on Rove's possible motives.

[Jason McCullough]

While I personally think Rove played a key role in the Novak story as a source, Cole's rhetoric is a bit too excessive considering that not a single charge/indictment has been issued against anyone involved in this sordid affair.

How the hell did the the CIA agent's cover get blown, then? Fairies fell from the sky and sprinkled it on Novak's brain?

[Jason McCullough]

More on Rove:

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_09_26.php#003523

The Alabama races in particular haven't gotten that much national press attention in the past. And one of the most lizardly passages in the article describes how Rove launched a whispering campaign against one Democratic opponent suggesting that the candidate -- a sitting Alabama state Supreme Court Justice, who had long worked on child welfare issues -- was in fact a pedophile ...

When his term on the court ended, he chose not to run for re-election. I later learned another reason why. Kennedy had spent years on the bench as a juvenile and family-court judge, during which time he had developed a strong interest in aiding abused children. In the early 1980s he had helped to start the Children's Trust Fund of Alabama, and he later established the Corporate Foundation for Children, a private, nonprofit organization. At the time of the race he had just served a term as president of the National Committee to Prevent Child Abuse and Neglect. One of Rove's signature tactics is to attack an opponent on the very front that seems unassailable. Kennedy was no exception.

Some of Kennedy's campaign commercials touted his volunteer work, including one that showed him holding hands with children. "We were trying to counter the positives from that ad," a former Rove staffer told me, explaining that some within the See camp initiated a whisper campaign that Kennedy was a pedophile. "It was our standard practice to use the University of Alabama Law School to disseminate whisper-campaign information," the staffer went on. "That was a major device we used for the transmission of this stuff. The students at the law school are from all over the state, and that's one of the ways that Karl got the information out—he knew the law students would take it back to their home towns and it would get out." This would create the impression that the lie was in fact common knowledge across the state. "What Rove does," says Joe Perkins, "is try to make something so bad for a family that the candidate will not subject the family to the hardship. Mark is not your typical Alabama macho, beer-drinkin', tobacco-chewin', pickup-drivin' kind of guy. He is a small, well-groomed, well-educated family man, and what they tried to do was make him look like a homosexual pedophile. That was really, really hard to take."

[extarbags]

Jesus.

[Talisker]

While I personally think Rove played a key role in the Novak story as a source, Cole's rhetoric is a bit too excessive considering that not a single charge/indictment has been issued against anyone involved in this sordid affair.
Yet.

[Jasper]

Damn, and that bit about Rove's demagoguery in Alabama is from one of his staffers? What a shitty thing to do. Isn't that sort of character assasination illegal? Sure it's hard to prove, but it seems like there's a witness willing to talk about it.

[Peter Frazier]

But according to Spoofy, both sides are just as bad!
Jesus.

[Brian Rucker]

My boss at work is a moderate Republican and sometime independant. He's a good friend and we have fun talking, and arguing, about politics. It works because we've got a good sense of humor and usually find something we can agree is ridiculous to pick on together before everything gets overheated. However, his main concern seems to be tax cuts. Everything else in his world tends to, but not always, rotate around how much more he can get in his pocket.

This leads to all kinds of rationalizations. The big one is that everybody's as bad as everyone else. Sure, The Republicans do sleezy politics and have some serious nutjobs running things. But so do the Democrats, says he with a practiced air of cynicism. And it's so very easy. If everyone's essentially just as corrupt everything is a wash and requires no further inquiry. And you sound so very fair, because you're treating everyone equally, and wise, because you're staying above the fray.

When you point out that folks who're the "nuts" on the left tend to mistrust and abandon the Democratic party rather than participate and that the "nuts" on the right are actually running the show for the Republicans, it doesn't phase him much because, says the Ambivalent Zen Master, that's always changing. And when you point out instances of extremely dirty pool in Republican politics, he'll tell you that goes with the terrain but is, as we are, unable to really cite good examples of reprocicity on the same level from The Democrats. In fact, when he's stuck in an argument he just assumes the only reason he doesn't have a good response is that he just doesn't have the information yet but, because he's right, it must surely be out there.

This can be very frustrating until, eventually, even he starts seeing things that disgust him, over and over, and is willing to concede arguments. Usually months after the initial discussion and with no mention of the fact that I'd pointed things out to him before. Suddenly, he's still cynical but the comments seem more directed towards Republicans and this administration. It's a slow process when a fellow who's always right, because it's not possible he could be wrong, starts changing his mind but when it does he's still as doggedly convinced of his correctness and, finally, he's closer to correct.

PS. Nobody show this to my boss. :)

[Brian Koontz]

This leads to all kinds of rationalizations. The big one is that everybody's as bad as everyone else. Sure, The Republicans do sleezy politics and have some serious nutjobs running things. But so do the Democrats, says he with a practiced air of cynicism. And it's so very easy. If everyone's essentially just as corrupt everything is a wash and requires no further inquiry. And you sound so very fair, because you're treating everyone equally, and wise, because you're staying above the fray.

That's a very nice example of a breed of human in America called the Dark Cynic. Its a damn shame that a fine institution like cynicism is so often raped in America.

Its amazing what people get sued for, and what people don't get sued for. I think that sort of thing can be improved.

[Brian Rucker]

Here's some perspective on the current spate of Republican talking points from Larry Johnson, a CIA operative and classmate of Valerie Plame's at the academy. It's all good stuff and relatively short so there's little point in quoting. Just go have a look for yourselves.

http://www.tpmcafe.com/story/2005/7/13/04720/9340

[Ben]

Jason- It is said that you may have sex with donkeys. Cole is a professor of some sort? He needs to sit in on some composition courses.


Anyway, you guys get surprised and outraged by freaking everything. Don't you get tired of gaping bug-eyed at your monitor? "That man said something that WAS NOT THE TRUTH. NOT THE TRUTH!" Jesus, indeed.

[Funkdrunk]

I don't know if Rove was the originator of the leak, but as a result of the leak the whole cover company that Plame worked for was compromised. This is intolerable, because it wasn't just one agent, but several, who were outed by this leak. This is far bigger than just one person. All of the operatives who worked for this company were all put at risk. How is this acceptable to anyone?

[John Reynolds]

Jason- It is said that you may have sex with donkeys. Cole is a professor of some sort? He needs to sit in on some composition courses.

A lot of professors aren't the best of writers. Not that snarky comments about his way with words actually addresses his argument, but don't let that stop you.

Anyway, you guys get surprised and outraged by freaking everything. Don't you get tired of gaping bug-eyed at your monitor? "That man said something that WAS NOT THE TRUTH. NOT THE TRUTH!" Jesus, indeed.

Says the man who supports the party who put Zel Miller on the stage of their convention last year. And how's your state's little witch hunt of Ward Churchill coming along?

[steve]

Anyway, you guys get surprised and outraged by freaking everything. Don't you get tired of gaping bug-eyed at your monitor? "That man said something that WAS NOT THE TRUTH. NOT THE TRUTH!" Jesus, indeed.
Maybe you should expect the truth from these people.

But you do realize that the only time this kind of comment pops up is when anyone criticizes a conservative, right? Or maybe you're being ironic. You're outraged that people are outraged.

I'm thinking people outraged over lies and possible treason from the president's top advisor have a slightly better better case than the guy upset over message board posts.

[BrewersDroop]

The latest GOP spin: Karl Rove is to be applauded for exposing nepotism in the CIA.

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110006955

[Bren]

The latest GOP spin: Karl Rove is to be applauded for exposing nepotism in the CIA.

You spin me right round, baby, right round...

[Brian Rucker]

One wild post which is an interesting construct around some facts, with alot of speculaton tossed in, is down a bit on the TMPCafe page I linked to. Look for a post by The Oklahoma Hippy. Now, while he's a self-described hippy (and Phish fan on his homepage) it does appear the hashbrownies might just be working for him. He might bit conspiracy happy but the chain of events and connections he draws together is just crazy enough to be plausible.

[Dave Markell]

My boss at work is a moderate Republican and sometime independant......

PS. Nobody show this to my boss. :)


Ah, the possibilities....especially since I'm related to him :twisted:

[Brian Rucker]

Errr...crap? :D

[John Reynolds]

The latest GOP spin: Karl Rove is to be applauded for exposing nepotism in the CIA.

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110006955

Because, lord knows, the Bush WH hates nepotism. I wonder how Cheney's daughter is doing these days (the non-lesbian, employable one).

[Andrew Mayer]

What's Libby Dole up to these days?

[Brian Rucker]

More on the GOP spin machine in high gear:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/12/AR2005071200093.html

A federal grand jury is investigating whether anyone in the Bush administration unlawfully leaked the name of a CIA official, Valerie Plame, to the news media. Although the White House has previously said Rove was not involved in the episode, a recently disclosed internal Time magazine e-mail shows that Rove mentioned Plame, albeit not by name, to reporter Matthew Cooper before her name and affiliation became public in July 2003. The grand jury is scheduled to hear from Cooper today.

The emerging GOP strategy -- devised by Mehlman and other Rove loyalists outside of the White House -- is to try to undermine those Democrats calling for Rove's ouster, play down Rove's role and wait for President Bush's forthcoming Supreme Court selection to drown out the controversy, according to several high-level Republicans.
Rove has not been asked by senior White House officials whether he did anything illegal or potentially embarrassing to the president and he spent most of the day strategizing on Bush's Supreme Court nomination, aides said.

"No one has asked him what he told the grand jury. No one has deemed it appropriate," said a senior White House official, who would discuss the Rove case only on the condition of anonymity. "What you all need to figure out is, does this amount to a crime? That is a legitimate debate." Still, some aides said they were concerned about the unknown. "Is it a communications challenge? Sure," the official said.

Privately, even Rove's staunchest supporters said the situation could explode if federal prosecutors accuse Rove or any other high-level official of committing a crime. William Kristol, a conservative commentator with close White House ties, said it would be hard to imagine a prosecutor conducting an investigation that has landed one reporter in jail and challenged the constitutional rights of the journalism profession without indicting someone. Special prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald "is the problem for the White House, and we have no idea what he knows," Kristol said.
Whatever the legal considerations in the case, the emerging record suggests that the administration was involved in an effort to discredit Wilson after he went public with his criticism.

According to the Time magazine e-mail, the conversation between Cooper and Rove took place a few days before Novak's column appeared in July 2003. Cooper says Rove raised questions about Wilson's credibility, offering a "big warning" not to "get out too far on Wilson," Newsweek has reported.

The e-mail comports with a previously reported conversation between a Washington Post reporter and an administration official two days before the Novak column ran. The administration official, who has not been identified, described the Wilson trip as a boondoggle that was set up by his wife and was not being taken seriously by the White House.

[Ben]

Reynolds-
1. It's more than just his bad grammar, "it has been said that X may" is the sort of wording that you would throw a fit about if it was a Republican talking point.
2. I'm not a Republican and I'm from Ohio, not Colorado. Churchill is an idiot, though, so I have no idea where that comment is going. You want to identify with him, go right ahead.

steve- I wasn't talking about the Plame issue, I was talking about the "outrage" over sleazy campaign tricks. This sort of comment crops up from me whenever people get upset over POLITICIANS TRYING TO WIN. This board is full of people who present this naive face when they know damn well they wouldn't give a shit if the sides were reversed. And, in fact, whenever their side does things like that we get all sorts of rationalizations that it's either not sleazy or not really from their side or whatever.

[Jason McCullough]

Jason- It is said that you may have sex with donkeys. Cole is a professor of some sort? He needs to sit in on some composition courses.


Anyway, you guys get surprised and outraged by freaking everything. Don't you get tired of gaping bug-eyed at your monitor? "That man said something that WAS NOT THE TRUTH. NOT THE TRUTH!" Jesus, indeed.

Sure, we might have blown her cover and got a bunch of people killed, flushing national security done the toilet in exchange for a vendetta to destroy anyone who got in the ways of their lies - BUT U TALK FUNNY!!!!!

[flyinj]

Let me go on the record as saying:

This goes beyond party affiliation. If Clinton's top advisor leaked the identity of a covert CIA operative as revenge for disagreeing with his policies, I'd be just as upset.

If not more, seeing how I actually respected Clinton.

[John Reynolds]

Reynolds-
1. It's more than just his bad grammar, "it has been said that X may" is the sort of wording that you would throw a fit about if it was a Republican talking point.

I was a English major, and that wording is something I wouldn't even notice while chewing over the message/argument. Seriously, your initial Cole comments were pedantically childish.

[Matthew Gallant]

I was a English major
o rly

[John Reynolds]

I was a English major
o rly

Heh, years ago. Is that an correct response? :P

[Brian Rucker]

More fodder for the reality-based community:

Among the latest: Byron York of National Review Online's revealing interview with Rove's attorney, Robert Luskin.

Luskin has previously said that special prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald had told him that Rove was not a "target" of the criminal investigation. All that would mean, however, is that Fitzgerald was at that point not ready to actually declare his intention to indict Rove.

But Luskin has now told that National Review that Fitzgerald identified Rove, among others, as a "subject."

In grand-jury talk a subject -- unlike an ordinary witness -- is someone who faces possible indictment.

And investigative reporter Murray Waas blogs today that his sources tell him that columnist Robert Novak -- the first person to publish Plame's identity -- has in fact spoken at length to prosecutors.

That would explain why Novak isn't in jail.

But, Waas reports, the prosecutors don't necessarily believe what Novak told them, which is why they want to talk to other reporters about what Novak's sources told them. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/linkset/2005/04/11/LI2005041100879.html

[Bren]

Reynolds-
1. It's more than just his bad grammar, "it has been said that X may" is the sort of wording that you would throw a fit about if it was a Republican talking point.

I was a English major, and that wording is something I wouldn't even notice while chewing over the message/argument. Seriously, your initial Cole comments were pedantically childish.

I suspect Ben's complaint is the un-named nature of the source, which jumped out at me as well.

Then again, Novak/Cooper didn't exactly name their sources either, did they?

[Brian Rucker]

More fodder for the reality-based community:

Among the latest: Byron York of National Review Online's revealing interview with Rove's attorney, Robert Luskin.

Luskin has previously said that special prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald had told him that Rove was not a "target" of the criminal investigation. All that would mean, however, is that Fitzgerald was at that point not ready to actually declare his intention to indict Rove.

But Luskin has now told that National Review that Fitzgerald identified Rove, among others, as a "subject."

In grand-jury talk a subject -- unlike an ordinary witness -- is someone who faces possible indictment.

And investigative reporter Murray Waas blogs today that his sources tell him that columnist Robert Novak -- the first person to publish Plame's identity -- has in fact spoken at length to prosecutors.

That would explain why Novak isn't in jail.

But, Waas reports, the prosecutors don't necessarily believe what Novak told them, which is why they want to talk to other reporters about what Novak's sources told them. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/linkset/2005/04/11/LI2005041100879.html

And speaking of our old pal Ari:

Richard Keil and Holly Rosenkrantz write for Bloomberg: "Rove is not the only potential subject for Fitzgerald's probe. . . .

"People familiar with the inquiry say Fitzgerald also is reviewing testimony by former White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer, though it is not clear whether the prosecutor is focusing on him or seeking information about higher-ups. Fleischer last night refused to comment.

"Other Bush aides who have testified to the grand jury or been questioned by prosecutors include [White House press secretary Scott] McClellan; Rove; former Deputy Press Secretary Adam Levine; Lewis 'Scooter' Libby, Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff; and Dan Bartlett, a Bush communications adviser.

"Bush himself was questioned by Fitzgerald in the Oval Office on June 24, 2004."

[Bren]

2. I'm not a Republican and I'm from Ohio

Wasn't Ohio a lost battle state in the last election? Way to go!

This board is full of people who present this naive face when they know damn well they wouldn't give a shit if the sides were reversed.

You're one, at least.

Actually, I generally hold the people I admire and support to a higher standard.

[Ben]

John- While he writes poorly(starting a sentence with "but"?), the "said...may" thing is just ridiculous. Not only is there no source, the use of "may" means that even if he sourced it the statement means nothing. It's just sensationalism.

Bren- My side doesn't have the funding to pull sleazy tricks, and you don't need to be sleazy to beat "us" since "we" managed to nominate a complete nutball last time who pretty much sleazed himself. Also, we are lucky to win a city council seat.

I'm not fully comfortable identifying as a Big L Libertarian since much of their base are just rechanneling racism, but they have the closest thing to a platform I agree on. That's an ugly sentence but I can't figure out how to reword it, so fuck it.


Anyway, if Ohio had been lost by one vote I would've felt horrible, but it wasn't, so I'm guilt-free.

[Ben]

Anyway, going after McCullough on the Cole thing I ended up poking around some political blogs. I quickly remembered why I don't do that, but not before I was amused:

Conservative bloggers are still going after Wilson! They're still running the "Plame nepotized the Nigeria trip for her no good husband" line. What's the point? Even if that was 100% true and Wilson has no credibility, I think Wilson's report is a moot point by now. It could've been written in crayon and alleged aliens were buying angel food cake, it's not like Wilson's report stopped the war or we found WMD.

Are they trying to build equivalency between Plame scrounging up a do-nothing job for her idiot relative(a crime that nearly everyone with power is guilty of) and leaking her name?

[John Reynolds]

Are they trying to build equivalency between Plame scrounging up a do-nothing job for her idiot relative(a crime that nearly everyone with power is guilty of) and leaking her name?

Pretty much. Thus the "Rove deserves a medal" line I've seen repeated in recent days.

[Ben]

Networking is treason!

[Brian Rucker]

Y'know this whole smear Wilson thing is getting old. Yeah, he's a bit of a self-aggrandizing showboater but that's a style issue not a substance one. You want to know what a guy's made of you look at what he's done.
His fingers threaded a string of ornate black worry beads, common in the Arab world. They're from his days in Baghdad, where he was acting U.S. ambassador. In 1990, while sheltering more than a hundred Americans at the U.S. Embassy and diplomatic residences, he briefed reporters while wearing a hangman's noose instead of a necktie -- a symbol of defiance after Hussein threatened to execute anyone who didn't turn over foreigners.

The message, Wilson said: "If you want to execute me, I'll bring my own [expletive] rope."

This toughness impressed President George H.W. Bush, who called Wilson a "truly inspiring" diplomat who exhibited "courageous leadership" by facing down Hussein and helping to gain freedom for the Americans before the 1991 war began.
http://www.billmon.org/archives/000695.html

Unfortunately the original Washington Post article seems to be gone but the link on billmon still connects to the headline and byline if not the story itself.

Not quite as glamorous as flying for the Texas Air National Guard or spreading sexual rumors about one's political opposition but it ain't too shabby. Also found this old transcript of a chat between Wilson and Moyers on NOW just before the war kicked off. So you can hear what he was saying at the time. Makes a fuckload more sense than what the other side was telling you in retrospect, doesn't it?

http://www.pbs.org/now/transcript/transcript_wilson.html

[Peter Frazier]

Anyway, you guys get surprised and outraged by freaking everything. Don't you get tired of gaping bug-eyed at your monitor? "That man said something that WAS NOT THE TRUTH. NOT THE TRUTH!" Jesus, indeed.
The fact that you can read about the pedophile smear campaign and then have a go at people for being indignant reveals a lot more about you than what you think.

[chumpface]

The latest GOP spin: Karl Rove is to be applauded for exposing nepotism in the CIA.

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110006955

Because, lord knows, the Bush WH hates nepotism. I wonder how Cheney's daughter is doing these days (the non-lesbian, employable one).

What's Libby Dole up to these days?

What's George W. Bush up to?

[SolomonGrundy]

The latest GOP spin: Karl Rove is to be applauded for exposing nepotism in the CIA.

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110006955

Because, lord knows, the Bush WH hates nepotism. I wonder how Cheney's daughter is doing these days (the non-lesbian, employable one).

What's Libby Dole up to these days?

What's George W. Bush up to?

That's a good question.

[SpoofyChop]

Jim Lindgren at Volokh has a very good summary of this whole issue here. (http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2005_07_10-2005_07_16.shtml#1121326634)

[extarbags]

Where exactly? I read the first article on that page, and whining about how Wilson was hired by his wife and how is report wasn't accurate, neither of which seems to be the issue we're talking about.

[SpoofyChop]

Where exactly? I read the first article on that page, and whining about how Wilson was hired by his wife and how is report wasn't accurate, neither of which seems to be the issue we're talking about.

You sound like you didn't read the whole article.

[extarbags]

I sorry, I forgot to mention the part where he pretends that Rove didn't do it on purpose. Mostly because it's, you know, completely retarded.

[Brian Rucker]

I think you'll find a reality-based summary from a site without Conspiracy in its name useful as well:

http://www.salon.com/opinion/blumenthal/2005/07/14/plame/index.html

It covers the issue of the "bi-partisan" Senate commission and the problems with the documents it cited among many other wonderful things.

[extarbags]

BTW, I just have to say I love the article below that one, in which he reveals another great reason to not allow gay marriage: if we did, it would probably mean that companies wouldn't be allowed to fire people just for being gay.

[Guido Jones]

Actually, Volokh is in favor of Gay Marriage, or at least that's the impression i've gotten over the years.

[Talisker]

BTW, I just have to say I love the article below that one, in which he reveals another great reason to not allow gay marriage: if we did, it would probably mean that companies wouldn't be allowed to fire people just for being gay.
While he's examining the argument from a legal perspective (Volokh (http://www.law.ucla.edu/volokh/) is, after all, a law professor), I don't see him suggesting that would be bad.

[Ben]

Wilson appears to be a dishonest and biased incompetent who wrote a pretty crappy report. Pretty much everything the right says about him is true.

But that's not relevant to the issue at hand. We aren't debating hiring Joe Wilson for another factfinding trip. Joe Wilson hasn't been the issue for 2 years.

I'm not sure how far they want to go down the "lying/being wrong about Iraq's WMDs is equal to treason" road.

[Brian Rucker]

Ben, you mind attempting to substantiate that claim about Wilson? If it wouldn't be a bother, I mean.

[SpoofyChop]

I think you'll find a reality-based summary from a site without Conspiracy in its name useful as well:

http://www.salon.com/opinion/blumenthal/2005/07/14/plame/index.html

It covers the issue of the "bi-partisan" Senate commission and the problems with the documents it cited among many other wonderful things.

I thoughtfully provide a link to a site that is widely considered to be even handed and you respond with a link to the second most liberal website on the internet that I have to sit through a commercial to access?

:D

Ugh. I'll read it later.

[extarbags]

Ben, you mind attempting to substantiate that claim about Wilson? If it wouldn't be a bother, I mean.

You know what? I'd rather he didn't. Because we shouldn't be talking about Wilson at all.

This is classic Rove; say anything, anything, to get people to stop talking about the meat of the issue. It's a brilliant tactic, because people keep falling for it. Just look at the Swift Boat Vets; it was so obviously bullshit, but everyone spent a lot of time and energy talking about it, refuting it, and so forth, and it ended up distracting everyone from the real issues of the campaign. And that's all it was meant to do; it was never meant to hold up under scrutiny, and it was never (really) meant to malign Kerry's war record with anyone but the party faithful. All it had to do was get people talking about something other than what mattered. That's Rove's signature move. It's his dragon punch.

And that's what he's doing right now. There's exactly one issue here, and that is that Karl Rove leaked the name of a covert CIA operative. Everything else is a smokescreen; just think about the things that are beign said, the things that people are talking about: Wilson's report was no good, Wilson wasn't qualified for that mission, Plame got him that job, Plame wasn't really maintaining her cover very well anyway, the CIA wasn't doing a good enough job of protecting her. It doesn't matter if those statements are true or not, because none of them change the fact that Karl Rove leaked the name of a covert CIA operative. But it's working anyway. He just circulates this stuff, and it takes over the debate, and everyone falls for it and ends up arguing about the quality of Wilson's report and the quality of Plame's cover and how Wilson got assigned that job in the first place until eventually, all that stuff is echoing so loudly that everyone forgets what this is really about.

[John Reynolds]

He just circulates this stuff, and it takes over the debate, and everyone falls for it and ends up arguing about the quality of Wilson's report and the quality of Plame's cover and how Wilson got assigned that job in the first place until eventually, all that stuff is echoing so loudly that everyone forgets what this is really about.

While the Washington talking heads and even the press and public may fall for it, the crux is whether or not it distracts Fitzgerald from doing his job properly.

[Donald L.]

Remarks By George Bush At the Dedication Ceremony for the George Bush Center for Intelligence (http://www.cia.gov/cia/public_affairs/speeches/1999/bush_speech_042699.html)

Your mission is different now than it was back then. The Soviet Union is no more. Some people think, "what do we need intelligence for?" My answer to that is we have plenty of enemies. Plenty of enemies abound. Unpredictable leaders willing to export instability or to commit crimes against humanity. Proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, terrorism, narco-trafficking, people killing each other, fundamentalists killing each other in the name of God. These and more. Many more. As our analysts know, as our collectors of intelligence know - these are our enemies. To combat them we need more intelligence, not less. We need more human intelligence. That means we need more protection for the methods we use to gather intelligence and more protection for our sources, particularly our human sources, people that are risking their lives for their country.

Even though I'm a tranquil guy now at this stage of my life, I have nothing but contempt and anger for those who betray the trust by exposing the name of our sources. They are, in my view, the most insidious, of traitors.

[Brian Koontz]

This sort of comment crops up from me whenever people get upset over POLITICIANS TRYING TO WIN.

If the best candidate is not elected then we lose. The point is to ensure that the best candidate (as determined by the voters) is elected. Anything that gets in that way (as lying can do) is not tolerated.

The point of a campaign with respect to what really benefits the humanity it serves is to clarify the political identity of the campaigner, such that the voters can make a highly informed decision in the voting booth.

People should never vote for a candidate that they are ignorant of. Candidates should be disqualified from running if they cannot present the electorate honest and sufficient information about both their political identity and whoever influences them. If they become largely different after entering office than what was presented to the electorate prior to taking office they should be put on trial to justify this change. Unable to justify it and they should be impeached (in the case of congress whatever that term is called... censored?).

Its nonsense to make an election a battle between Karl Roves. Those people should not be in power, and your attitude achieves only that.

[Ben]

Pretty much what extarbags said, Brian. You're so eager to jump in to defend a liberal who is having bad things said about him that you're completely missing the point. Wilson shouldn't be the issue. I see now why the right is going after Wilson again. He's relying on exactly this sort of "against Iraq confers sainthood" bullshit, where Joe Wilson is infallible and nobody on the left ever spins things and Mr. Wilson was just trying to find out what was going on. He didn't even want to go, but he loves his country ever so much!

Rucker approved salon.com article:

... during the Clinton administration. (I first encountered Wilson then, and we have since become friends.) No other professional had such an ideal background for this CIA mission.



Anyway, Wilson "got some dates" wrong("got some dates wrong" is what we call it when a liberal makes shit up for political gain) regarding his report, leaving aside the issue of his wife's involvement. The salon.com truthicle doesn't address that issue.

[Talisker]

Its nonsense to make an election a battle between Karl Roves. Those people should not be in power, and your attitude achieves only that.
Well put!

[Talisker]

the George Bush Center for Intelligence
Hey, that's a great idea. Here's a few more:

the Bill Clinton Center for Chastity
the Ashley Simpson Center for Music
the Don King Center for Understatement
...

(help me out here, I'm drawing a blank)

[antlers]

What I can't understand is how anyone, much less a supposedly independent commission, can maintain, with a straight face, that no political pressure was applied to CIA analysts to come up with the Iraq facts the administration wanted when everyone can see this brazen example.

[Brian Rucker]

No, Ben, I'm sorry. That doesn't work for me. Popping off unsupported cheap shots and then scurrying back into "But, that's not the point."

I know what Rove's trying to do and I think it's refreshing to see you agree that these guys are engaging in sleazy distortions (again) which are exaggerating the relative issues. My problem is that I'm not quite willing to go along with, "Jeepers, they're all pretty bad. But sure enough, Rove's the worstestest." No, fuck that. Lay out what you've got on Wilson. Because I want to see if my understanding of the situation is wrong. Or even better, I'd like a crack at knocking your smug and vapid posts around this forum. One or the other. Either I end up wiser or I end up happy as a schoolgirl.

There are folks who were against Iraq that I wouldn't give too much rope to. In fact, alot of folks I really do give creedence to and whose opinions are quite well reasoned are saying we need to get out now. I don't, yet, agree with that though the longer we go without something resembling transperancy and honesty about our real situation over there the closer I get - regardless of the consequences. But, fuck, I'm furious with this administration and Rove right now is the weakest, and ugliest, link. So let's go.

Edit: You know it's bad when I start chanelling an alternate universe chet who's got a functioning shift-key.

[Ben]

Volokh's blog's assertions regarding Wilson's accuracy and honesty are not refuted by the salon.com article(and tremendously shoddy linkage. Wilson's friend says he's a great guy! Film at 11!). Wilson claimed he proved a document false before he saw the document, etc. etc. Whatever.

Why the fuck do you want to defend Wilson? Are you headhunting for him? No, once again, it's a refusal to admit flaw in an ally. If you stipulate Wilson being a nepotised hack, they win!

The Democratic talking point should be substantially the same as my posts. Wilson can be whatever you want to call him, but ROVE DID SOMETHING MAYBE ILLEGAL AND DEFINITELY GROUNDS FOR TERMINATION.

[milo]

the George Bush Center for Intelligence
Hey, that's a great idea. Here's a few more...
How about the Andrew Myers Center for the Advancement of Sarcasm?

The George Bush Center for Intelligence was created in 1998, and is named for former president George H.W. Bush, who was the Director of the CIA during the late 1970s.

[Jasper]

Why the fuck do you want to defend Wilson? Are you headhunting for him? No, once again, it's a refusal to admit flaw in an ally. If you stipulate Wilson being a nepotised hack, they win!
My problem is that I'm not quite willing to go along with, "Jeepers, they're all pretty bad. But sure enough, Rove's the worstestest." No, fuck that. Lay out what you've got on Wilson.
Pretty straight forward. The extreme right often uses the "all politicians are like this, what's the big fuss? Mommy look, he's bad too-oo!" smoke screen when it gets caught with it's hand in the cookie jar (but takes a different stance when it's an opponent). Typically the allegations are complete bullshit too, like mained war veteran Max Cleland not being a patriot, while putting all the chicken-shit-hawks like Bush and Cheney on a pedestal.

Brian's point is: The neo-con imperialists running the show are far dirtier than any other segment of american politics, and instead of being honest they simply hire a good "lawyer" and spin like mad when they get caught. Slamming Wilson is just another example of Rove's demagogery, especially considering the extreme right had lauded him when he toed the line.

Rove's genius is that he's taken this smoke screen, and combined it with changing the debate topic. I say fuck Rove, he has no more credibility than the Enquirer. At this point I won't give any allegations coming out of his camp a second look -- he manages to rumor monger bad things about everybody he disagrees with and in the past it's been pretty much all lies.

[Jason McCullough]

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/7/10/42259/4958

Speculation Fitzgerald is working on espionage act indictments. The angle with Chalabi, and that judge saying the evidence is so serious as to be worth overrulling reporter confidentiality.....

Summary...

Courtjester and TPM: Fitzgerald and CIA believe that Plame is part of an ongoing series of leaks severely damaging national security.

Lawrence O'Donnell: Judge Tatel's concurrence in Miller suggests that this is not about perjury... AND it is about a very serious crime.

Mark A. Kleiman: Judge Hogan thinks that the information [Judy Miller] was given and her potential use of it was a crime.

John Dean: Leaking classified information is a crime under the Espionage Act with no exceptions for good intentions.

Dec. 2003, MSNBC documentary evidence: Cheney's office and Hannah specifically was "a principal point of contact" with Chalabi's INC to receive and disseminate intelligence.

Feb. 2004, Richard Sale (UPI): FBI had "hard evidence" that Hannah and Libby were involved in the outing of Plame.

June 2004, USA Today reported that the FBI had begun interviews to determine who might have told Chalabi that the CIA had cracked Iranian codes - info which Chalabi passed on to Iran.

When you put all of this together, it sure feels like Espionage Act prosecutions are in the offing... Wouldn't you think?

[ridge]

Why the fuck do you want to defend Wilson? Are you headhunting for him? No, once again, it's a refusal to admit flaw in an ally. If you stipulate Wilson being a nepotised hack, they win!
My problem is that I'm not quite willing to go along with, "Jeepers, they're all pretty bad. But sure enough, Rove's the worstestest." No, fuck that. Lay out what you've got on Wilson.
Pretty straight forward. The extreme right often uses the "all politicians are like this, what's the big fuss? Mommy look, he's bad too-oo!" smoke screen when it gets caught with it's hand in the cookie jar (but takes a different stance when it's an opponent). Typically the allegations are complete bullshit too, like mained war veteran Max Cleland not being a patriot, while putting all the chicken-shit-hawks like Bush and Cheney on a pedestal.

Brian's point is: The neo-con imperialists running the show are far dirtier than any other segment of american politics, and instead of being honest they simply hire a good "lawyer" and spin like mad when they get caught. Slamming Wilson is just another example of Rove's demagogery, especially considering the extreme right had lauded him when he toed the line.

Rove's genius is that he's taken this smoke screen, and combined it with changing the debate topic. I say fuck Rove, he has no more credibility than the Enquirer. At this point I won't give any allegations coming out of his camp a second look -- he manages to rumor monger bad things about everybody he disagrees with and in the past it's been pretty much all lies.

Wilson outted himself to politicize his Niger trip in an election year. Dishonestly. The Senate report on Prewar Intelligence Assessments (http://intelligence.senate.gov/iraqreport2.pdf#search='US%20senate%20report%20ira q%20war%20wilson') severly impacted the credibility of his claims. So the Senate lied about Wilson? Rove lied about Wilson?

If Wilson and the Democrats are so keen on preserving low level CIA personnel, they should use the proper channels like the Senate and Senate reports rather than marching off to the press with clear misrepresentations. Wilson should have testified in front of the Senate not run every major media outlet. He's more responsible for outting his wife than anyone else.

[MikeSofaer]

He's more responsible for outting his wife than anyone else.
It's true. Wilson was so far beyond the pale that Karl Rove had no choice; he had to out her.

......

Look, welcome to the board and all, but for blatant contravention of reality we have Brian Koontz already.

[ridge]

He's more responsible for outting his wife than anyone else.
It's true. Wilson was so far beyond the pale that Karl Rove had no choice; he had to out her.

......

Look, welcome to the board and all, but for blatant contravention of reality we have Brian Koontz already.

Wilson revealed her identity on his website before Rove said she apparently worked for the CIA. She wasn't a covert agent. Plame had a desk job and was retired from since the 90's from covert assignments. Wilson and Plame were all over the Washington scene.

[MikeJ]

Wilson outted himself to politicize his Niger trip in an election year.

Could someone clear this up for me? As I understand it, Wilson went public in the middle of 2003. Was that an election year? I thought election years in the US were even numbers?

[Andrew Mayer]

He's more responsible for outting his wife than anyone else.
It's true. Wilson was so far beyond the pale that Karl Rove had no choice; he had to out her.

......

Look, welcome to the board and all, but for blatant contravention of reality we have Brian Koontz already.

Wilson revealed her identity on his website before Rove said she apparently worked for the CIA. She wasn't a covert agent. Plame had a desk job and was retired from since the 90's from covert assignments. Wilson and Plame were all over the Washington scene.


For all your inability to correctly use phpBB codes, your ability to paste together lies from right wing blogs is excellent.

Just FYI, telling people that someone is your wife isn't the same as blowing her cover.

[Jason Lutes]

Wilson revealed her identity on his website before Rove said she apparently worked for the CIA. She wasn't a covert agent. Plame had a desk job and was retired from since the 90's from covert assignments. Wilson and Plame were all over the Washington scene.
Cite your source, please. Let's see that webpage. Here's (http://play.rbn.com/?url=livecon/kcrw/g2demand/tp/tp050714Has_Homeland_Securit.rm&start=00:42:01.872&end=00:50:11.628&proto=rtsp) an interesting radio interview with Larry Johnson, a former CIA anti-terrorism official and registered Republican, that provides an interesting counterpoint to the "desk job" red herring.

[SpoofyChop]

Wilson revealed her identity on his website before Rove said she apparently worked for the CIA. She wasn't a covert agent. Plame had a desk job and was retired from since the 90's from covert assignments. Wilson and Plame were all over the Washington scene.

These incontrovertible facts are really of no use to the true believers on the left.

It doesn't matter a whit that there was general knowledge (in the press!) of the fact that Plame worked for the CIA, these ding dongs continue to treat her as if she was on some kind of frigging NOC list from Mission Impossible.

If the left can ride this horse long enough that Rove gets fired then they'll have won. Unfortunately Bush cannot win because he made the extremely bad mistake of saying that he would fire the Plame "leaker" if he was found in the administration. I will have lost a little more respect for Bush if he doesn't fire Rove but it will probably be better for conservatism since Rove keeps handing these clowns their asses.

Anyway, on a side note, I was reading "Wedding of the Waters" about the Erie Canal and the author is talking about how much corruption, patronage, and politicking the canal generated. Makes current politics look like a Church Council meeting.

[ridge]

He's more responsible for outting his wife than anyone else.
It's true. Wilson was so far beyond the pale that Karl Rove had no choice; he had to out her.

......

Look, welcome to the board and all, but for blatant contravention of reality we have Brian Koontz already.

Wilson revealed her identity on his website before Rove said she apparently worked for the CIA. She wasn't a covert agent. Plame had a desk job and was retired from since the 90's from covert assignments. Wilson and Plame were all over the Washington scene.


For all your inability to correctly use phpBB codes, your ability to paste together lies from right wing blogs is excellent.

Just FYI, telling people that someone is your wife isn't the same as blowing her cover.

So Plame didn't retire in the 90's from covert assignments? And the whole world didn't know he was married to a paper pusher in the CIA?

[flyinj]

He's more responsible for outting his wife than anyone else.
It's true. Wilson was so far beyond the pale that Karl Rove had no choice; he had to out her.

......

Look, welcome to the board and all, but for blatant contravention of reality we have Brian Koontz already.

Wilson revealed her identity on his website before Rove said she apparently worked for the CIA. She wasn't a covert agent. Plame had a desk job and was retired from since the 90's from covert assignments. Wilson and Plame were all over the Washington scene.


For all your inability to correctly use phpBB codes, your ability to paste together lies from right wing blogs is excellent.

Just FYI, telling people that someone is your wife isn't the same as blowing her cover.

So Plame didn't retire in the 90's from covert assignments? And the whole world didn't know he was married to a paper pusher in the CIA?


Let's see....

We have a huge federal prosecution case because someone leaked the name of a CIA agent... and it is now publically known that Karl Rove leaked it.

And we have you, who says that simply everyone knew she was an agent anyways.

Who to believe, who to believe....

Show me any evidence that people knew she was a covert operative before this article came out.

[MikeSofaer]

Just because she hadn't been on a covert operation in some time doesn't mean that she was no longer undercover. That's not the way it works. See, people remember where she was and who she talked to while she was undercover, so the secret doesn't magically expire.

[Bren]

Show me any evidence that people knew she was a covert operative before this article came out.

Yeah really, 'cause if true, this common knowledge is possibly the best kept secret, at the moment.

I'm guessing these guys are confusing the "fact" that Plame was "outed" as Wilson's wife, and/or the fact that Plame didn't have the "black passport" that gave her diplomatic immunity, or something like that.

[BrewersDroop]

Yet another textbook example of political spin at work: divert attention from the main thrust of an embarassing story by going on the offensive.

[flyinj]

Let's see it, Ridge.

[chet]

Spoofy, did you call your brother to help you out of your insanity? Oh wait, I get it.. IT IS TOM RIDGE POSTING ON QT3??!?! Woohoo. See spoofy is right, someone is agreeing with him, so he must be right! Yep! That is how it works...

[Andrew Mayer]

So Plame didn't retire in the 90's from covert assignments? And the whole world didn't know he was married to a paper pusher in the CIA?

I dunno. She was working for a company that was acutally a cover operation for the CIA at the time so what do you think?

Have you always created accounts just so you could support traitors such as Rove?

[flyinj]

Here's an article that debunks the talking point of Wilson lying repeatedly in his Niger report:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000103&sid=a8dab8rni_Do&refer=us#

[SpoofyChop]

Spoofy, did you call your brother to help you out of your insanity? Oh wait, I get it.. IT IS TOM RIDGE POSTING ON QT3??!?! Woohoo. See spoofy is right, someone is agreeing with him, so he must be right! Yep! That is how it works...

Well, for starters my brother is dead.

Second, it would be really awesome if I was Tom Ridge.

Third, I wish I was right everytime somebody agreed with me...that would be awesome. Don't you agree?

:D

[Bren]

OK, so you have no evidence, and are pulling this out of your ass, then? Got it.

[flyinj]

Wilson revealed her identity on his website before Rove said she apparently worked for the CIA. She wasn't a covert agent. Plame had a desk job and was retired from since the 90's from covert assignments. Wilson and Plame were all over the Washington scene.

These incontrovertible facts are really of no use to the true believers on the left.

It doesn't matter a whit that there was general knowledge (in the press!) of the fact that Plame worked for the CIA, these ding dongs continue to treat her as if she was on some kind of frigging NOC list from Mission Impossible.

If the left can ride this horse long enough that Rove gets fired then they'll have won. Unfortunately Bush cannot win because he made the extremely bad mistake of saying that he would fire the Plame "leaker" if he was found in the administration. I will have lost a little more respect for Bush if he doesn't fire Rove but it will probably be better for conservatism since Rove keeps handing these clowns their asses.

Anyway, on a side note, I was reading "Wedding of the Waters" about the Erie Canal and the author is talking about how much corruption, patronage, and politicking the canal generated. Makes current politics look like a Church Council meeting.

Ok guys, let's see the evidence here:

First of all, let's see the evidence of Wilson outing his wife as a covert CIA operative on his website before Rove leaked her name.

Next, let's see the evidence that everyone in the world knew she was a covert CIA agent before Rove leaked the story.

[Jasper]

I will have lost a little more respect for Bush if he doesn't fire Rove but it will probably be better for conservatism since Rove keeps handing these clowns their asses.
So dishonest Rove tactics are better for conservatism, so long as it makes them win? Could you be more blatant in spouting "ends justify the means" ideology?

Rove should go, as should the rest of the people conspiring with him, or covering up for him. I'm betting Bush et al. knew all about this from the beginning. If their hands are so clean and they have nothing to hide why have the lied so much to cover it up?

Or to put it another way: What did the president know, and when did he know it?

[chet]

Spoofy, did you call your brother to help you out of your insanity? Oh wait, I get it.. IT IS TOM RIDGE POSTING ON QT3??!?! Woohoo. See spoofy is right, someone is agreeing with him, so he must be right! Yep! That is how it works...

Well, for starters my brother is dead.

Second, it would be really awesome if I was Tom Ridge.

Third, I wish I was right everytime somebody agreed with me...that would be awesome. Don't you agree?

:D

This would be what... the second time someone agreed with you that wasn't you?

[MikeSofaer]

I still think that there is a layer of legal responsibility beyond Rove. It doesn't make any sense to me that he would have legally been able to access the identity of a covert CIA agent. He may be a government official, but that sort of thing is classified on a need-to-know basis, and he didn't need to know. Someone had to tell Rove, and wow, there are some amazing possibilities there.

[Nick Walter]

I still think that there is a layer of legal responsibility beyond Rove. It doesn't make any sense to me that he would have legally been able to access the identity of a covert CIA agent. He may be a government official, but that sort of thing is classified on a need-to-know basis, and he didn't need to know. Someone had to tell Rove, and wow, there are some amazing possibilities there.

Rove is white house deputy chief of staff and has a security clearance. His breakfast buddy is the commander in chief. I don't think there's any sinister tale invovled in Rove knowing who Plame was. It probably came up in the course of his regular duties, or over eggies.

[Ben]

Uh, kids, Plame was on some kind of NOC list right out of Mission Impossible. Whoops.


flyingj-
Wilson was right about the core Iraq-WMD issue, but on several points of fact he lied. He completely made some shit up for political gain. He was right by accident, just as Bush would've been right by accident if there had been WMDs in Iraq.

If we had found, I dunno, anthrax in Baghdad the neocons wouldn't have been proven right. In fact, I think that was their plan. They lied about WMDs but assumed that they'd find something. Then they could handwave about about how while they said it was Nigerian uranium to make nukes and we actually found Chinese poison gas WMD is WMD and aren't we all better off? Doesn't make the initial lie true.

[flyinj]

Uh, kids, Plame was on some kind of NOC list right out of Mission Impossible. Whoops.


flyingj-
Wilson was right about the core Iraq-WMD issue, but on several points of fact he lied. He completely made some shit up for political gain. He was right by accident, just as Bush would've been right by accident if there had been WMDs in Iraq.

If we had found, I dunno, anthrax in Baghdad the neocons wouldn't have been proven right. In fact, I think that was their plan. They lied about WMDs but assumed that they'd find something. Then they could handwave about about how while they said it was Nigerian uranium to make nukes and we actually found Chinese poison gas WMD is WMD and aren't we all better off? Doesn't make the initial lie true.

This sounds great... if you could point me to the evidence.

I've read nothing from any news source that said Wilson "made shit up" on his Niger reports.

[MikeSofaer]

I still think that there is a layer of legal responsibility beyond Rove. It doesn't make any sense to me that he would have legally been able to access the identity of a covert CIA agent. He may be a government official, but that sort of thing is classified on a need-to-know basis, and he didn't need to know. Someone had to tell Rove, and wow, there are some amazing possibilities there.

Rove is white house deputy chief of staff and has a security clearance. His breakfast buddy is the commander in chief. I don't think there's any sinister tale invovled in Rove knowing who Plame was. It probably came up in the course of his regular duties, or over eggies.

Classified information doesn't, as a rule, get distibuted that way. The point of a need-to-know classification is that you need to be specifically cleared for each piece of information at that level, and there needs to be some reason you would be given it. Deputy chief of staff does not need to know identities of covert agents. There is no reason that such information should be given out to anyone not involved in some official business related to her covert identity. If it really was Bush who told Rove, that could be a very awkward thing.

[ridge]

So Plame didn't retire in the 90's from covert assignments? And the whole world didn't know he was married to a paper pusher in the CIA?

I dunno. She was working for a company that was acutally a cover operation for the CIA at the time so what do you think?

Have you always created accounts just so you could support traitors such as Rove?

No. I wait for all the facts and the court decisions before concluding someone is a traitor. A Milgram (Yale) button pusher like you on the other hand has certain challenges in life.

US 50 (http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode50/usc_sec_50_00000421----000-.html)

What do the authors of the law think? First, Plame wasn't covert, and the government wasn't concealing her identity. Second, we have no evidence that Rove obtained the information from a classified source. And at this point the third criteria is irrelevant. She wasn't covert.

Now Otto Reich, aka Mr. Smith, he's a covert agent. “Did Otto Reich share his belief that Fulton Armstrong should be removed from his position? The answer is yes,” Kerry said. “Did John Bolton share that view? Yes.” Kerry needs a special investigator assigned to him.

[flyinj]

So Plame didn't retire in the 90's from covert assignments? And the whole world didn't know he was married to a paper pusher in the CIA?

I dunno. She was working for a company that was acutally a cover operation for the CIA at the time so what do you think?

Have you always created accounts just so you could support traitors such as Rove?

No. I wait for all the facts and the court decisions before concluding someone is a traitor. A Milgram (Yale) button pusher like you on the other hand has certain challenges in life.

US 50 (http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode50/usc_sec_50_00000421----000-.html)

What do the authors of the law think? First, Plame wasn't covert, and the government wasn't concealing her identity. Second, we have no evidence that Rove obtained the information from a classified source. And at this point the third criteria is irrelevant. She wasn't covert.

Now Otto Reich, aka Mr. Smith, he's a covert agent. “Did Otto Reich share his belief that Fulton Armstrong should be removed from his position? The answer is yes,” Kerry said. “Did John Bolton share that view? Yes.” Kerry needs a special investigator assigned to him.

I've read that Ridge...

So, where's the evidence that the whole world knew that Wilson was a covert agent for the CIA, like you claimed a few posts up?

[Houngan]

I've read that Ridge...

So, where's the evidence that the whole world knew that Wilson was a covert agent for the CIA, like you claimed a few posts up?

And, more importantly, why didn't the president know this at the time? He sure seemed to think she was covert. As did the rest of the world. And her bosses. And the press. And infinitum.

H.

[Ben]

flyingj- Run through the Volokh link earlier, there's a number of links to some other conservative blog which in turns excerpts various news articles.

[forgeforsaken]

Watched some of the talking heads today. What I find interesting is there's a bunch who think perjury or maybe obstruction of justice but nothing more than that. On the other hand, Matt Cooper's lawyer seems to think there are some pretty serious and substantial charges that are going to be made against someone. The impression he got is that Fitzgerald has a large and substantiated case and has been very thorough.

[ridge]

So Plame didn't retire in the 90's from covert assignments? And the whole world didn't know he was married to a paper pusher in the CIA?

I dunno. She was working for a company that was acutally a cover operation for the CIA at the time so what do you think?

Have you always created accounts just so you could support traitors such as Rove?

No. I wait for all the facts and the court decisions before concluding someone is a traitor. A Milgram (Yale) button pusher like you on the other hand has certain challenges in life.

US 50 (http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode50/usc_sec_50_00000421----000-.html)

What do the authors of the law think? First, Plame wasn't covert, and the government wasn't concealing her identity. Second, we have no evidence that Rove obtained the information from a classified source. And at this point the third criteria is irrelevant. She wasn't covert.

Now Otto Reich, aka Mr. Smith, he's a covert agent. “Did Otto Reich share his belief that Fulton Armstrong should be removed from his position? The answer is yes,” Kerry said. “Did John Bolton share that view? Yes.” Kerry needs a special investigator assigned to him.

I've read that Ridge...

So, where's the evidence that the whole world knew that Wilson was a covert agent for the CIA, like you claimed a few posts up?

No. You didn't read it. Because of Ames, who blew her cover, Plame retired from covert operations in the 90's. She has a desk job.

[Andrew Mayer]

No. I wait for all the facts and the court decisions before concluding someone is a traitor. A Milgram (Yale) button pusher like you on the other hand has certain challenges in life.


Yeah, like Newbies, (and/or renamed users) spouting lies and nonsense with no attribution.

[Oppressor]

No. You didn't read it. Because of Ames, who blew her cover, Plame retired from covert operations in the 90's. She has a desk job.

Ah the succulent sucking sound of right-wing apologist desperation. Turd Blossom is going down. I understand how denial precedes depression and acceptance so I'll refrain from commenting further...

[BrewersDroop]

The fact that the CIA referred the case to the Justice Department who then launched a criminal investigation is proof positive that both the CIA and the Justice Department believe a crime was committed, dontcherknow.

[flyinj]

So Plame didn't retire in the 90's from covert assignments? And the whole world didn't know he was married to a paper pusher in the CIA?

I dunno. She was working for a company that was acutally a cover operation for the CIA at the time so what do you think?

Have you always created accounts just so you could support traitors such as Rove?

No. I wait for all the facts and the court decisions before concluding someone is a traitor. A Milgram (Yale) button pusher like you on the other hand has certain challenges in life.

US 50 (http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode50/usc_sec_50_00000421----000-.html)

What do the authors of the law think? First, Plame wasn't covert, and the government wasn't concealing her identity. Second, we have no evidence that Rove obtained the information from a classified source. And at this point the third criteria is irrelevant. She wasn't covert.

Now Otto Reich, aka Mr. Smith, he's a covert agent. “Did Otto Reich share his belief that Fulton Armstrong should be removed from his position? The answer is yes,” Kerry said. “Did John Bolton share that view? Yes.” Kerry needs a special investigator assigned to him.

I've read that Ridge...

So, where's the evidence that the whole world knew that Wilson was a covert agent for the CIA, like you claimed a few posts up?

No. You didn't read it. Because of Ames, who blew her cover, Plame retired from covert operations in the 90's. She has a desk job.

Yes. I did read that. Please point out, from that link, where it states Wilson was a well-known covert CIA agent prior to the Novak editorial.

And, after you figure out that link doesn't say it anywhere, please show us a major news source stating that she was a well known CIA operative.

[Troy S Goodfellow]

From October 2003 (http://www.billingsgazette.com/index.php?ts=1&display=rednews/2003/10/01/build/nation/25-leak.inc) in response to suggestions that Plame was not really undercover:

The CIA declined to discuss Plame's intelligence work, but an agency official disputed suggestions that she was a mere analyst whose public exposure would have little consequence.

"If she was not undercover, we would have no reason to file a criminal referral," the CIA official said, insisting on anonymity because of the sensitivity of the investigation.

So as far as the CIA was concerned, she was covert. Any suggestion now that her status was well known is rewriting history. IIRC, there was very little of this sort of claim before Rove was implicated. Can anyone find a GOP official taking this line when the case first broke?

Troy

[flyinj]

Ok, I did Ridge's research for him.

He's referring to this piece in The Washington Post:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20040722-115439-4033r.htm

So, apparently, through espionage, the Russians and the Cubans might have been able to figure out that Plame was CIA.

And if they did, I'm sure the first thing they would do in the interest of their intelligence gathering agencies, is announce it to the world.

Just not to anyone in the US... or Western Europe... most likely not Asia.... Africa? Nah....

[flyinj]

flyingj- Run through the Volokh link earlier, there's a number of links to some other conservative blog which in turns excerpts various news articles.

Ok, I'm running through it now.

It's pretty difficuly to ascertain what is conjecture on the site's part and what is actual fact...

Seeing how you used this to ascertain that Wilson lied numerous times, you must have the relevant real news sources that explicitly say that he lied, right?

Notice also, that when I send off a factual rebuttal, I link to a real news source, not a speculative right-wing blog.

[Matthew Gallant]

He's referring to this piece in The Washington Post:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20040722-115439-4033r.htm
There's a big difference between the Times and the Post, homey.

[flyinj]

flyingj- Run through the Volokh link earlier, there's a number of links to some other conservative blog which in turns excerpts various news articles.

Ok,
It's pretty difficuly to ascertain what is conjecture on the site's part and what is actual fact...

Seeing how you used this to ascertain that Wilson lied numerous times, you must have the relevant real news sources that explicitly say that he lied, right?

Notice also, that when I send off a factual rebuttal, I link to a real news source, not a speculative right-wing blog.

OK, I've finished reading through this. It doesn't point to one single news report that shows Wilson lying.

The only legitimate links point to definitions of federal law. The rest point to right-wing editorials and bloggers:

Under the link "The bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee 2004 report exposed Wilson’s lies on what he found and told the CIA, as well as the one about how Wilson was hired. "

Exposed Wilson's lies was a hyperlink, which brought me to this article:

http://powerlineblog.com/archives/011014.php

The next one:

It would be great if NBC TODAY would probe Wilson on these matters. The Wall Street Journal says that Wilson had started lying to the press and public about how he was hired before his wife was outed, in part by Rove.

"The Wall Street Journal" is a hyperlink in that paragraph to this:

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110006955

Next:

"The other reason that Plame may not have been a covert agent is that, according to bloggers quoting Andrea Mitchell, who was involved in NBC’s early stories on Wilson, it was widely known that Wilson’s wife worked for the CIA"

"bloggers quoting Andrea Mitchell" is hyperlinked to this:

http://powerlineblog.com/archives/010989.php

The rest of the hyperlinks point to various right-wing bloggers.

Also note, many times the phrase "exposed wilson's lies" pops up in the blog, and always points to the same poweline blog.

So, please, show me a real news source that shows Wilson lied in his Niger report...

[flyinj]

He's referring to this piece in The Washington Post:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20040722-115439-4033r.htm
There's a big difference between the Times and the Post, homey.

Was that times link an editorial? I couldn't really tell...

[ridge]

From October 2003 (http://www.billingsgazette.com/index.php?ts=1&display=rednews/2003/10/01/build/nation/25-leak.inc) in response to suggestions that Plame was not really undercover:

The CIA declined to discuss Plame's intelligence work, but an agency official disputed suggestions that she was a mere analyst whose public exposure would have little consequence.

"If she was not undercover, we would have no reason to file a criminal referral," the CIA official said, insisting on anonymity because of the sensitivity of the investigation.

So as far as the CIA was concerned, she was covert. Any suggestion now that her status was well known is rewriting history. IIRC, there was very little of this sort of claim before Rove was implicated. Can anyone find a GOP official taking this line when the case first broke?

Troy

From October 2003 (http://www.billingsgazette.com/index.php?ts=1&display=rednews/2003/10/01/build/nation/25-leak.inc) in response to suggestions that Plame was not really undercover:

The CIA declined to discuss Plame's intelligence work, but an agency official disputed suggestions that she was a mere analyst whose public exposure would have little consequence.

"If she was not undercover, we would have no reason to file a criminal referral," the CIA official said, insisting on anonymity because of the sensitivity of the investigation.

So as far as the CIA was concerned, she was covert. Any suggestion now that her status was well known is rewriting history. IIRC, there was very little of this sort of claim before Rove was implicated. Can anyone find a GOP official taking this line when the case first broke?

Troy

Wilson didn't rewrite history. She wasn't covert at the time of the Novak article. Her status changed in the mid-90's. The Ames information is widely available (see the washingtonmonthly link).

WILSON: My wife was not a clandestine officer the day that Bob Novak blew her identity.

BLITZER: But she hadn't been a clandestine officer for some time before that?

WILSON: That's not anything that I can talk about. And, indeed, I'll go back to what I said earlier, the CIA believed that a possible crime had been committed, and that's why they referred it to the Justice Department.


Washington Monthly Archive (http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2003_10/002395.php)

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2003_10/002395.php

[ridge]

He's referring to this piece in The Washington Post:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20040722-115439-4033r.htm
There's a big difference between the Times and the Post, homey.

Was that times link an editorial? I couldn't really tell...

What's the average age of the forum? 26-27?

[flyinj]

From October 2003 (http://www.billingsgazette.com/index.php?ts=1&display=rednews/2003/10/01/build/nation/25-leak.inc) in response to suggestions that Plame was not really undercover:

The CIA declined to discuss Plame's intelligence work, but an agency official disputed suggestions that she was a mere analyst whose public exposure would have little consequence.

"If she was not undercover, we would have no reason to file a criminal referral," the CIA official said, insisting on anonymity because of the sensitivity of the investigation.

So as far as the CIA was concerned, she was covert. Any suggestion now that her status was well known is rewriting history. IIRC, there was very little of this sort of claim before Rove was implicated. Can anyone find a GOP official taking this line when the case first broke?

Troy

From October 2003 (http://www.billingsgazette.com/index.php?ts=1&display=rednews/2003/10/01/build/nation/25-leak.inc) in response to suggestions that Plame was not really undercover:

The CIA declined to discuss Plame's intelligence work, but an agency official disputed suggestions that she was a mere analyst whose public exposure would have little consequence.

"If she was not undercover, we would have no reason to file a criminal referral," the CIA official said, insisting on anonymity because of the sensitivity of the investigation.

So as far as the CIA was concerned, she was covert. Any suggestion now that her status was well known is rewriting history. IIRC, there was very little of this sort of claim before Rove was implicated. Can anyone find a GOP official taking this line when the case first broke?

Troy

Wilson didn't rewrite history. She wasn't covert at the time of the Novak article. Her status changed in the mid-90's. The Ames information is widely available (see the washingtonmonthly link).

WILSON: My wife was not a clandestine officer the day that Bob Novak blew her identity.

BLITZER: But she hadn't been a clandestine officer for some time before that?

WILSON: That's not anything that I can talk about. And, indeed, I'll go back to what I said earlier, the CIA believed that a possible crime had been committed, and that's why they referred it to the Justice Department.


Washington Monthly Archive (http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2003_10/002395.php)

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2003_10/002395.php

Well, that washington monthly link doesn't work.

I looked up the actual transcript of that interview on CNN, and the quotes you just made don't even exist in it:

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0407/18/le.00.html

As a matter of fact, here is the exchange:


BLITZER: And one final question. Based on the sensitivity of the issue, I take it under the law, whoever leaked the name, your wife's name, Valerie Plame, to Bob Novak, had to know this was a violation of the law, that she was a clandestine officer undercover working for the CIA.

Do you believe whoever leaked that name actually knew that?

WILSON: I have no idea. And my understanding is it's quite possible that a number of different laws have been broken. But I'm not an attorney. I put in my book a piece that was done by Sam Dash before he passed away suggesting it might even be a violation of the Patriot Act.

BLITZER: All right. So now we have you, your future, Valerie Plame's future. What's next for both of you?

WILSON: Well, I don't know. Obviously, there's been this orchestrated campaign, this smear campaign. I happen to think that it's because the RNC, the Republican National Committee's, been involved in this in a big way...

BLITZER: But they weren't involved in the Senate Intelligence Committee report.

WILSON: No, they weren't. But they've certainly seized upon it as a way of smearing, sort of perpetuating the smear campaign against me. I think Valerie and I will fight back. If they think that I'm going to go away on this issue, they're wrong. And we will see where we go from there.

BLITZER: Joe Wilson, thanks for joining us.

WILSON: Good to be with you, Wolf.


Again, please point me to some solid evidence that Wilson lied.

And, as a service to your own integrity and to this forum, PLEASE check your sources this time.

[flyinj]

He's referring to this piece in The Washington Post:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20040722-115439-4033r.htm
There's a big difference between the Times and the Post, homey.

Was that times link an editorial? I couldn't really tell...

What's the average age of the forum? 26-27?


Biting!

[ridge]

That's because you've got the wrong transcript. ROFL. The interview was today.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0507/14/wbr.01.html

The Washington Monthly quote the NYTimes. So google that. Then take your meds.

From October 2003 (http://www.billingsgazette.com/index.php?ts=1&display=rednews/2003/10/01/build/nation/25-leak.inc) in response to suggestions that Plame was not really undercover:

The CIA declined to discuss Plame's intelligence work, but an agency official disputed suggestions that she was a mere analyst whose public exposure would have little consequence.

"If she was not undercover, we would have no reason to file a criminal referral," the CIA official said, insisting on anonymity because of the sensitivity of the investigation.

So as far as the CIA was concerned, she was covert. Any suggestion now that her status was well known is rewriting history. IIRC, there was very little of this sort of claim before Rove was implicated. Can anyone find a GOP official taking this line when the case first broke?

Troy

From October 2003 (http://www.billingsgazette.com/index.php?ts=1&display=rednews/2003/10/01/build/nation/25-leak.inc) in response to suggestions that Plame was not really undercover:

The CIA declined to discuss Plame's intelligence work, but an agency official disputed suggestions that she was a mere analyst whose public exposure would have little consequence.

"If she was not undercover, we would have no reason to file a criminal referral," the CIA official said, insisting on anonymity because of the sensitivity of the investigation.

So as far as the CIA was concerned, she was covert. Any suggestion now that her status was well known is rewriting history. IIRC, there was very little of this sort of claim before Rove was implicated. Can anyone find a GOP official taking this line when the case first broke?

Troy

Wilson didn't rewrite history. She wasn't covert at the time of the Novak article. Her status changed in the mid-90's. The Ames information is widely available (see the washingtonmonthly link).

WILSON: My wife was not a clandestine officer the day that Bob Novak blew her identity.

BLITZER: But she hadn't been a clandestine officer for some time before that?

WILSON: That's not anything that I can talk about. And, indeed, I'll go back to what I said earlier, the CIA believed that a possible crime had been committed, and that's why they referred it to the Justice Department.


Washington Monthly Archive (http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2003_10/002395.php)

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2003_10/002395.php

Well, that washington monthly link doesn't work.

I looked up the actual transcript of that interview on CNN, and the quotes you just made don't even exist in it:

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0407/18/le.00.html

As a matter of fact, here is the exchange:


BLITZER: And one final question. Based on the sensitivity of the issue, I take it under the law, whoever leaked the name, your wife's name, Valerie Plame, to Bob Novak, had to know this was a violation of the law, that she was a clandestine officer undercover working for the CIA.

Do you believe whoever leaked that name actually knew that?

WILSON: I have no idea. And my understanding is it's quite possible that a number of different laws have been broken. But I'm not an attorney. I put in my book a piece that was done by Sam Dash before he passed away suggesting it might even be a violation of the Patriot Act.

BLITZER: All right. So now we have you, your future, Valerie Plame's future. What's next for both of you?

WILSON: Well, I don't know. Obviously, there's been this orchestrated campaign, this smear campaign. I happen to think that it's because the RNC, the Republican National Committee's, been involved in this in a big way...

BLITZER: But they weren't involved in the Senate Intelligence Committee report.

WILSON: No, they weren't. But they've certainly seized upon it as a way of smearing, sort of perpetuating the smear campaign against me. I think Valerie and I will fight back. If they think that I'm going to go away on this issue, they're wrong. And we will see where we go from there.

BLITZER: Joe Wilson, thanks for joining us.

WILSON: Good to be with you, Wolf.


Again, please point me to some solid evidence that Wilson lied.

And, as a service to your own integrity and to this forum, PLEASE check your sources this time.[

[Jason McCullough]

Remember my idea of instituting a minimum post count requirement for access to P&R?

[flyinj]

Ok, there we have it. A Blitzer interview from today:

BLITZER: But the other argument that's been made against you is that you've sought to capitalize on this extravaganza, having that photo shoot with your wife, who was a clandestine officer of the CIA, and that you've tried to enrich yourself writing this book and all of that.

What do you make of those accusations, which are serious accusations, as you know, that have been leveled against you.

WILSON: My wife was not a clandestine officer the day that Bob Novak blew her identity.

BLITZER: But she hadn't been a clandestine officer for some time before that?

WILSON: That's not anything that I can talk about. And, indeed, I'll go back to what I said earlier, the CIA believed that a possible crime had been committed, and that's why they referred it to the Justice Department.

She was not a clandestine officer at the time that that article in Vanity Fair appeared. And I have every right to have the American public know who I am and not to have myself defined by those who would write the sorts of things that are coming out, being spewed out of the mouths of the RNC...

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0507/14/wbr.01.html


That seems extremely strange.

Given the context of how this was said, he wasn't even answering the question Blitzer asked him. He just blurted that out.

Why he would possibly say that is beyond me. He's basically saying that this case has never had any merit whatsoever, and that his wife was never outed.

It doesn't make any sense.

At the top of the page, it does say this, however:

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

My money is that he mis-spoke, or it might have just been an error in the transcription.

But, nonetheless, thank you Ridge for actually having a legitimate news source.

[Brian Rucker]

That Washington Monthly bit notwithstanding, we've still got a special prosecutor gunning for someone in this Administration seriously enough to lock up one reporter for not cooperating. We've got a CIA that sent this case over to Justice. Perhaps Plame's life wasn't put in danger but we don't know what the status of her cover identity was. Was the "business" still in operation and were other operatives attached? What about people she had clandestine contact with through the company who might be identified now?

Seriously. Rove's a scumbag playing scumbag tricks and this White House either lied for him or was lied to by him. I don't think anybody can paint a clearer picture than that.

PS. Ben, do yourself, and me, a huge favor and go back to read the Blumenthal story. He does deconstruct what's going on around the so-called "bipartisan" Senate report which is cited for most of Volkov's claims.

[Jason McCullough]

That seems extremely strange.

Given the context of how this was said, he wasn't even answering the question Blitzer asked him. He just blurted that out.

Uh, how? Can you like diagram the sentences or something? Not following here.

[flyinj]

That seems extremely strange.

Given the context of how this was said, he wasn't even answering the question Blitzer asked him. He just blurted that out.

Uh, how? Can you like diagram the sentences or something? Not following here.

Well, Blitzer asked him how he responded to people saying he was capitalizing on the fame with a book and a photo shoot.

Wilson responded with "My wife was not a clandestine officer the day that Bob Novak blew her identity."

What does that have to do with responding to people saying he was capitalizing on the case to make money?

[chet]

Okay I am confused.

Is the idea now that no one ever checked to see if Plame was actually undercover, instead they went thought the whole investigation, the president said he would fire the person involved etc - but we never bothered to check to see if there was something to investigate, only now that we have a suspect have we decided to check to see if it was possible a crime was committed?

Is that really the wacky defense today? Lets pretend we live in spoofy/ridge land. Doesn't that mean we should go after the guy who called for this useless investigation and wasted millions of tax payer's dollars? Didn't bush approve of the investigation?

[BrewersDroop]

According to the NY Times article (http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/11/opinion/11KRIS.html?ex=1121572800&en=6217262d4a504fd6&ei=5070&oref=login) referenced in the Washington Monthly link, at the time she was outed, Plame was transitioning from her previous NOC cover as an analyst with Brewster Jennings & Associates to a new cover as a State Department official. I'm not sure why someone who was not undercover -- as is being claimed in this thread -- would need a cover but there you are.

[Jason McCullough]

That seems extremely strange.

Given the context of how this was said, he wasn't even answering the question Blitzer asked him. He just blurted that out.

Uh, how? Can you like diagram the sentences or something? Not following here.

Well, Blitzer asked him how he responded to people saying he was capitalizing on the fame with a book and a photo shoot.

Wilson responded with "My wife was not a clandestine officer the day that Bob Novak blew her identity."

What does that have to do with responding to people saying he was capitalizing on the case to make money?

Nothing - but then, he's not the story here, is he? It's stupid to get drawn into a "no I'm not a corrupt whore/no I don't beat my wife like they say" discussion.

[VegasRobb]

Source: Rove Got CIA Agent ID From Media

WASHINGTON - Chief presidential adviser Karl Rove testified to a grand jury that he talked with two journalists before they divulged the identity of an undercover CIA officer but that he originally learned about the operative from the news media and not government sources, according to a person briefed on the testimony.

Link. (http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050715/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/cia_leak_rove)

[foogla]

BAM there goes the "news madia" (to be tried for treason).

[Midnight Son]

IMHO: He's a lying sack of shit.

[Brian Rucker]

There was the theory going around that it was Judith Miller who gave Rove and Co. the ID. Nonetheless, the Cooper and Rove chat didn't happen in a vacuum. There were many journalists who were approached with this information by members of the government. Miller, Cooper and Novak are among them but several other journalists were also contacted.

Now where would Miller have gotten that information, if she was the source? The CIA? Dinner party chat? Or the same intelligence contacts in the administration who put her in bed with Chalabi?

But I would suggest that Midnight Son has a valid point re: "The Lying Sack of Shit" theory.

Edit: It was Novak?! Can't they make room for him in Miller's cell?

[TriggerHappy]

IMHO: He's a lying sack of shit.

Enough of one that Dubya's dad fired him, no?

Anyway, all politicians are lying sacks of shit imho, so this is no surprise.

[Guido Jones]

Just because she hadn't been on a covert operation in some time doesn't mean that she was no longer undercover. That's not the way it works. See, people remember where she was and who she talked to while she was undercover, so the secret doesn't magically expire.

Actually that is how it works - the statutory definition turns on whether she was on undercover missions outside the US in the 5 years before the disclosure of her identity. So if she was, then he committed a crime. If she wasn't, well, he's just an asshole.

[forgeforsaken]

That NY Times article is one of the worst written articles I have ever read.

[extarbags]

So that's a weird twist. If it's true.

Which it isn't.

[MikeSofaer]

I didn't see the interview, but WILSON: My wife was not a clandestine officer the day that Bob Novak blew her identity. could mean that she was no longer a clandestine officer as soon as that happened, so a photo shoot isn't inappropriate.

[antlers]

I didn't see the interview, but WILSON: My wife was not a clandestine officer the day that Bob Novak blew her identity. could mean that she was no longer a clandestine officer as soon as that happened, so a photo shoot isn't inappropriate.

That's the only interpretation that makes sense. He didn't just blurt out some fact that would seem to exonerate Rove; he was once again excoriating Novak for burning his wife. It would have been much clearer if he had said "My wife was no longer a clandestine officer the moment that Bob Novak blew her identity," but people screw up when they talk to the press.

In any case, he seems to have inadvertently provided ammunition to the less-intelligent of the Bush administration apologists.

[Ben Sones]

I didn't see the interview, but WILSON: My wife was not a clandestine officer the day that Bob Novak blew her identity. could mean that she was no longer a clandestine officer as soon as that happened, so a photo shoot isn't inappropriate.

That's the only interpretation that makes sense. He didn't just blurt out some fact that would seem to exonerate Rove; he was once again excoriating Novak for burning his wife.

That was how I read it as well. He's clearly not saying that she wasn't a clandestine officer at all, because then the rest of the sentence makes no sense. If she wasn't a clandestine officer, then she wouldn't have had an identity for Novak to blow.

[Midnight Son]

IMHO: He's a lying sack of shit.

Enough of one that Dubya's dad fired him, no?

Anyway, all politicians are lying sacks of shit imho, so this is no surprise.

But it's always fun when they get caught.

[Ben]

It doesn't matter if Rove committed a crime. Don't get attached to the treason charge because when Rove is exonerated of the treason charge you give Bush an out to not fire him.

Outing CIA operatives for political gain should be a termination-worthy offense. I can't think of an exception. Bush said he would fire the leak, right?

No amount of "But she was a desk jockey and her husband was an idiot" makes harming national security for political capital worth it. Political capital and national security don't even go on the same scale, you can't weigh the pros and cons. One trillionth of a percent chance that outing Plame could hurt the CIA in acheiving it's goals is unquestionably heavier than completely discrediting Wilson.

[XtienMurawski]

There's such a great, and sickening, schoolyard kind of thinking in this tactic. "Did you smack that journalist?" "He smacked me first." And it's brilliant--and still therefore sickening--because there doesn't seem to be any way to disprove it. It's like they just laid low for a few days until they came up with a tactic. Novak's a total schill, so he'll probably just play along.

It's a pity this tactic couldn't have worked for Clinton. "Did you have sex with that woman?" "No...she had sex with me."

"We can neither confirm nor deny the presence of a human child here last night."

-Amanpour

[Bren]

I long for the days when Reagan's simple "I cannot recall" was sufficient...