0
   

Rove was the source of the Plame leak... so it appears

 
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Jul, 2005 11:24 am
Well, I think it is splitting hairs a bit, but there is an argument to be made that 'all of the above' may not constitute a crime, but that doesn't mean the same thing as 'no crime was committed,' now does it?

That's the worst thing about politics; they make you micromanage yer grammar...

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Chrissee
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Jul, 2005 12:31 pm
There is a difference but it seems that moist conservatives who post on internet sites have a real problem understanding nuance.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Jul, 2005 12:34 pm
Chrissee wrote:
There is a difference but it seems that moist conservatives who post on internet sites have a real problem understanding nuance.


... and you very often have to hit damp liberals over the head to get them to acknowledge reality.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Jul, 2005 04:01 pm
Wading wetly through all the salivating by the lefties here to post a bookmark. . . .
0 Replies
 
Chrissee
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Jul, 2005 04:39 pm
We are not seeing the forests for the trees, sure we would all like to see Karl Rove lead away by the capital police, but the larger issue is how this all ties in to the leadup into war and how the administration was determined to invade Iraq at any cost.
0 Replies
 
Chrissee
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Jul, 2005 04:51 pm
http://www.therandirhodesshow.com/randirhodes/messageboards/index.php?act=Attach&type=post&id=4085
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Jul, 2005 07:18 pm
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Yeah, that's bullsh*t Helen. But we'll see how this plays out, won't we?

Lash
Quote:
Some reporters actually get a "lead" and then investigate. Rove could've said that Wilson's wife got him the Niger gig.

Then Novak could've said--how did she do that?

Rove could've said--she's in a position top do things like that--Look into it.

You don't know what Rove could've said. But there are several ways he could've tipped Novak off to her without naming her as a covert spy.

He could've said she was fair game because he thought she was fair game--meaning not undercover.


Why should anyone be 'fair game?'

Why is it fair game to out the wife of someone who is speaking badly about the Administration? Even if they are not secret (which she was)?

I really can't believe the lengths you people will go to to justify the misbehavior of your leaders...

Cycloptichorn

Everyone who plays under the table is fair game. But, Chris Matthews is the one who coined that quote. Rove said it differently--like --we can tell people how Wilson got that assignment.

Why shouldn't people know two Bush haters orchestrated the fake trip?

She even spoke about it in terms that revealed she thought it was bogus--before Wilson even boarded a plane to Niger. She made sure it was an unfair "investigation". Likely her and her liar husband with shady income wanted to get a plum assignment in a Kerry cabinet or cash in on a book.

...Oh yeah. They did.

It was an attempted hatchet job on Bush that was discovered---because Rove made sure people knew Plame and Wilson orchestrated the fake investigation.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Jul, 2005 07:24 pm
<chuckle>

Here, Chrissee, I can get that silly photo-shpped image to work for you - even if your party's silly agenda doesn't work for anyone - least of all for themselves and their candidates.

http://img53.imageshack.us/img53/3294/arrestedrove1av.jpg

Go right ahead and enjoy whatchya think ya got while ya think ya got it. Reality is a brute, and its comin' RIGHT atchya.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Jul, 2005 07:27 pm
They will burn.

muahahahaha
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Jul, 2005 07:50 pm
ANYBODY gonna take Novak seriously anymore? I think he has slipped the bounds of journalism ( a post tenuously served at best all these years) and now shall be seen for all he is . Nothing more than a Rush Limbaugh without the drug thing.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Jul, 2005 07:53 pm
I say we apply the Bush/Rumsfeld method to this problem. We invade Washington, round up all the members of the current regime, ship 'em off to a prison camp on an island, where we abuse, torture and humiliate 'em for years on end until somebody fesses up . . .
0 Replies
 
LionTamerX
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Jul, 2005 08:15 pm
Setanta wrote:
I say we apply the Bush/Rumsfeld method to this problem. We invade Washington, round up all the members of the current regime, ship 'em off to a prison camp on an island, where we abuse, torture and humiliate 'em for years on end until somebody fesses up . . .


Heck,
I'd settle for some humiliating photos...
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Jul, 2005 08:49 pm
If Rove was the source of ther leak,then he deserves to go to jail.

But,I have my doubts.
The reason I have my doubts is because the media was willing to use FAKE documents to try and stop the Bush re-election,yet you expect people to believe that a reporter was willing to sit on this story?

This most likely would have ruined Bush's chances to get re-elected,and you really think a reporter from Time mag would have passed up the chance to name Rove as the leak.

I dont think so!!!
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Jul, 2005 09:15 pm
I guess it depends on how you see the U.S. media.
Right-wing and sucking up to the White House about covers it from the north of the border view.

O'Donnell has a few questions

http://news.yahoo.com/s/huffpost/20050705/cm_huffpost/003683/nc:742

Quote:
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Jul, 2005 09:38 pm
Regardless whether, or how hard, Fitzgerald is looking at Rove, he is pressing for charges - or at least the imposition of jail time already handed down but held pending now-failed appeals - but not much here about Rove, or anyone else from The Administration:



Quote:
July 5, 2005
Jail for Journalists in Leak Case, Prosecutor Urges
By REUTERS
Filed at 6:04 p.m. ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Two journalists should be jailed for refusing to reveal their confidential sources to a grand jury investigating the leak of a covert CIA operative's name to the news media, a federal prosecutor said on Tuesday.

Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald urged Chief U.S. District Judge Thomas Hogan to reject requests from New York Times correspondent Judith Miller and Time magazine reporter Matthew Cooper for home detention instead of jail.

``Journalists are not entitled to promise confidentiality -- no one in America is,'' Fitzgerald, a U.S. Justice Department prosecutor, wrote in one of the court filings ...

... The judge has scheduled a hearing on Wednesday to consider the punishment for Miller and Cooper for refusing to disclose their sources and comply with a subpoena requiring them to turn over documents and testify before the grand jury.

They have been found in contempt by Hogan and each could be jailed for up to 120 days, the remainder of the grand jury's term ...

... Fitzgerald said ``special treatment'' for the journalists would ``enable, rather than deter, defiance of the court's authority.''

``Although confinement in a federal detention facility would separate Cooper from his family, special counsel reiterates that all Cooper need do to avoid this result is to follow the law as all American citizens are required to,'' he said.

Fitzgerald made a similar argument in the Miller case and said she would be jailed only for as long as she refuses to comply. ``Miller could avoid even a minute of separation from her husband if she would do no more than just follow the law.''

Fitzgerald said the judge should reject an alternative request by the journalists that they be sent to a specified federal prison camp instead of to a local jail ...
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Jul, 2005 09:49 pm
I am interested in a reasonable idea about why Novak seems to have skated.

Must he have 'named names'?
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Jul, 2005 10:03 pm
Tomorrow's news today - an interesting - if not exactly unpredicted - turn:
Quote:
'Wash Post' Wonders if Leaker of Plame's Identity Was a Reporter

By E&P Staff

Published: July 05, 2005 11:00 AM ET

NEW YORK The Washington Post, declaring Wednesday an "historic" day in the history of the press in America, suggested that perhaps the "leaker" of Valerie Plame's identity as a covert CIa operative was not a Bush administration official but a reporter (or reporters).

In a Wednesday A3 story, Carol Leonnig writes, "Sources close to the investigation say there is evidence in some instances that some reporters may have told government officials -- not the other way around -- that Wilson was married to Plame, a CIA employee."

She also revealed that colleagues of Matt Cooper, the Time who may be sent to jail Wednesday if he continues to refuse to testify to a grand jury, say "he is still struggling with his decision. For practical purposes, he cannot protect his sources because his publication has already turned over notes that identify them. But if Cooper cooperates, friends say, he fears his journalistic reputation will be tarnished. Time editors have told him they will respect whatever decision he makes, they said."

Leonnig also observed that at a lunch meeting on Tuesday with Washington Post reporters and editors, Karl Rove, who turned up as a source in Cooper's notes, declined to answer questions about the Plame case.



Re Novak - my conjecture - and its just conjecture - is that Novak demonstrated to Fitzgerald's satisfaction that Novak was blameless - if even there was a "There" there, Novak was nowhere near "There".
0 Replies
 
kelticwizard
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Jul, 2005 10:42 pm
mysteryman wrote:
The reason I have my doubts is because the media was willing to use FAKE documents to try and stop the Bush re-election.....


Whoa!

A) CBS did not KNOW the documents were fake. You make it sound like they did.

B) There WERE experts checking the documents and giving them the OK. Perhaps they should have done more checking, but checking was done, using experts.

C) Incidentally, the fact that the documents were fake does not mean that Bush DIDN'T do what the documents said. Somebody can forge documents saying Osama bin Laden sent the planes into the WTC-after the forgery is discovered, it certainly does not mean the bin Laden did not do just that.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Jul, 2005 10:45 pm
Nah. MM, you're right.
0 Replies
 
kelticwizard
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Jul, 2005 10:48 pm
Nah. He's wrong. So are you.

CBS DID check out the doucments, and got the okay. Other experts called the document into question.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Karl Rove E-mails - Discussion by Diest TKO
Rove: McCain went 'too far' in ads - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Sheryl Crow Battles Karl Rove at D.C. Press Dinner - Discussion by BumbleBeeBoogie
Texas attorney fired for Rove article comments - Discussion by BumbleBeeBoogie
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 01/09/2025 at 12:18:22