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

JustWonders wrote:

I wonder if Berger was sitting there cutting up stolen classified documents and thinking to himself "this is an honest mistake".

He's not yet been sentenced, so he's not being punished.

that should read "COPIES of classified documents".

still a stupid thing to do, but there's a difference between a copy and an original document.

DontTreadOnMe wrote:

JustWonders wrote:

I wonder if Berger was sitting there cutting up stolen classified documents and thinking to himself "this is an honest mistake".

He's not yet been sentenced, so he's not being punished.

that should read "COPIES of classified documents".

still a stupid thing to do, but there's a difference between a copy and an original document.

Berger made more than one "visit" to do his pilfering. He took multiple copies of documents, presumably thinking he'd taken them all, but by the second visit they were onto him and had "flagged" certain copies and also made certain that there were other copies left behind.

You see, you'd know all this stuff by heart if it got as much press as anything the administration or their staff do. Don't even try to tell me that if Rove stole documents, copies of documents, and then took them home, cut them up with scissors, destroyed others and then said it was an "honest mistake" that you'd believe that for even one minute LOL.

If Rove had done that, the MSM would be screaming on a daily basis wanting to know WHY. They would not let it rest until they either had answers or had made up their own answers. You know that. Be a sport and admit it

Cite the variables I refuse to acknowledge? You can't seem to do it no matter how many times I request you to do it. Why is that Tico?

(1) You assume there are no other sources of the information aside from the State Dept. memo. (You appear to feel confident in making that assumption because there are no other "known" sources.) (2) You assume that Rove and Libby got their information from the State Dept. Memo. (3) You assume that nobody at the State Dept. revealed the information to a reporter, who then told Rove and Libby. (4) You assume that Rove and/or Libby saw the State Dept. memo.

I got a great laugh out of this one JW.. "multiple copies of documents" Documents with an s? He took copies of the SAME document. ONE.. That is what he pled guilty to. Berger pled guilty to taking 5 copies of a document. One on his first visit and 4 copies on his second visit. Perspective is required on your part JW before you accuse the left and the media of going over the top on Rove.

Justice Department officials made the crucial decision in late 2003 to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the leak of the identity of undercover CIA officer Valerie Plame in large part because investigators had begun to specifically question the veracity of accounts provided to them by White House deputy chief of staff Karl Rove, according to senior law enforcement officials.


Several of the federal investigators were also deeply concerned that then attorney general John Ashcroft was personally briefed regarding the details of at least one FBI interview with Rove, despite Ashcroft's own longstanding personal and political ties to Rove, the Voice has also learned. The same sources said Ashcroft was also told that investigators firmly believed that Rove had withheld important information from them during that FBI interview.

Up until that point, the investigation had been conducted by a team of career prosecutors and FBI agents, some of whom believed Ashcroft should recuse himself. Democrats on Capitol Hill were calling for him to step down, but he did not. Then on December 30, 2003, Ashcroft unexpectedly recused himself from further overseeing the matter, and James B. Comey, then deputy attorney general, named Patrick J. Fitzgerald as the special prosecutor who would take over the case.

As the truthfulness of Rove's accounts became more of a focus of investigators, career Justice Department employees and senior FBI officials became even more concerned about the continuing role in the investigation of Ashcroft, because of his close relationship with Rove. Rove had earlier served as an adviser to Ashcroft during the course of three political campaigns. And Rove's onetime political consulting firm had been paid more than $746,000 for those services.

In response to these new allegations, Representative John Conyers of Michigan, the current ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, and former chairman of the committee as well, said in a statement: "There has long been the appearance of impropriety in Ashcroft's handling of this investigation. The former attorney general had well documented conflicts of interest in this matter, particularly with regard to his personal relationship with Karl Rove. Among other things, Rove was employed by Ashcroft throughout his political career, and Rove reportedly had fiercely advocated for Ashcroft's appointment as attorney general. Pursuant to standard rules of legal ethics, and explicit rules on conflict of interest, those facts alone should have dictated his immediate recusal.

Although not reported at the time, when Ashcroft recused himself from the Plame investigation, Deputy Attorney General Comey said in a statement that the A.G.'s personal staff was also being fully recused in the matter.

The new disclosures as to why Ashcroft recused himself from the Plame case and why a special prosecutor was named are important for a number of reasons:

First, they show that from the very earliest days of the criminal probe, federal investigators had a strong belief and body of evidence that Rove and perhaps other officials might be misleading them.

Second, the new information underscores that career Justice Department staffers had concerns that the continued role of Ashcroft and other political aides might tarnish the investigation.

Finally, the new information once again highlights the importance of the testimony of journalists in uncovering whether anyone might have broken the law by disclosing classified information regarding Plame. (The same liberal press so despised for no rational reason by TICO but apparently revered by Rove and co)

On July 19, 2004, it was revealed that the U.S. Justice Department was investigating Berger for taking as many as fifty classified documents, in October 2003, from a National Archives reading room prior to testifying before the 9/11 Commission. The documents were commissioned from Richard Clarke about the Clinton administration's handling of millennium terror threats. When initially questioned, Berger claimed that the removal of top-secret documents in his attache-case and handwritten notes in his pants and jacket pockets was accidental. He would later, in a guilty plea, admit to deliberately removing materials. Berger left the John Kerry campaign shortly after the incident became public. Some suggested that Berger's removal of the documents constituted theft and moreover had serious national security implications, while others claimed that the documents were taken, only drafts and all were flattering to Clinton and Berger (relating to the failed 2000 millennium attack plots). However, Berger admitted that the three documents that he destroyed were drafts that contained information not contained in the final report.[1]
On April 1, 2005, in connection with the documents investigation, Berger pled guilty to a misdemeanor charge of unauthorized removal and retention of classified material. Under a plea agreement, he was fined $10,000 and lost his security clearance for three years.

08.15.2005 Arianna Huffington

The Judy File: Miller's UN-likely Visitor
Ever since President Bush slipped him through the UN's backdoor via a recess appointment, John Bolton has been giving reporters the cold shoulder. He strode past them when he showed up at the UN on August 2nd to present his letter of appointment, and WaPo columnist Al Kamen shows that he hasn't opened up much since (via TWN).

But Bolton apparently has a warm spot in his heart for at least one journalist: none other than Judy Miller.

A trusted Judy File source just emailed to say that Bolton had recently taken time out of his busy schedule to pay a jailhouse visit to Judy.

No word on what they talked about.

Maybe they swapped notes on Pat Fitzgerald (Judy: "He really got mad when I wouldn't tell him what he wanted..." Bolton: "...and they say I've got a temper!"(laughter all around))

Or maybe they just talked about old times, when Bolton was reportedly a regular source for Miller's WMD and national security reports.

Just two potential Plamegate sources shooting the breeze.

For anyone who doesn't find this jailhouse get-together highly UN-usual, please give me the name of the journalist who, in or out of jail, would get a visit from John Bolton. Other than Bob Novak.

And for any employees of the Alexandria Detention Center who may have been monitoring the Bolton-Miller visit: feel free to give us a call or drop us an e-mail. The Judy File promises to protect your identity... even if it means taking the cell next to Judy's.

Posted at 02:50 PM

I only know Huffington from her run for CA Gov. I take it she's a gossip-columnist?

DontTreadOnMe wrote:

JustWonders wrote:

I wonder if Berger was sitting there cutting up stolen classified documents and thinking to himself "this is an honest mistake".

He's not yet been sentenced, so he's not being punished.

that should read "COPIES of classified documents".

still a stupid thing to do, but there's a difference between a copy and an original document.

Berger made more than one "visit" to do his pilfering. He took multiple copies of documents, presumably thinking he'd taken them all, but by the second visit they were onto him and had "flagged" certain copies and also made certain that there were other copies left behind.

You see, you'd know all this stuff by heart if it got as much press as anything the administration or their staff do. Don't even try to tell me that if Rove stole documents, copies of documents, and then took them home, cut them up with scissors, destroyed others and then said it was an "honest mistake" that you'd believe that for even one minute LOL.

If Rove had done that, the MSM would be screaming on a daily basis wanting to know WHY. They would not let it rest until they either had answers or had made up their own answers. You know that. Be a sport and admit it

Tico,

And there you go again.

Trying to discredit Huffington?

LOL.

parados wrote:

Cite the variables I refuse to acknowledge? You can't seem to do it no matter how many times I request you to do it. Why is that Tico?

If you're trying to get an award for being the most pig-headed, you really don't need to try so hard ... you won a long time ago.

2 days ago, Tico wrote:

(1) You assume there are no other sources of the information aside from the State Dept. memo. (You appear to feel confident in making that assumption because there are no other "known" sources.) (2) You assume that Rove and Libby got their information from the State Dept. Memo. (3) You assume that nobody at the State Dept. revealed the information to a reporter, who then told Rove and Libby. (4) You assume that Rove and/or Libby saw the State Dept. memo.

LINK

The variables, parados, are the unknowns which you steadfastly refuse to ackowledge might exist.

And in the - no doubt futile - hope that you won't yet again demand that I provide proof of the existance of these variables, I'll state once again that I have NO PROOF that any such variables exist.

Is it probable that 2 years of investigation have not found that other source? no.

Oh, I don't think that reason is as unknown as it used to be, do you?

She's up to her neck in this thing.

Cycloptichorn