0
   

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

 
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Jul, 2005 08:37 am
Senate hearing re federal shield law for journalists
Senate to hold hearing on bill to protect reporters who keep secret sources
By LAURIE KELLMAN
Associated Press Writer

July 7, 2005, 2:23 AM EDT

WASHINGTON -- The Senate Judiciary Committee could be the next stop for the those involved in the federal probe into who exposed undercover CIA officer Valerie Plame as it weighs a bill that would protect reporters who refuse to identify their sources.

Those called to testify could include the media outlets and the prosecutor in the case, in which New York Times reporter Judith Miller was jailed Wednesday. Plame's identity was first revealed publicly in a column by Robert Novak.

"If they would be interested in coming to testify, I think it would be informative and possibly useful," said Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, a former Texas Supreme Court judge and state attorney general.

Despite a pending Supreme Court nomination, Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pa., has said the media shield bill _ sponsored by Sen. Dick Lugar, R-Ind. _ is one of several he expects to come before his committee this month. A spokesman said Wednesday the hearing is tentatively set for July 20 and that a witness list still is being worked out with Vermont Sen. Patrick Leahy, the panel's top Democrat.

Cornyn said Specter and Leahy would want testimony from those "in the best position to know about all sides of the issue."

The American Society of Newspaper Editors' board of directors voted on Wednesday to endorse the idea of a national shield law for reporters to protect them from having to reveal the names of their confidential sources.

A Time magazine reporter who barely escaped being sent to jail Wednesday said the grand jury probe into who leaked Plame's identity makes the case for such a law.

"I think this clearly points out the need for some kind of a national shield law. There is no federal shield law and that is why we find ourselves here today," said Time's Matthew Cooper.

He spoke as Miller was jailed for refusing to tell U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald who leaked Plame's name to her.

The bill, sponsored in the House by Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind., would require prosecutors and judges to meet strict national standards and exhaust other remedies before they could subpoena reporters. No hearings are scheduled in the House.

Thirty-one states and the District of Columbia have such "shield" laws, but there is no set of standards that applies in the federal courts.
---------------------------------

On the Net:
Senate Judiciary Committee: http://judiciary.senate.gov/
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Jul, 2005 08:37 am
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-brooks6jul06,0,1169727.story?coll=la-news-comment-opinions

Quote:
But Miller still won't testify. Even though, ethically, there should be no obligation to go to jail to cover for a sleazeball.

It's possible (though not likely) that Miller is covering for a genuine whistle-blower who fears retaliation for fingering, gee, Karl Rove, for instance, as the real source of the leak.

But I have another theory. Miller's no fool; she understood the lesson of the Martha Stewart case: When you find yourself covered with mud, there's nothing like a brief stint in a minimum-security prison to restore your old luster.


(The rest of the article at the link, says much the same as BBB's)
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Jul, 2005 08:46 am
Lash wrote:
Starting to look like all that schmoozing the liberal press has always done with the elected Democrats in DC has created a little credibility problem.

Signs point to the possibility that reporters leaked Plame's name and job and husband to government officials...

I may be missing something here, but if reporters leaked the name TO government officials, what people are we talking about here? "Elected Democrats in DC", really? I mean, considering the year this happened in, wouldn't those "government officials" have been Republicans in DC?
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Jul, 2005 08:56 am
Oh, by the way ... Mr. Green

Lash wrote:
This'll be forgotten by Wednesday.

sozobe wrote:
(Gosh, awfully tempting to start another bet...)

Lash wrote:
Soz seems to want to bet on something.

Its been Wednesday ... story's not forgotten by a long shot. Soz should have just taken the bet. And Lash better not get into betting as a hobby ... ;-)
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Jul, 2005 09:18 am
ehBeth wrote:
<where's pdid when Lash is in a betting mood?>


I tried to flag down pdiddie on this. mrsDid could use another pair of shoes.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Jul, 2005 12:29 pm
Bush Didn't lie. However, Wilson, on the other hand ... .


I stand ready to wager this will not turn out at all the way the Democrats hope - and anticipate - it will. If PDiddie is willing, I'll offer the same terms as our previous bet: a $50 donation to the National Committee of the US political party chosen by the winner. To clarify my position, I state again, I do not believe the investigation will conclude any high-level Republican perpetrated any prosecutable offense in the matter of the Plame Game.
0 Replies
 
Stradee
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Jul, 2005 12:33 pm
the tie goes very nicely with an orange jumpsuit..........

http://www.dudehisattva.com/arrestedRove.jpg
0 Replies
 
DontTreadOnMe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Jul, 2005 02:26 pm
K-diddy ????
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Jul, 2005 02:55 pm
nimh wrote:
Oh, by the way ... Mr. Green

Lash wrote:
This'll be forgotten by Wednesday.

sozobe wrote:
(Gosh, awfully tempting to start another bet...)

Lash wrote:
Soz seems to want to bet on something.

Its been Wednesday ... story's not forgotten by a long shot. Soz should have just taken the bet. And Lash better not get into betting as a hobby ... ;-)

It is a good thing you didn't take the bet. I meant, of course, Wednesday 27th, August 2006...

<heh>

If you'll notice, I said nothing of betting. Soz did. The goils are trying to shut me up by reminding me of my terrible loss.

<Birds sigh, tectonic plates shift ruefully>

I usually don't bet-- as I think it's crass to be so frivilous with money, but PD caught me in a crazy mood that day.

It was my first bet in twenty years. It will likely be another twenty before I bet again. Unfortunately for the general public, that does not preclude any future occasional clairvoyant declarations I may divine.
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Jul, 2005 03:01 pm
Why is FoxNews so disinterested in this story?

just did a search on their site : tried Plame, tried Rove, tried Wilson

Plame and Wilson only exist as part of stories about the reporters. Rove not at all other than a comment on the graffitti wall.

What gives?

Hinkiness abounds.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Jul, 2005 03:02 pm
They are busy with the terrorist attack of London.
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Jul, 2005 03:05 pm
Yes, but this story has been out for a while and fox has been unusally silent.
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Jul, 2005 03:05 pm
mmmmmmmmm

that's fine for current news

i was searching their archives
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Jul, 2005 03:14 pm
I prefer to think you're not lying, ehBeth.

All I did was search "Plame" is the Fox search engine and got three recent stories.

Fox' Three Plame Stories.

Probably could've found more if I'd tried.

PS--Fox beat the hell out of everybody online today with the Breaking Terrorist Attacks.

They scooped CNN on stats ALL DAY.

....another reason why they are NUMBER ONE!!!!!
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Jul, 2005 03:18 pm
I may very well be beaten to a bloody plup for this but yes, fox NEWS, often does a very good job of coverage. (I will also note that Fox news often, far too often, obscures their news coverage with commentary that is just below worthless.)
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Jul, 2005 03:21 pm
Put on your iron pants quickly, dys!!!
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Jul, 2005 03:24 pm
I don't know but i find it in bad taste to brag about fox being first to report the terrorist acts in London. It just seems unseemly.

But I stand corrected about fox and the plame thing. The reason I thought they were silent is because I have been searching a lot of stories about it and I just didn't happen to see any from fox.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Jul, 2005 03:29 pm
I don't know why the hell it would be unseemly or bad taste to tell the truth, unless someone doesn't like it.

I'm only reporting who had the best coverage this morning on the net. They were ahead of everyone else on the breaking information.

I think it's only unseemly to someone who hates Fox. To anyone else, they'd appreciate knowing who has the most up to date information.
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Jul, 2005 03:59 pm
I just found it in bad taste to cheer in connection with such a somber event is all. I am not going to belabor the point. Forget it.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Jul, 2005 04:12 pm
Yes. You're likely correct. When someone attempted to drop an unfair turd on Fox re the Plame stories, I suppose I got a little defensive.

Silly. On all counts.
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 03/09/2025 at 04:18:24