Kuvasz, your voting record isn't at issue here, the issue in specific is
1a) Did a highly placed White House figure b) criminally leak information which c) compromised national security, and, if so,
2) Who was that figure?
3) What are the circumstances of that person's knowlege of and subsequent release of the information leaked?
and, though marginal,
4) To whom was the information leaked, and when.
The issue is not Wilson's veracity. It is not any role Plame may or may not have had in Wilson's assignment. It is not what was or was not the evidence gathered by Wilson. It is not who may have said or done what in any report, analysis, or summation other than the yet-to-be-issued grand jury statement of investigation findings and conclusions. All the rest is side show, irrelevant, or of at most tangential relationship to the issue at hand.
As to that issue, a negative finding in the case of any of item 1) as cited above essentially moots the rest, though a finding of complicity involving someone other than a White House official still leaves items 2) through 4) to be addressed, but removes the White House from the equation, a circumstance which would be much to the inconvenience of the Rove-ophobes.
Portray the issue however you find convenient and comforting. The Grand Jury is dealing with items 1) through 4) as listed above, and will, when Fitzcerald deems it appropriate, release its findings and conclusions pertinent thereto.
PDiddie wrote:I believe it will, and let's make it for a hundred.
OK, PDiddie, you're on. I sorta like nimh's idea of a worthy cause, though I think if we do go that way, to be absolutely fair, we would have come to agreement on a mutually acceptable apolitical worthy cause. One which comes immediately to mind is A2K itself, however I'm open to suggestion.
Chrissee wrote:Are we talking indictments? Does Timber really believe no high-ranking public official will be indicted? Wow, this is easy money!
I believe you misapprehend the terms and conditions of the wager, as set forth. They are clearly delineated, and do not conform to your conjectural assessment.
Stradee, good article, IMO. One thing it leaves out is that Rove, on record and unambiguously, claims to have requested confidentiality from no one in regard to the Plame Game. If that is true, Rove cannot have been a source who's confidentiality the sanctioned reporters pressed.
Thanks. It was fun.
