How To Talk To A Conservative About Karl Rove (If You Must)
How To Talk To A Conservative About Karl Rove (If You Must)
Everything you need to fight back against the right-wing misinformation campaign.
CLAIM: White House Can’t Comment While Investigation Is Ongoing
McClellan: “While that investigation is ongoing, the White House is not going to comment on it.”
FACT: White House Has Repeatedly Commented During the Ongoing Investigation
McClellan had previously cited that same investigation and then gone on to answer the questions as they pertained to Rove. For example, on October 1, 2003, he said, “There’s an investigation going on … you brought up Karl’s name. Let’s be very clear. I thought — I said it was a ridiculous suggestion, I said it’s simply not true that he was involved in leaking classified information, and — nor, did he condone that kind of activity.” Similarly, on October 10, 2003, McClellan said, “I think it’s important to keep in mind that this is an ongoing investigation.” But he then added with regard to a question about Rove’s involvement, “I spoke with those individuals, as I pointed out, and those individuals assured me they were not involved in this.”
CLAIM: Rove Didn’t Leak The Name So He’s Not Guilty
Rove: “I didn’t know her name and didn’t leak her name.” Rove attorney Robert Luskin said “he did not tell any reporter that Valerie Plame worked for the CIA.”
FACT: National Security Law Says Identifying Covert Agent Is Illegal
Rove at the very least identified Plame as “Wilson’s wife.” Under section 421 of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act, the disclosure of “any information identifying [a] covert agent” is illegal.
CLAIM: White House Didn’t Push The Story
Rove’s lawyer Robert Luskin claims Cooper manipulated what Rove said to him “in a pretty ugly fashion to make it seem like people in the White House were affirmatively reaching out to reporters to try to get them to report negative information about Plame.”
FACT: There Was An Organized Campaign To Push Leak Info
First, Robert Novak admitted: “I didn’t dig it out [Plame's identity], it was given to me…. They [the White House] thought it was significant, they gave me the name and I used it.” Second, Rove told Chris Matthews that Plame’s identity was “fair game.” Third, Time magazine reported the orchestrated campaign against Wilson in October 2003: “In the days after Wilson’s essay appeared, government officials began to steer reporters away from Wilson’s conclusions.”
CLAIM: Conversation Was About Welfare Reform, So Rove Didn’t Do Anything Wrong
National Review’s Byron York: “According to Luskin, the fact that Rove did not call Cooper; that the original purpose of the call, as Cooper told Rove, was welfare reform.”
FACT: What They Spoke About Was Irrelevant
The original purpose of the conversation between Rove and Cooper is irrelevant. It has no bearing on the fact that Rove did identify a covert agent during that conversation.
CLAIM: Plame Wasn’t An Undercover Agent
Ed Rogers, former official under Reagan/Bush: “I think it is now a matter of established fact that Mrs. Plame was not a protected covert agent, and I don’t think there’s any meaningful investigation about that.”
FACT: Former CIA Officer Who Worked With Plame Verified She Was Undercover
Larry Johnson, former CIA officer: “Valerie Plame was a classmate of mine from the day she started with the CIA. I entered on duty at the CIA in September 1985. All of my classmates were undercover–in other words, we told our family and friends that we were working for other overt U.S. Government agencies. We had official cover.”
CLAIM: Rove Was Trying To Correct A False Story
Rove attorney Luskin added, “What Karl was trying to do … was to warn Time away from publishing things that were going to be established as false.”
FACT: Wilson Was Right, Bush Was Wrong
Bloomberg recently reported, “Two-year old assertions by former ambassador Joseph Wilson regarding Iraq and uranium, which lie at the heart of the controversy over who at the White House identified a covert U.S. operative, have held up in the face of attacks by supporters of presidential adviser Karl Rove.”
CLAIM: Wilson Lied About His Trip To Niger
Former Rove deputy Ken Mehlman: “What Joe Wilson alleged was that the vice president, then he said the CIA director sent him to Niger.” [CNN, 7/12/05]
FACT: Wilson Never Said Cheney Personally Sent Him To Niger
Bloomberg reported, “Wilson never said that Cheney sent him, only that the vice president’s office had questions about an intelligence report that referred to the sale of uranium yellowcake to Iraq from Niger. Wilson, in his New York Times article, said CIA officials were informed of Cheney’s questions. ‘The agency officials asked if I would travel to Niger to check out the story so they could provide a response to the vice president’s office,’ Wilson wrote.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
It’s really very simple: the answer to every Bushevik talking point is that the Cooper email is prima facie evidence that Karl Rove outed a covert agent of the CIA. Check Anthony Wade on the Chimp: http://www.smirkingchimp.com/
Under section 421 of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act, the disclosure of “ANY INFORMATION identifying a covert agent” is illegal.
It is treason in a ‘time of war’. What would they have done with Benedict Arnold had they caught him? Put Rove in the brig next to Jose Padilla until he tells us who leaked the CIA information to him.
July 14th, 2005 at 6:28 pmVal wasn’t a covert agent protected by the Intel Identities Protection Act.
July 14th, 2005 at 6:31 pmhttp://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-07-14-cia-wilson_x.htm
The “fair game” was quoted by Wilson himself. When asked about the comment Chris Matthews said he would not comment. Wilson has lied so much I suspect he’s lying about this too.
July 14th, 2005 at 6:33 pmBy spilling the beans about Velerie Plame, Rove endangered the National Security of the United States. The CIA works overseas – correct me if I’m wrong here – to thwart our enemies and our potential enemies. Plame’s contacts and anyone who might have been helping her, knowingly or not, has been exposed to retribution by those enemies. If that’s not giving aid to the enemy I don’t know what is.
Joe Wilson isn’t even part of this story anymore AFAIC. The penalty for giving aid and comfort to the enemy in wartime is clear. It’s obsturction of justice at this point for anyone who tries to defend Rove’s actions.
July 14th, 2005 at 6:37 pmIT IS NOT ABOUT WILSON. Sheeese
July 14th, 2005 at 6:40 pmSteed two rebuttals:
(1) Note in your quoted article that the CIA launched the request to investigate – they seemed to think that the IIPA was breached in Plame’s case – not me, not Wilson – the CIA
July 14th, 2005 at 6:41 pm(2) Its not about what Wilson has said – it is about what Rove told Cooper and where Novak got his “name”
From the Intel Report:
July 14th, 2005 at 6:43 pmConclusion 13. The report on the former ambassador’s trip to Niger, disseminated in
March 2002, did not change any analysts’ assessments of the Iraq-Niger uranium deal. For
most analysts, the information in the report lent more credibility to the original Central
Intelligence Agency (CIA) reports on the uranium deal, but State Department Bureau of
Intelligence and Research (INR) analysts believed that the report supported their
assessment that Niger was unlikely to be willing or able to sell uranium to Iraq.
Directly from the report, not a misrepresentation by Bloomberg:
July 14th, 2005 at 6:45 pmBecause CIA analysts did not believe that the report added any new information to clarify the issue, they did not use the report to produce any further analytical products or
highlight the report for policymakers. For the same reason, CIA’s briefer did not brief the Vice President on the report, despite the Vice President’s previous questions about the issue.
And more lies:
July 14th, 2005 at 6:51 pmThe former ambassador also told Committee staff that he was the source of a Washington Post article (”CIA Did Not Share Doubt on Iraq Data; Bush Used Report of Uranium Bid,” June 12, 2003) which said, “among the Envoy’s conclusions was that the documents may have been forged because ‘the dates were wrong and the names were wrong.’” Committee staff asked how the former ambassador could have come to the conclusion that the “dates were wrong and the names were wrong” when he had never seen the CIA reports and had no knowledge of what names and dates were in the reports. The former ambassador said that he may have “misspoken” to the reporter when he said he concluded the documents were “forged.” He also said he may have become confused about his own recollection after the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reported in March 2003 that the names and dates on the documents were not correct and may have thought he had seen the names himself. The former ambassador reiterated that he had been able to collect the names of the government officials which should have been on the documents.
SL, consider for just one micro-second what you just said. Please. For the love of country.
Rove, in the very least, brought down an entire global network of WMD tracking by referencing Wilson’s wife. Don’t you think tracking WMD, including those spread by AQKhan and the North Koreans, would be rather important at times like this? Or do you feel its more important to “out” Valerie for business reasons, just so Dick Cheney’s company could win a few more contracts?
Gads! Get a grip on reality. For a change. Please.
July 14th, 2005 at 6:53 pmOkay Turtle,
July 14th, 2005 at 6:54 pmI’ve asked and nobody can answer with specific evidence (and without and insult). Where did Novak get Val’s name? No speculation, please.
And by the way Turtle, my posts are responding the one of the item (Rove was correcting a false story, which the intel report validates) listed by thinkparanoid.org (the link to the Bloomberg article)
July 14th, 2005 at 6:58 pm“Rove was correcting a false story, which the intel report validates” – SLankershim
He corrected a false story with illegal information? … Hrmm… what responsibility/liability does Rove have with the publication of false information? For which media organization does he work? Oh… He isn’t responsible for the publication of false information, and he doesn’t work for any media outlet… So where is the justification in “correcting a false story…” ???
Rove is a senior administration staff, he should have known better to stay out of it. What’s the deal Steed, where exactly does this logical fail you? Why is it so important that Rove not be taken down by this?
July 14th, 2005 at 7:23 pmSteed, get that bullshit out of here. This is not going to turn into a he-said-she-said. These scumbags did the deed and now they are covering it up. Hannity and Limbaugh and Mehlman and the rest of the sleazy rightwing spin machine are lying through their collective teeth. Your defense of them is baseless. CIA agents have come out already and confirmed Plame’s status as covert. The “Rove was correcting a false story” argument is so weak you should be ashamed that you even typed it. You are anti-American and unpatriotic for even trying to pawn that crap on your fellow citizens. Shameful and sleazy.
July 14th, 2005 at 7:23 pmIt is high time that we remember what this is really about – BUSH LIED IN HIS STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS THAT THERE WERE WMDS AND THAT IRAQ WAS BUYING MORE WMD MATERIALS IN AFRICA. Wilson was sent to investigate, and found out that the “documentation” was forged – and BushCo (namely, that Nazi Rove) put Wilson’s wife’s life in jeopardy to scare the both of them. In doing so, however, HE ALSO PUT THE UNITED STATES IN JEOPARDY. HE SHOULD BE TRIED FOR TREASON.
July 14th, 2005 at 7:41 pmI have a question regarding why Rove gave Cooper the waiver allowing him to cooperate with the grand jury. Was he cleverly up to something there or is it just that it would have looked worse for him if he didn’t sign the waiver? Or is that a stupid question?
July 14th, 2005 at 7:57 pmMikey, simple answer — Rove did nothing wrong. He told a reporter that Wilson’s findings was biased because his wife sent him on the trip. Listen to Norm Coleman today — he makes a ton of sense.
July 14th, 2005 at 8:39 pmhttp://www.kare11.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=102390
John, simple rebuttal–Wilson’s wife didn’t send him on the trip. Check your facts.
Neither did Wilson ever claim that Cheney sent him. The “quote” the RNC talking points use to support that claim comes from an appearance on Blizter’s show in August 03. First, the quote is out of context and leaves out Wilson’s very clear statement that Cheney DIDN’T know about his trip. Second, isn’t it a little strange that Rove would know what the RNC alleges Wilson said three weeks before he said it, and that’s why Rove felt compelled to warn Cooper that it was Mrs. Wilson (it wasn’t) and not Cheney (who no one said it was) that sent Wilson on the trip?
The RNC and devoted partisans can try to deflect all the want (obviously) but the prosecutor and grand jury aren’t likely to be so easily spun.
July 14th, 2005 at 8:58 pmEarlene, I don’t understand your point. Rove has released all the reporters from their confidentiality. No one is saying Rove violated any laws. Someone may have leaked, but it wasn’t Rove — he’s much too smart — and that’s why you hate him.
July 14th, 2005 at 9:03 pmRove is not smart. He’s thrifty and opportunistic. Conjuring up whisper campaigns is easy-if you’re a sicko.
July 14th, 2005 at 9:12 pmJohn, you’ve got to be kidding!!! Rove’s lawyer said in essence that Rove leaked the name. If he is as smart as you say he is, he shouldn’t be in this much trouble. Karl Rove knew exactly what he was doing. Joe Wilson was against George’s little war in Iraq, and Rove got back at him by outing Wilson’s wife, pure and simple. I can’t wait for the other shoe to drop and find out who else in this lying, cheating administration gets caught.t
July 14th, 2005 at 9:17 pmBush and all of his cronies are liars. NOTHING they have said or done from the very first day in office has been truthfull.They have commited treason and lied about it.
July 14th, 2005 at 9:21 pmAny person with half a brain could easily fact check what they have said and done with a simple google search.
Now the rightwingnuts are imploding because they can’t keep the lies straight. It is time to Impeach these thugs and let the ADULTS in this country take control. The days of illegitimate war criminal Bush administration days are numbered and they know it. YOu can lie to some of the people most of the time, most of the people some of the time, but when you lie to all of the people all of the time your lies about why you illegaly invaded a country murdering tens of thousands of innocent people will land you in the Hauge on trial for war crimes.
Steed Lankershim,
“The former ambassador also told Committee staff that he was the source of a Washington Post article (â€?CIA Did Not Share Doubt on Iraq Data; Bush Used Report of Uranium Bid,â€? June 12, 2003) which said, “among the Envoy’s conclusions was that the documents may have been forged because ‘the dates were wrong and the names were wrong.’â€? Committee staff asked how the former ambassador could have come to the conclusion that the “dates were wrong and the names were wrongâ€? when he had never seen the CIA reports and had no knowledge of what names and dates were in the reports. The former ambassador said that he may have “misspokenâ€? to the reporter when he said he concluded the documents were “forged.â€? He also said he may have become confused about his own recollection after the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reported in March 2003 that the names and dates on the documents were not correct and may have thought he had seen the names himself. The former ambassador reiterated that he had been able to collect the names of the government officials which should have been on the documents.”
I don’t understand.
Does this mean that Plame was not a CIA agent?
Does this mean that Plame did not work for a company that was a CIA front?
Does this mean that Plame was not outed?
Does this mean that Rove did not out her?
Does this mean that Rove is not under investigation?
Does this mean that Rove did not do something that might be illegal?
Does this mean that Rove did not go after Wilson’s family, something that even the Mafia doesn’t do?
Does this mean that Bush did not say that he would fire anyone involved in the outing?
Does this mean that McClellan did not say that Rove was not involved?
I’m confused. Please explain how your posting applies to these issues.
July 14th, 2005 at 9:21 pmAh, folks, it was the CIA that referred the matter to the Justice Department as a CRIMINAL REFERRAL because Plame was a protected agent. It’s the CIA that decides who is a covert protected agent.
July 14th, 2005 at 9:42 pmClaim: It didn’t hurt anyone anyways, what’s the big deal?
July 14th, 2005 at 9:56 pmFact: An entire CIA dummy Corp. and the agents working for it were compromised. It had operations inside Saudi Arabia where the 9/11 attackers came from as well as many other sketchy countries.
Steed,
I think you’ve been spanked pretty effectively on the “Plame wasn’t covert” claim.
This whole thing can be boiled down to one simple talking point: Rove leaked classified info, and then lied about it. Now he’s trying to cover it up, and these lies are nothing more than another Rove cover story.
July 14th, 2005 at 10:05 pmSteed,
Responses to #11 and #12.
Wilson was compelled to write about the 16 words about yellowcake in the SOTU speech. In his opinion, he saw no foundation in that statement based on his trip to Niger. The CIA for its part had recommended that the 16 words not be included in the SOTU and Bolton seems to have pressed to get the story back in the source for the SOTU. To this date there is no compelling proof that Saddam sought nuclear materials in the timeframe alleged and I would argue after the SOTU gaffe and the total failure to find jack in Iraq that the burden is on the Administration.
Now Wilson’s visit may or may not have completely dealt with the entire “Saddam looks for nuclear materials” issue, but it certainly played a role in destroying (along with the IAEA and Italians) the basis for the specific 16 words.
But Steed, this is the only piece that matters: Wilson was right to doubt the 16 words and it is that doubt which directly led to the Novak story. And this is important because it was those 16 words which had a direct impact on public opinion leading to the invasion. And it was based on ‘fixed intelligence’; fixed by Bolton, missed by the incompetent Rice, deceitfully bypassing the doubtful CIA and parroted by Chimpy on the night. Once you make that clear linkage, then you have a huge motive to discredit Wilson by outing his wife. Without the Niger forgery, there’s nothing “nukular” to scare the grannies about except Condi’s vague “mushroom clouds”. So no, I don’t buy the “correcting a reporter’s mistake” defence – it is not in Rove’s modus operandi and given the “double secret background” whatever, Rove knew it was much more serious than that.
So once again in very straightfoward terms:
(1) Wilson questioned the ‘16 words’ and he was right to the rest is unimportant to the criminal probe
(2) It is the Administration’s credibility we should be questioning, because the ‘16 words’ are why Wilson’s wife was outed
(3) This issue is NOT about Wilson, it is about Rove and the politics coming before national security in the Administration – in what way is it not? Can you defend Rove without questioning Wilson – I think not and I think in a narrow sense Fitzgerald agrees there.
(4) By smearing Wilson and Plame, the Administration is clearly caught orchestrating a ‘fixing of the intelligence to fit the policy’ which proves the Downing Street Memos are accurate. QED, end of story, finito Benito, go straight to impeachment, do not pass go, do not collect $200.
To your point about Novak. I have no idea where he got his “name” from. I know that Novak and Rove have worked together before and Rove got himself fired from Pappy’s ‘92 campaign for leaking smears, again not for correcting a mistaken reporter. I am reduced to looking at the means, motive and opportunity. Who had most to lose both inside the admin and outside? Who had access to State documents, who was snooping around CIA communcations, who had access to Wilson’s file?
For the record, I am left thinking that Fitzgerald is looking at obstruction and perjury for Rove among others in the WH. The outing may turn out to be unimportant legally. Martha Stewart was a pioneer.
So remember, forget Wilson. The path goes: the PNAC wants to invade Iraq for the oil, Chimpy says “f*** Saddam, we’re taking him out”, Dearlove says ‘facts are being fixed’, Bolton pushes yellowcake forgery into the SOTU ‘fixing facts’, ‘16 words’ were serious enablers for Chimpy’s War, Chimpy’s War and “Mission Accomplished”, ‘16 words’ are questioned, someone leaks to Novak, Rove leaks to Cooper, Novak smears Wilson/Plame, CIA asks for criminal probe and you know the rest.
Oh yes, did I say it’s not about Wilson?
July 14th, 2005 at 10:36 pmJohn,
Rove has stimulated the same kinds of emotions that Bendict Arnold did – in a position of trust, he puts his own advantage above the weal of the nation. Rove was an odious man before, and no, the ends do not justify the means – something you Americans have a hard time with (”For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?” (Mark 8:36)). Treason is like rape – that’s why people hate him now.
July 14th, 2005 at 10:41 pmKarl Rove is no genius, he just got all his mean lowdown dirty tricks from Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf! Read chapter 6, War Propaganda, and you can see what I mean, I have been after this dirty lowdown S.O.B., ever since, he and Lee Atwater(Now Deseased) screwed over Mike Dukukis, with the Willie Horton AD. No wonder his Father Committed Suicide,and his mother left him, when she born a Devil!
July 14th, 2005 at 10:46 pmTo Steed,
Answer this question: Did you support the investigation of Bill Clinton that revealed nothing more than a stupidly self-destructive infidelity? From your evident stance on all matters liberal, we’ll assume your answer is yes. Okay, now that we’ve set the standard for what you believe merits investigation, can you not step away from your myopic fealty to Republican party dogma, just for one wee minute, and understand that enough circumstantial and concrete evidence exists to implicate Karl Rove in a willful plot to discredit a whistleblower? If a White House official, Democrat or Republican, is even remotely suspect in a treasonous act is that not worthy of the most sweeping investigation?
If Rove is innocent he hasn’t got a damn thing to fear from an impartial investigation. If he is guilty of betraying the security of the United States, as we believe, then should he not recieve the most severe punishment? After all, Steed, the dismembering of a covert operation intent on protecting all Americans is a crime that hurts each of us, regardless your or my political distinction.
July 14th, 2005 at 10:50 pmI would also ask John to respond to post #30.
July 14th, 2005 at 10:54 pmAt the end of the day…the Bush White House divulged the identity of a CIA operative for petty revenge. IF by some chance, because the way the law is worded, that person or persons are exonerated ther remains the moral question. Republicans like to remind us all that GOP stands for God’s Own Party so what would Jesus do? I don’t think he would expose anyone to harm as a payback.
July 15th, 2005 at 12:16 amI have it from a good source that steed is a paid operative working out of GOP headquarters. Congrats to thinkprogress- you have their attention.
July 15th, 2005 at 12:33 amFact: Pushing paper at Langley is not “under cover” or “covert” but you guys are consistent at least, consistently wrong, LOL. We are all just freaking out, I mean what will we ever do, you got us right where you want us now, would you stop if we let you pick or SCOTUS nominee? Hey next time you throw around the nazi word, remember these photos of your side, at their finest, I doubt you will even look, it might make you think and you wouldn’t want that:
July 15th, 2005 at 12:39 amhttp://zombietime.com/hall_of_shame/
It explains why we call you traitors as well.
If Steed is paid that sucks for me, all I get are stale leftover Reagan jellybeans….you guys are going to be so pissed when this turns out to be all smoke no fire…I love the fact you guys are all so patriotic now…LOL.
July 15th, 2005 at 12:47 amf.b.a., the photos of protestors being warehoused behind chainlink detention facilities during the Republican convention are real, too.
Lincoln imprisoned Congressman Henry May during the Civil War. Republicans have a long history of repression of civil liberties. Their brand of freedom isn’t what I have in mind. They have no hearts and no minds. They can get lost.
Republicans? What Republicans? We don’t need no stinking Republicans.
Let them wither on the vine. I will never vote for another Republican… ever again.
July 15th, 2005 at 12:57 am0nly the hardcore thirty per centers will ever vote Republican ever again.
July 15th, 2005 at 1:20 amhttp://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/05_29/c3943060_mz013.htm
Washington Outlook
Independents Are Having Buyer’s Remorse
The Schiavo case has led many swing voters to turn their backs on the GOP
Just nine months after giving George W. Bush the crucial swing votes he needed to best John Kerry, political independents are bolting out of the Republican Big Tent. Angered by GOP meddling in the Terri Schiavo right-to-die case, reeling from record gasoline prices, and depressed by the escalating cycle of violence in Iraq and Afghanistan, unaligned voters are suddenly lining up with Democrats to give Bush the lowest ratings of his Presidency. The disenchantment extends beyond the White House to the GOP Congress: Only 31% of independents say Congress is in touch with their concerns, according to a June 14-15 Fox News/Opinion Dynamics Poll. Amid such dismal data, the only good news for Republicans is that the chronically disorganized Democrats have not convinced swing voters that they are any better — at least not yet.
But that’s cold comfort to the GOP. A June 24-26 Gallup Poll shows independents turning thumbs down to much of the President’s second-term agenda, including his stay-the-course stance on Iraq, partial privatization of Social Security, and a pro-drilling energy policy. Equally worrisome: Just 15% of indies approve of Bush’s handling of the economy, a June 19-22 American Research Group Poll found — down from 44% last November.
To gauge the depth of independent anger, talk to Alan Rego Jr., an assistant supermarket manager in Cleveland. Rego, 23, twice voted for George W. Bush. The unaligned voter viewed Bush as a champion of small business and a stalwart in the war on terror. But he now sees a President bogged down in a Mideast quagmire and a Congress obsessed with a Religious Right agenda he does not share. “Congress is involved in too many social issues that it shouldn’t be, like Terri Schiavo,” he says. “It doesn’t want to tackle the issues that it should be fixing, like tax reform, unemployment, and job creation.”
For Republicans, an exodus of voters like Rego could have profound repercussions. Because 67% of independents think Bush will appoint a Supreme Court justice whose religious beliefs will inappropriately influence judicial rulings, according to Gallup, Dems may be emboldened to dig in for a long showdown (page 38).
Nearly 30% of the electorate describes itself as independent, though about half of those voters remain registered with a party. So while Republicans have signed up more than 4 million unregistered Christian conservatives in two years, a sizable decline in independent support in the 2006 midterm elections could leave the GOP a net loser outside the South. Particularly at risk are Republicans in states with independent streaks, such as California, Colorado, Minnesota, and New Hampshire.
The swing-voter stampede started after the extraordinary intervention by Bush and the GOP Congress in the Schiavo case. Now socially moderate independents — who strongly favor expanded stem cell research and oppose overturning Roe v. Wade — fear that the majority party is in thrall to the Religious Right. “These people lean more Republican because of fiscal issues, but they’re much more liberal on social issues,” says independent pollster Dick Bennett of American Research Group. “After Schiavo, they said, ‘Wait a minute. We didn’t buy in for that.”‘
Add to the toxic political mix sticker-shock at the gas pump and growing worries about post-Saddam Iraq. In an about-face, formerly hawkish indies now side with Democratic war critics. According to Gallup, just 31% of swing voters say Bush has a clear plan for Iraq, and 60% call the U.S. invasion a mistake. Alan Rego recently attended services for a friend’s brother killed in Iraq. “The kid was my age,” he recalls. “I voted for Bush because he seemed to have a plan to deal with terrorism, but Iraq is becoming another Vietnam.”
Third-party opening?
The indie revolt worries some GOP veterans, but the White House seems unconcerned. Some insiders say Bush über-strategist Karl Rove believes Republicans can afford to lose socially liberal swing voters if they succeed in wooing indie and Democratic “values voters” and increasing turnout on the Christian Right. “They obviously have a strategy to change the electorate, and they’re willing to give up independents and moderates,” says Democratic pollster Stanley B. Greenberg.
But can Democrats capitalize? Even Greenberg’s polls show Dems struggling to convince voters that they can keep the nation safe, foster economic growth, and reform pay-to-play politics. He says circumstances are ripe for a strong third-party candidacy in 2008 — if the right maverick emerges.
During the Bush years, the GOP has kept a majority of indies in its corner by portraying Dems as an unacceptable alternative. That tactic may work again — if Democrats fail to attract the political center and the third-way option fizzles. But with so many swing voters ready to declare independence from Republican-ruled Washington, Bush and his allies on the Hill can’t be so sure anymore.
July 15th, 2005 at 1:29 amHey Ron, you fruitloops were talking about killing the president during the convention. That was a private party, like the dhimmicrat convention, I don’t remember any Republicans shouting down your traitor during that debacle. FYI, Mike “the bloated liar” Moore sitting next to Carter was worth what, like 10% of what we got, nice move, thanks. As for the pics, I see you are proud, those are your folks there, nuttier than a snickers. So slavery was a “civil liberty” you say? That’s progressive, making the old new again? Anti-Semitism at dhimmicrat HQ last month during your make believe impeachment hearings, photos of leftist hate and treason in the streets, your guys almost killed a cop last weekend in SF, but hey, Lincoln was a bad guy is your defense? You never let me down, LOL. As for Rove, you guys keep holding your breath. I cancel you out on the vote, I never voted Republican before 2004, and My wife is part of the 10% of the black vote you lost in 2004, and she brought others over with her, now face it, that hurts : )
July 15th, 2005 at 1:35 amThis gets funnier by the day, I love the new format by the way, all Rove all the time, now you may have to go back to hurricanes and hazmat exclusion zones to thwart suicide bombers:
WASHINGTON (AP) – Presidential confidant Karl Rove testified to a grand jury that he learned the identity of a CIA operative originally from journalists, then informally discussed the information with a Time magazine reporter days before the story broke, according to a person briefed on the testimony.
The person, who works in the legal profession and spoke only on condition of anonymity because of the secrecy of grand jury proceedings, told The Associated Press that Rove testified last year that he remembers specifically being told by columnist Robert Novak that Valerie Plame, the wife of a harsh Iraq war critic, worked for the CIA.
Rove testified that Novak originally called him the Tuesday before Plame’s identity was revealed in July 2003 to discuss another story. The conversation eventually turned to former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, who was strongly criticizing the Bush administration’s Iraq war policy and the intelligence it used to justify the war, the source said.
The person said Rove testified that Novak told him he had learned and planned to report in a weekend column that Wilson’s wife, Plame, had worked for the CIA, and the circumstances on how her husband traveled to Africa to check bogus claims of alleged nuclear material sales to Iraq.
Novak’s column, citing two Bush administration officials, appeared six days later, touching off a political firestorm and leading to a federal criminal investigation into who leaked Plame’s undercover identity. That probe has ensnared presidential aides and reporters in a two-year legal battle.
more giggles here:
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20050715/D8BBJCL00.html
Was Valerie Plame a covert agent?
John wrote here that whether Valerie Plame was a “covert agent” subject to the protection of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act appears to turn on whether she served outside the United States during the five years preceding her identification. Did she?
We seem to have made some progess today in our efforts to answer the question. James Taranto links to this USA Today article and writes in “Best of the Web Today”:
Unless we’re missing something, Joe Wilson has disproved his own accusation that someone in the Bush administration violated the Intelligence Identities Protection Act, USA Today reports:
The alleged crime at the heart of a controversy that has consumed official Washington–the “outing” of a CIA officer–may not have been a crime at all under federal law, little-noticed details in a book by the agent’s husband suggest.
In The Politics of Truth, former ambassador Joseph Wilson writes that he and his future wife both returned from overseas assignments in June 1997. Neither spouse, a reading of the book indicates, was again stationed overseas. They appear to have remained in Washington, D.C., where they married and became parents of twins.
This meant that Plame would have been stationed in the U.S. for six years before Bob Novak published his column citing her two years ago today. As USA Today notes:
The column’s date is important because the law against unmasking the identities of U.S. spies says a “covert agent” must have been on an overseas assignment “within the last five years.” The assignment also must be long-term, not a short trip or temporary post, two experts on the law say.
All the Democrats who are braying for Karl Rove’s head can’t be very confident that he’s committed a crime. If they were, they would wait for an indictment, which would be a genuine embarrassment to the administration.
Over at NRO’s Corner, John Podhoretz writes:
Here is Joseph Wilson himself, talking to Wolf Blitzer on CNN today: “My wife was not a clandestine officer the day that Bob Novak blew her identity.” Read that again. Now reflect on the fact that there has been an ongoing investigation FOR TWO YEARS conducted, we were breathlessly and rather constantly told in the weeks surrounding the initial controversy, on the basis that the White House and reporters OUTED A CLANDESTINE AGENT. Now we know. She wasn’t. Not then.
It is certainly possible, based on the poorly drafted wording of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982, to take this fact and still somehow to discern a crime somewhere here. Which is what Wilson’s defenders and the blood-in-the-water Democrats and Leftists are arguing and will continue to argue.
Fine. And for the record, as I said in my book Bush Country, if indeed a clandestine agent was placed in jeopardy by a White House leak, then the administration deserved to go hang. But — now her own husband is saying it — Valerie Plame Wilson WASN’T A CLANDESTINE AGENT AT THE TIME.
No, no, no. She WASN’T.
So what I want to know, based on simple logic, is this: When is Allen Funt going to step out from behind the lamppost and inform America that we’ve all been on Candid Camera?
Has anyone explored the possibility that Karl Rove is not the target of Patrick Fitzgerald’s investigation or that the crime in issue does not include violation of the IIPA?
UPDATE: Reader Jimmy Guckian emails us this story from tomorrow’s New York Times: “Rove reportedly held phone talk on CIA officer.” It appears highly likely that another element of an offense under the IIPA may be lacking as to Rove — knowledge of the CIA officer’s identity from classified information. The story also notes that Karl Rove’s attorney “has previously said that prosecutors have advised Mr. Rove that he is not a target in the case, which means he is not likely to be charged with a crime.” Guckian comments on the Times article: “They all but exonerate Karl Rove and then wonder whether Bush will stand behind his promise to fire any official caught leaking the name of a covert agent. The exonerate Karl Rove and then rag on about how difficult a position Scott McClellan is in. They exonerate Karl Rove and harp on about how this may be Bush’s political undoing (Jeeze! How many times has the Times written that?)”
http://powerlineblog.com/
July 15th, 2005 at 2:21 amfba,
So you’re proud that your wife voted for a treasonous president who lied to congress about a war, and who now protects an ADMITTED PERJURER who under grand jury testimony said he never gave up the identity of Plame? Of course he was very ‘Clintonesque’ in use of the ‘I never gave up her name’, but last time I checked (Wilson’s Wife – eg. Ms. Wilson) is still a name albeit indirect. It reminds of the “depends on what the definition of ‘is’ is.” too much for me to not find the irony in it.
As for civil liberties, if the republicans felt so strongly about this, why did they permit jim crow laws until the 1960s, and require a president who was a DEMOCRAT to lead the charge for actual civil rights legislation? And if Lincoln was such a broad believer in civil rights, why did he call out the army to put down riots in New York by shooting women and children in the streets? Slavery was an abomination, but it was supported by members of both political parties of the day. Many republicans were only supportive of the civil war because they were pissed at southern cotton producers who were selling cotton to England at the same price, and thereby undermining their own prices because of improved English Industrialized production. They weren’t as interested in freeing slaves as they were in their own economic interests and desire to control southern plantations – and hence why Sherman burned all of the courthouses in the south and permitted carpet baggers to ‘take over’ much of the southern economy after the war.
While the end of slavery was an important piece of civil justice, the REASON it happened had little to do with civil liberties, just as the reason we invaded iraq had little to do with the ‘freedom’ of the Iraqis. If you want to know why the Republican party does anything, just follow the money. It was true in the 1860s, it’s true today. Considering your obvious propagandist indoctrination and idealism beyond reason, it’s clear you’re part of the brainwashed witless minions – how sad for you and your wife that you have to be such witless pawns and dupes… You must have really bad karma to make such stupid choices…
July 15th, 2005 at 2:34 amRove, Plame, Wilson, curiouser and curiouser
WILSON: My wife was not a clandestine officer the day that Bob Novak blew her identity.
July 15th, 2005 at 2:43 amI don’t think FBA isn’t married. Not legally. Unless marrying your mom is part of the new Republican agenda, and if you are familiar with the weird shit coming from Rick Santorum these days, you know that it sounds like something he might like to legalize. Wingnuts.
July 15th, 2005 at 2:47 amMark is in Mexico because he is a wanted pedophile in the U.S.
July 15th, 2005 at 2:48 amMr Turtle, my post was in response to one thinkparanoid.org’s points. I don’t agree with it and I gave a source (Intel Report) that gives weight to my position, Wilson’s credentials raised questions (this nepatism thing is very concerning to me when it involves intelligence)about his claims. The Committee found and concluded, in fact, what he reported from Niger conflicted with what he was saying to the press. The little that we know about Cooper’s it appears that the context can very likely be about trying to correct the record and downplay the Wilson nepatism deal. I don’t know. Btw, why won’t NEWSWEEK (or TIME) release the full memo? I still have a problem with that.
I don’t think we even have 1/116 of the information that’s necessary to make a reasonable conclusion. But I’m considering some, but few of your points. I’ll debunk your obligatory rant on the DSM’s later.
Someone brought up what is my position on Bill’s Monica. If Clinton (Hillary) didn’t stonewall Whitewater investigation, whether or not there was a crime, it would have never happened. But there was serious shit going at the time that wasn’t getting enough attenction. I happen to have intimate knowledge of the Iraq problem in the late nineties. It’s been messy for a very long time and I wish Clinton dealt with it more aggressively. Now were paying dearly for it, but Iraq was going to get messier before it got better. Probably never get better. There was too much potential for Saddam to become so much more dangerous. The Not all, but majority of our government officials and elected congress believed that since the mid-nineties for sure. The debate was over for me back then. So someone’s remarks about fixing and deliberately and lying are not supported by the conclusions of the exhaustive investigations (Intel Committee, Butler) and you’re wasting your time.
So back to Rove and Wilson and the Media? They’re all lying. All of them, not just Rove not just Wilson. All of our politicians are lying some or most of the time. Get over it. But the media, especially the one’s that want sexy headlines, are lying the worst. So don’t bother me with Bloomberg, Rueters, Yahoo, AP links.
I’ll be waiting for when the investigation concludes. Don’t go too far out on a limb on this one. You might be getting rope-a-doped.
July 15th, 2005 at 2:53 amSlavery was an abomination, but it was supported by members of both political parties of the day.
Ryan
Read a freakin book before you lecture me on history JR. I mean come on, how stupid are you? Jeez, you liberals are a gawd damn joke. By the way, calling my wife anything from the safety of the Internet may make you feel tough, but I would be careful : ) I am karma u POS FM.
July 15th, 2005 at 3:42 amRyan, you have pissed me off.
July 15th, 2005 at 4:03 amThe Flying Spin Monkeys are so desparate. Let them spin this. Tom Ridge, this administration, clumsily outing another agent may have led to the UK bombings. I like to see the spin monkeys dance. 0h yeah, Rove was the leak who confirmed for Novak, as well. Dance, Monkeys! Dance!
Bush admin may be responsible for botching effort to thwart London bombing
http://americablog.blogspot.com/2005/07/bush-admin-may-be-responsible-for.html
ABC News just reported that the British authorities say they have evidence that the London attacks last week were an operation planned by Al Qaeda for the last two years. This was an operation the Brits thought they caught and stopped in time, but they were wrong. The piece of the puzzle ABC missed is that this is an operation the Bush administration helped botch last year.
I.e., last year Bush botched the effort to thwart the London subway attacks.
1. The London bombers, per ABC, are connected to an Al Qaeda plot planned two years ago in Lahore, Pakistan.
2. Pakistani authorities recovered the laptop of a captured Al Qaeda leader, Mohammed Naeem Noor Khan, on July 13, 2004. On that laptop, they found plans for a coordinated series of attacks on the London subway. According to an expert interviewed by ABC, “there is absolutely no doubt that Khan was part of a worldwide Al Qaeda operation, not just in the United States but also in Great Britain and throughout the west.”
Also important, but not reported by ABC this evening, after his arrest Khan started working for our side – sending emails to his other Al Qaeda buddies, working as our mole.
3. ABC reports that names in Khan’s computer matched a suspected cell of British citizens of Pakistani decent, many of who lived near the town of Luton, England – Luton is the same town where, not coincidentally, last week’s London bombing terrorists began their day. According to ABC, authorities thought they had stopped the subway plot with the arrest of more than a dozen people last year associated with Khan. Obviously, they hadn’t.
4. Those arrests were the arrests that the Bush administration botched by announcing a heightened security alert the week of the Democratic Convention. The alert was raised because of information found on Khan’s computer (this is in the public record already, see below). In its effort to either prove that the alert was serious, or to try and scare people during the Dem Convention, the administration gave the press too much information about WHY they raised the alert. This put the media on the trail of Khan – they found him, and they published his name.
Because the US let the cat out of the bag, the media got a hold of Khan’s name and published the fact that he had been captured – his Al Qaeda contacts thus found out their “buddy” was actually a mole, and they fled. Our sole source inside Al Qaeda was destroyed. As a result, the Brits had to have a high speed chase to catch some of Khan’s Al Qaeda associates as they fled, and, according to press reports, the Brits and Pakistanis both fear that some slipped away.
Again, these were guys connected to the plot to blow up the London subway last week. Some may have escaped because of Bush administration negligence involving a leak. And in fact, ABC News’ terrorism consultant says the group that bombed London was likely activated just after the arrests:
“It is very likely this group was activated last year after the other group was arrested,” Debat said.
MORE DETAIL
The NYT reported on August 17, 2004 that Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge announced on August 1, 2004 that we had information about an “unusually specific” threat against “the New York Stock Exchange and Citigroup in Manhattan, Prudential’s headquarters in Newark and the headquarters buildings of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank in Washington.”
We now know that this threat info came from Mr. Khan’s computer that we got our hands on only weeks before. As a result of the heightened security alert, the media dug into the story to find out what the heightened alert was based on, and they got a hold of Mr. Khan’s name and made it public.
The Americans say it was Pakistani officials who leaked Khan’s name. Pakistan says it was the Americans. But as Juan Cole notes:
had Ridge not made his announcement, the press would have had no occasion to go searching for the source of his information. The Bush administration decision to go public put a powerful spotlight on the Pakistani arrests of June and July…. The Bush administration at the very least bears indirect responsibility for the outing of Khan. Without the Ridge announcement, reporters would have had no incentive to seek out the name of the source of the information.
Now, why did it matter if Khan’s name went public?
That was important because Khan was remaining in touch with his Al Qaeda contacts AFTER his arrest – he was our mole – and the authorities were thus tracking INSIDE Al Qaeda. Once the American official made the info about Khan’s arrest public, our mole inside the cell was blown, and the British police, caught off guard, had to make a high speed chase, literally, to catch Khan’s contacts before they fled. THAT’S the raid that ABC is talking about. And it’s that raid that – guess what? – didn’t catch everybody who was plotting to blow up London last week. That’s the raid that got botched.
And I quote from the Associated Press, August 10, 2004:
The disclosure to reporters of the arrest of an al-Qaida computer expert jeopardized Pakistani efforts to capture more members of Osama bin Laden’s terrorist network, government and security officials said Tuesday.
Two senior Pakistani officials said initial reports in “Western media” last week of the capture of Muhammad Naeem Noor Khan had enabled other al-Qaida suspects to get away, but declined to say whether U.S. officials were to blame for the leak.
“Let me say that this intelligence leak jeopardized our plan and some al-Qaida suspects ran away,” one of the officials said on condition of anonymity….
But the Pakistani officials said that after Khan’s arrest, other al-Qaida suspects had abruptly changed their hide-outs and moved to unknown places.
The first official described the initial publication of the news of Khan’s arrest as “very disturbing.”
“We have checked. No Pakistani official made this intelligence leak,” he said.
Without naming any country, he said it was the responsibility of “coalition partners” to examine how a foreign journalist was able to have an access to the “classified information” about Khan’s arrest. (NOTE: In this story, it quotes Condi Rice saying the Americans leaked the name – she later retracted that assertion.)
And this from CNN.com, August 9, 2004:
The effort by U.S. officials to justify raising the terror alert level last week may have shut down an important source of information that has already led to a series of al Qaeda arrests, Pakistani intelligence sources have said.
Until U.S. officials leaked the arrest of Muhammad Naeem Noor Khan to reporters, Pakistan had been using him in a sting operation to track down al Qaeda operatives around the world, the sources said.
In background briefings with journalists last week, unnamed U.S. government officials said it was the capture of Khan that provided the information that led Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge to announce a higher terror alert level….
Law enforcement sources said some of the intelligence gleaned from the arrests of Khan and others gave phone numbers and e-mail addresses that the FBI and other agencies were using to try to track down any al Qaeda operatives in the United States.
Then on Friday, after Khan’s name was revealed, government sources told CNN that counterterrorism officials had seen a drop in intercepted communications among suspected terrorists….
One senator told CNN that U.S. officials should have kept Khan’s role quiet.
“You always want to know the evidence,” said Sen. George Allen.
“In this situation, in my view, they should have kept their mouth shut and just said, ‘We have information, trust us.’ “….
“The Pakistani interior minister, Faisal Hayat, as well as the British home secretary, David Blunkett, have expressed displeasure in fairly severe terms that Khan’s name was released, because they were trying to track down other contacts of his,” Schumer told CNN.
And this from the NY Daily News, August 7, 2004:
A captured Al Qaeda computer whiz was E-mailing his comrades as part of a sting operation to nab other top terrorists when U.S. officials blew his cover, sources said yesterday.
Within hours of Muhammad Naeem Noor Khan’s name being publicized Monday, British police launched lightning raids that netted a dozen suspected Al Qaeda terrorists, including one who was nabbed after a high-speed car chase….
Now British and Pakistani intelligence officials are furious with the Americans for unmasking their super spy – apparently to justify the orange alert – and for naming the other captured terrorist suspects.
Pakistani Interior Minister Faisal Saleh Hayyat expressed dismay the trap they had hoped would lead to the capture of other top Al Qaeda leaders, possibly even Osama Bin Laden, was sprung too soon.
“The network is still not finished,” Hayyat said. It “remains a potent threat to Pakistan, and to civilized humanity.”
“It makes our job harder,” a British security source said. British officials denied press reports yesterday that several suspects were able to escape the net….
“His arrest was kept secret and he was made to remain in touch with his contacts,” a Pakistani government official told The Times of London. “During his detention, he regularly communicated through E-mail with the Al Qaeda operatives in Britain and other countries. That helped us to identify them.”
And this from the Washington Times:
The Times quoted one unidentified “senior (police) commander” as saying Scotland Yard and MI5 had not expected the American announcements and had to move up the arrests, which were “part of a pre-planned, ongoing intelligence-led operation.”
And this from Juan Cole, who tracked this story last year:
…had Ridge not made his announcement, the press would have had no occasion to go searching for the source of his information. The Bush administration decision to go public put a powerful spotlight on the Pakistani arrests of June and July…. The Bush administration at the very least bears indirect responsibility for the outing of Khan. Without the Ridge announcement, reporters would have had no incentive to seek out the name of the source of the information…. The appearance of Khan’s name in the New York Times on August 2 caused the British to have to swoop down on the London al-Qaeda cell to which he was speaking. As it was, 5 of them heard about Khan’s arrest and immediately fled. The British got 13, but it was early in their investigation and they had to let 5 go or charge them with minor offences
And this from IPS-Inter Press Service, August 9, 2004:
“By exposing the only deep mole we’ve ever had within al-Qaeda, it ruined the chance to capture dozens if not hundreds more,” a former Justice Department prosecutor, John Loftus, told Fox News on Saturday.
And spin these numbers while you are at it.
http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/media/poll20050713.pdf
July 15th, 2005 at 5:45 amBy the way, calling my wife anything from the safety of the Internet may make you feel tough, but I would be careful : ) I am karma u POS FM.
Comment by fake but accurate  July 15, 2005 @ 3:42 am
FBA, anything that would marry you, goat, pig, dog or otherwise, is “fair game”, isn’t it?
I’ll just call it a cow, because “bovine” is a word that might confuse you.
July 15th, 2005 at 5:50 amRyan, you have pissed me off.
Suggestion. Stay out of here. It works.
July 15th, 2005 at 5:53 amAha! Who says irony is dead? Fake But Accurate, (like the TANG docs, as opposed to the Niger Yellowcake docs, which would be Fake And Inaccurate) objects to Rove’s rules!
Jeez, you liberals are a gawd damn joke. By the way, calling my wife anything from the safety of the Internet may make you feel tough, but I would be careful : ) I am karma u POS FM.
That’s what you get for marrying “game”. As in, outside your own species. And I am giving you the benefit of the doubt by assuming you might be human.
July 15th, 2005 at 7:52 amJohn Kerry Outed Undercover CIA Agent!!!!!!
Sen. John Kerry, who called for Karl Rove to be fired over allegations that he revealed the identity of CIA employee Valerie Plame, outed a genuine undercover CIA agent just this past April – even after the Agency asked that his identity be kept secret.
Kerry blew the cover of CIA secret operative Fulton Armstrong during confirmation hearings for U.N. ambassador nominee John Bolton.
Questioning Bolton, Kerry asked: “Did Otto Reich share his belief that Fulton Armstrong should be removed for his position?” – according to a transcript excerpted by the New York Times.
“The answer is yes,” the top Democrat continued.
In his response to Kerry, Mr. Bolton did his best to maintain the agent’s confidentiality, reverting to the Armstrong’s pseudonym.
“As I said,” he told Kerry, “I had lost confidence in Mr. Smith, and I conveyed that.”
Two years earlier, Armstrong had been identified in news reports on his dispute with other officials over intelligence involving Cuba. But he was operating in a different capacity and his identity wasn’t secret at the time.
“When the Bolton nomination resurrected the old accounts, however, the C.I.A. asked news organizations to withhold his name,” the Times said.
Apparently the CIA directive wasn’t good enough for Sen. Kerry – who outed Armstrong anyway and later defended the move by saying his Republican colleague, Senator Richard Lugar, had also mentioned the name.
July 15th, 2005 at 8:33 amSteed,
I will give you the part about Valerie not actually being a “covert” CIA agent during the leak. Therefore, the Intelligence and Identities Act was not violated based on the information that has been released up to this point. However, Rove still broke the law and it has nothing to do with Joe Wilson’s report! Karl Rove violated Title 18, United States Code, Section 641. This is a law that prohibits theft (or conversion for one’s own use) of government records and information for non-governmental purposes. But its broad language covers leaks, and it has now been used to cover just such actions in a court of law.
Look up the Joseph Randel case in which this DEA officer was indicted on leaking a name from an investigation of money laundering. The name was Lord Ashcroft who successfully sued Joseph Randel. Randel faced up to life in prison if convicted, so he pleade guilty and server 1 year in prison and 3 years probation.
How does this involve Rove? Karl Rove may be able to claim that he did not know he was leaking “classified information” about a “covert agent,” but there can be no question he understood that what he was leaking was “sensitive information.” The very fact that Matt Cooper called it “double super secret background” information suggests Rove knew of its sensitivity, if he did not know it was classified information (which by definition is sensitive).
So put that in your pipe and smoke whatever you seem to be smoking; given all that smoke you have been trying to blow up everyones ass.
Question to ponder: Why did Bush hire an independent criminal defense attorney recently?
Thanks to John Dean’s article on this information.
July 15th, 2005 at 8:48 amhttp://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20050715.html
“John Kerry Outed Undercover CIA Agent!!!!!!”?
Oh, Really?
http://mediamatters.org/items/200504120007
Back on topic:
Heard the latest spin on CBS Early show: They now claim that Rove Heard it from Robert Novak First…
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/07/15/MNGKCDOG4I1.DTL
The ultimate source of thie “info”: Karl Rove’s Testomony!
July 15th, 2005 at 8:49 amBet Robert Novak anf KR Got their “Facts” straight before hand!
Both Cheney and Bush went to outside counsel, sometime ago, in fact. That indicates foreknowledge, i.e., conspiracy.
July 15th, 2005 at 8:52 amI will give you the part about Valerie not actually being a “covert� CIA agent during the leak. Therefore, the Intelligence and Identities Act was not violated based on the information that has been released up to this point.
Horseshit. She was on maternity leave for chrissake! She just had twins. She was going back into the field. She was NOC. Period. The most dangerous kind of deep cover. No diplomatic passport. If caught, she faced execution, which would be too good for Rove and the rest of these traitors.
July 15th, 2005 at 8:56 amSam reads Drudge! LMAO!~
July 15th, 2005 at 8:59 amSteed and Sam…
Conservative shills to the bitter end. Dutuifully regurgitating their GOP talking points.
Nice to see that so many of you have debunked them over and over and over and over…
Oh well, they are just adhering to one of the fundamental rules of their disgraced hero, Rove. Repeat a lie often enough, and it will become true.
July 15th, 2005 at 9:05 amOh, I almost forgot fake but inaccurate.
He is in league with hte aforementioned two as well.
All they need is a fourth, and they can start a barbershop quartet.
July 15th, 2005 at 9:08 amRove, Plame, Wilson, curiouser and curiouser
WILSON: My wife was not a clandestine officer the day that Bob Novak blew her identity.
Trackback by Mark in Mexico  July 15, 2005 @ 2:43 am
It’s amazing that in idiot like Mark actually found the border and crossed it. He’s probably in New Mexico, or Arizona, and just thinks he’s in Mexico.
From Atrios
http://atrios.blogspot.com/2005_07_10_atrios_archive.html#112143393211391174
Moronosphere
The wingnutosphere, in association with the associated press, is very excited about this interview with Wilson, specifically the bolded line:
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…
For sentient humans, it’s clear what Wilson means – that she ceased to be a clandestine operative the day Novak’s column came out. It’s also clear from his other comments (as it was clear to Blitzer in conversation) that he has to used such language because he can’t acknowledge that she ever was a clandestine operative with direct language.
christ.
July 15th, 2005 at 9:38 amFor sentient humans, it’s clear what Wilson means – that she ceased to be a clandestine operative the day Novak’s column came out. It’s also clear from his other comments (as it was clear to Blitzer in conversation) that he has to used such language because he can’t acknowledge that she ever was a clandestine operative with direct language.
At least for five years from that date…
July 15th, 2005 at 9:40 amAll they need is a fourth, and they can start a barbershop quartet.
A Barbershop quartet of four Jonny-one-notes? I’ll pass.
July 15th, 2005 at 9:42 amSupport the troops, support the troops. Conservatives like to wave their yellow ribbons at you if you don’t happen to agree that sending them to Iraq is a good way to support the troops.
Conservatives seem to have forgotten that the Central Intelligence Agency is an important branch of our military apparatus. CIA agents gather information that bears directly on the deployment and success of our troops in the field. Many of them face danger and privation in the line of duty. While they may not wear a uniform, they are certainly soldiers serving their country.
When no less than the top strategist for the whole conservative apparatus, Karl Rove, exposes the identity of an undercover CIA agent for utterly callow political reasons, conservatives rush to his defense. They ignore, at our troops’ peril, the deeply demoralizing effect Mr. Rove’s actions have had on the CIA, and on the military as a whole.
Conservatives can’t have it both ways. If they are truly dedicated to supporting the troops, they need to confront Mr. Rove’s indefensible disregard for the welfare of those who risk their lives for our country.
July 15th, 2005 at 9:51 amMany Republicans seems very, very anxious to defend Rove even though the potential ramifications of what he may have done are quite serious (despite their denials). I don’t believe they know or care whether he may have done anything wrong. As long as they stay in charge, any potentially unethical behavior by a Republican is OK. The ends justify the means, right? I mean, come on, the elder Bush praised Wilson to the skies fifteen years ago. Called him a “great American”, I believe. Haven’t heard a word from the old man lately about Wilson. Why? Because he *can’t* say anything. That wouldn’t be allowed in the GOP playbook.
I think what really makes my blood boil is that the right tries very hard to paint the left as unpatriotic, which is beneath contempt. In the Rove controversy, like every other time the actions of a Republican are questioned, the GOP will *always* defend the interests of their party above the interests of this country. THAT is the definition of hating America.
July 15th, 2005 at 9:51 amLiberal Definition of Treason:
Slandering troops on senate floor – OK.
Defending Administration (and 28 Senate Democrats) decision to go to war on basis of WMD – treason.
Joe Wilson’s letter from 41 was a nice touch, I must say. Keep playing in the mud folks, I am looking through Janice Rogers Brown’s judicial port right now!
July 15th, 2005 at 10:00 am#64 – you’re painted as unpatriotic because YOU ARE unpatriotic. Most people see the furor over Gitmo and Abu Ghraib as “terrorist sympathizing.”
July 15th, 2005 at 10:02 amyou are losing, again, watch as your dreams of getting back at us slips away…….hey 70%, real bad ass aren’t you, talk the talk littleman, that’s all we both know you can do. I’ll be here to teach you history from time to time, so get use to it ; )
July 15th, 2005 at 10:06 amand to gloat.
What tangled webs we weave. A few days ago, the New York Times, the most representative outlet of liberal opinion in the country, was extolling government leaks as absolutely necessary to the First Amendment and to public knowledge of the workings of government. A prosecutor who asks a reporter to reveal his anonymous sources could chill such leaks, and freedom of the press in America would enter a long twilight period.
Now, a leaker in the Valerie Plame case, which was the occasion for this dire inanity from the Times, turns out to have been White House adviser Karl Rove. That puts things in a new light. Even though his leak  that Plame, a CIA officer, got her husband and President Bush critic Joe Wilson a jaunt to Niger to probe whether Saddam Hussein had attempted to acquire uranium there  added important new information to the public knowledge of the case, the Times has the vapors. Surely Thomas Jefferson couldn’t have crafted the First Amendment with icky Karl Rove in mind?
Thus the Plame controversy continues to churn out bad faith the way Willy Wonka’s factory produces chocolate. At first, the media hyped the leaks about Plame as practically the Lindbergh baby kidnapping for the 21st century  a spectacular and dastardly crime (revealing the identity of a covert CIA operative potentially violates the law). The furor forced the administration to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate. He has managed to get one Times reporter, Judith Miller, jailed for refusing to testify about who leaked to her, and he nearly bagged Time magazine reporter Matt Cooper too.
The prospect of jail time for its members prompted the Fourth Estate to begin to argue in its court filings that, contrary to its initial feeding frenzy, no crime occurred in the Plame leaks. This opportunistic argument is correct. The statute in question is narrowly written to target persons deliberately attempting to disrupt U.S. intelligence operations. The question is whether the elite media will stick to this understanding now that visions of ousting Rove dance through their heads like sugarplums.
Rove’s leak was to Cooper. Cooper called Rove to talk about welfare reform, then asked him about Wilson at the end of the call. It was a mystery how Wilson had been selected for this mission, and Rove was simply providing an explanation. Rove was not trying to punish Wilson or endanger his wife. He appears not to have even wanted Cooper to use the material, giving it to him on “double super secret background�  a ground rule that usually comes with a secret decoder ring  as a way to warn him not to take Wilson too seriously.
Which was a good tip. Wilson is a witch’s brew of fatuity and dishonesty. He has blatantly lied about his wife’s role in his trip and has been skewered by the Senate Intelligence Committee for other falsehoods meant to inflate his own importance. The contention that Saddam sought uranium  Wilson insists he debunked it for all time with his brief CIA-sponsored vacation in Niger  remains a murky matter, since British intelligence has stood by it. Wilson isn’t even internally consistent, given that he is a stalwart defender of Miller, whose refusal to testify makes it harder to identify the leakers that supposedly so harmed Wilson and his wife.
The White House has contributed bad faith of its own. It went along with the pretense that something awful had happened in the Plame leaks, acquiescing in the appointment of a special prosecutor. It provided false assurances during the investigation that Rove wasn’t involved. Now suddenly the White House is saying it won’t comment during a still-ongoing investigation, and probably will eventually argue that the leaks weren’t a big deal after all.
The newest position of liberalism as represented by the New York Times at that point will be difficult to predict, except that it will be calculated to inflict maximum harm on Karl Rove.
July 15th, 2005 at 10:08 amSam – do people still read the NY Times? lol!!! I thought we took them down with CBS.
July 15th, 2005 at 10:10 amI read with interest the remarks in this blog. I had thought about Steed’s comments–you notice how he changes tone and the shape of his argument? Whoever suggested (a joke?) that he was a GOP operative—well, if true, then he is testing arguments to the new edition of Republican Talking Points and the blogs generously respond. Is this spin-in-progress?
July 15th, 2005 at 10:17 amThis site is alot more pleasant if you just ignore the morons. I know, I know, I do it too. But just look at the above and tell me that some folks don’t have real lives.
Blog ettiquette # 1 – Speak your mind in as compact a form as you can make your statement mean what you want. ie – short and concise. Ignore the trolls. They just want to interject chaos into a group that generally agrees and gets along. If someone posts something real, respond. When they are rehashing RNC talking points and lying up a storm = troll.
July 15th, 2005 at 10:24 amYou all need to go to DailyKos and look at the quote from Bush 41 about reveiling undercover sources. Very relevant today! And according to Plame’s formed CIA classmate, William Pitt, Plame was indeed a NOC for the CIA. You can read that story, printed at Truthout.org.
The facts are that Rove discussed/leaked the indentity of a CIA agent, with a reporter, to get back at her husband for not agreeing with a now debunked British report saying that Saddam was trying to by Uranium from Niger. I have read that perhaps IRAN was the culprit here, not Iraq.
Of course Wilson was ideal to go to Niger, regardless of who sent him. First, he says that he had previously gone to Niger and he was ONLY the former Amb. to Iraq, so he surly knew alot about Saddam. Why not send him? He had connects to bpth countries, right?
Wilson is not some political hack. He is on record as having donated money to both Bush and Gore in 2000 and Bill Clinton said yesterday that Wilson admittingly voted for Bush 41 in 1992. So Ken Melhman is wrong in saying that Wilson had some ax to grind before going to Niger. Simply wrong.
He probably has an ax to grind now, given that his wife no longer has a job (and is around the house much more, all guys understand his pain!!) and he himself is now being smeared yet again.
The bottom line is that nobody, but Karl Rove, really knows what he did to the extent of wheather it is a crime or not but we all agree that he shouldn’t be outting CIA folks in a time of war.
I am betting that Fitzgerld will file indictments. How else can one explain that Judith Miller (who herself helped the Bushies LIE us into war) is sitting in jail today? Would Fitzgerld go so far as to lock a reporter up if he wasn’t in the middle of a big crime? Perhaps he is just pissed but I can’t see his collegues allowing him to hold grudges without some burden of proof that a crime (perjury at the least) was committed.
July 15th, 2005 at 10:27 am#71
So you want this blog to become boring? You want to restrict comments to only those who share your opinion? I thought liberals were supposed to have open minds? I think the only morons here are the liberals.
July 15th, 2005 at 10:37 amyou are losing, again, watch as your dreams of getting back at us slips away…….hey 70%, real bad ass aren’t you, talk the talk littleman, that’s all we both know you can do. I’ll be here to teach you history from time to time, so get use to it ; )
and to gloat.
Comment by fake but accurate
Nothing illustrates their sick, petty, intellectually dishonest and morally bankrupt juvenile minds better than this comment. Let them post. Most folks don’t go to Freep or LGF to see it for themselves. It’s like this everyday there, but worse.
July 15th, 2005 at 10:40 amDear The Northeast Dilemma and Fake But Accurate,
July 15th, 2005 at 10:42 amYou’re done your part. Now, check the mail for your check from the GOP and the latest talking points. And try looking for your soul while you are at it.
It sounds to me like these people think that liberals are the new Jews, gays and non-whites, but worse. I guess we all know what you have to do with those kind of people.
July 15th, 2005 at 10:45 amI think we should do to them what they think should be done to an enemy.
July 15th, 2005 at 10:47 amEarlene,
Nice to see that you remember the Blitzer interview. Wilson did indeed say that VP Cheney didn’t send him to Niger. Thanks for paying attention.
July 15th, 2005 at 10:49 amYeah, and getting to watch their desparation, anger and shrillness reach fever pitch is worth the price of admission. They know it’s over. They can see the writing on the wall, but will deny it to the end.
July 15th, 2005 at 10:53 amSteed,
If I can paraphrase your response:
(1) You are still thinking that Wilson’s initial New York Times letter is bigger that it was and therefore his credibility across the whole nuclear issue is the issue.
(2) Iraq was a mess for a while and it’s Clinton’s fault
(3) The UK Butler and Senate Intel inquiries were exhaustive
(4) The DSMs are not worth reading
(5) Everybody is lying or distorting anyway
(6) We might be getting ahead of ourselves with not enough information
I’ll start with what I agree with: (5) and (6) – but in (6)s case, I’ll prefer trying to piece together the (5)s so that I can at least test one story against another and come to a conclusion myself. It’s far more challenging than CSI reruns and is the duty of an informed citizen. And besides, there is so much b/s in the MSM today, you have to do your own reading and cross sourcing to get close to the truth.
OK here’s (1). Read Wilson’s original Times op-ed, the one that got his wife outed by Novak’s response. You say you don’t believe he believes what he says, but this is what he said nevertheless that got his wife outed – and that is the only thing we should be looking at here. http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0706-02.htm
Notice how he only focuses on the ‘16 words’ about the Niger yellowcake and even gives his reason for not coming forward sooner – he thought the president may have been talking about something he had not debunked – South Africa for example. It’s only when he finds out that the story he debunked was the source of the ‘16 words’ does he write that letter.
Now we can wander off into Wilson’s credibility again at this point if you like, but it is simply not relevant and I don;t need to go there. The IAEA and the Italians proved that the ‘16 words’ basis was a forgery (now that’s a question I would like to see answered – who forged those docs?). So your comment about the Roberts report is not relevant either to the ‘16 words’. In any case the Roberts report is not exhaustive about the issue because it does not examine the way that intelligence was used by the administration and the Democrats are clear in their objections to that limitation on the Roberts remit. So John Bolton’s sponsorship of the Niger yellowcake story gets a free pass by Roberts – that is crucial. Neither is any of the UK reports exhaustive for the same reasons and Blair came under fire there too.
On (4): My last 3 sentences above are my argument for why the DSMs should be required reading for anyone who voted for this lunacy last November. In my opinion, the ‘16 words’, John Bolton’s invovlement, the Blair Dossier and the DSMs are all part of the same deception.
Anyway, my original point stands: Wilson questioned initially only the basis for the ‘16 words’ and for that his wife was outed and the ‘Big Smear’ was on. Just like O’Neill and Clarke and anyone else who attempts to question the manufactured reality of this administration.
And finally (2) – Iraq was a mess and it’s Clinton’s fault. The appalling consequences of US foreign policy on the rest of the world are a subject another time – I think Clinton’s greatest failure is his waste of his own talent. Is Iraq his fault? Clinton is guilty of maintaining the status quo, nothing more. But to your direct point that Saddam was still very dangerous in 2002 – I’ll let Condi and Colin rebut your point and what they thought in 2001:
From John Pilger http://pilger.carlton.com/print/133099 :
“Both Colin Powell, US Secretary of State, and Condoleezza Rice, President Bush’s closest adviser, made clear before September 11 2001 that Saddam Hussein was no threat – to America, Europe or the Middle East.
In Cairo, on February 24 2001, Powell said: “He (Saddam Hussein) has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbours.”
This is the very opposite of what Bush and Blair said in public.
Powell even boasted that it was the US policy of “containment” that had effectively disarmed the Iraqi dictator – again the very opposite of what Blair said time and again. On May 15 2001, Powell went further and said that Saddam Hussein had not been able to “build his military back up or to develop weapons of mass destruction” for “the last 10 years”. America, he said, had been successful in keeping him “in a box”.
Two months later, Condoleezza Rice also described a weak, divided and militarily defenceless Iraq. “Saddam does not control the northern part of the country,” she said. “We are able to keep his arms from him. His military forces have not been rebuilt.”"
The actual clips are around somewhere – I couldn’t find them at short notice. In terms of pure realpolitik for US national interests, is Iraq any better now?
I don’t think we’re getting ahead of ourselves, just connecting the dots, Steed. The question is whether anyone cares enough.
July 15th, 2005 at 10:56 amJosh Marshall nails it. 0h yeah, and Duke Cunningham is the first in a long line of Republicans who won’t be seeking re-election, or who will get trounced if they dare.
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2005_07_10.php#006117
There’s a point that’s probably worth raising with our scofflaw Republican friends. All of their arguments now amount to excuses, like those of a small child caught stealing cookies: Joe Wilson’s a liar. Plame’s covert status wasn’t protected well by the CIA. It was just a short phone call. Rove really wanted to speak about welfare reform. Wilson said Cheney sent him to Africa. Plame sent Wilson to Africa. Rove leaked Plame’s identity in the interests of good journalism. Wilson went on too many TV shows. On and on and on.
The salient point is not that each of these claims is false. The point is that they’re irrelevant. It’s the mid-life version of ‘He hit me first!’ or ‘He called me a name!’ or other such foolery.
No presidential advisor should ever disclose the identity of a covert agent at the CIA. That doesn’t require elaboration.
If it’s done knowingly, it’s a felony. Joe Wilson could be the biggest hack in the world. Plame could have cooked the whole trip idea up to damage the president — as some GOP loopsters are now claiming — and it wouldn’t matter.
Rove (and, though we’re not supposed to say it yet, several of his colleagues) did something obviously wrong and reckless. And they probably broke several laws by the time it was all done.
Pretty much every Republican in Washington today works for Karl Rove. So they can’t deal with that fact. But fact it is.
And nothing was done amiss? If Rove et al. didn’t do anything wrong, why have they spent two years lying about what they did? No law was broken? Then what is Fitzgerald looking at? Why is a grand jury investigating Rove? A prosecutor like Fitzgerald, a Republican appointee, wouldn’t be throwing journalists in jail unless he thought he was investigating a serious crime.
What’s their answer to that? They have none. Rove runs the Washington Republican party, owns it. So it’s anything but hold him accountable.
– Josh Marshall
July 15th, 2005 at 11:01 amNobert Rovak
Karl Rove confirmed information about a C.I.A. agent’s identity, regardless of how they attempt to spin it. Second, it’s interesting that they are attempting to create this merry-go-round in which the press gave Rove all the info without the press ev…
July 15th, 2005 at 11:03 amVery gd, Terrytheturtle. But they aren’t interested in the truth getting out, they already know it, anyway. They are only interested in protecting the Boy King and his Regent. And you thought we got rid of the Royals, didn’t you. Loyalists.
July 15th, 2005 at 11:09 amAUDIO – Yesterday’s KCRW interview with Larry Johnson (former CIA and State Dept counterterrorism official) is now available courtesy of crooksandliars.com
You go Larry.
July 15th, 2005 at 11:19 amCool, I could waffle for a newspaper – beats cleaning office toilets late at night. http://www.startribune.com/stories/1519/5505382.html
July 15th, 2005 at 11:23 amSTOP THE HATE!
Please, or we’ll be forced to pick up MORE senate seats!!! lol!!!
July 15th, 2005 at 11:24 amROVE IS GUILTY AND ALL TRUE AMERICANS KNOW IT!
Can’t wait to see him lead away in cuffs with the rest of BushCo.
votetoimpeach.org
July 15th, 2005 at 11:26 amSusan,
The MSM has reported that Rove has committed no crime. Exactly how will he be led off in handcuffs or is that just some fantasy you are dreaming of?
July 15th, 2005 at 11:47 amtnd, stewed, fba, sam, tony, john etc. etc….can’t stay away. They are in love for sure. They have admired us from afar for a long time and now they are riding their bikes back and forth in front of our house, trying to get our attention.
July 15th, 2005 at 11:51 amDaddy and mommy tell us we shouldn’t play with their kind because they aren’t of our class but you always annoy and tease the one you’re in love with when you are a child, regardless of status.
But wait ….it’s Daddy out front with the
shot-gun ….no…noo….. you’ll stain the sidewalk!!
Bush is going to be forced to ask Rove to leave. Look at todays CNN (damn I don’t like them since Ted left) interactive vote poll. Vote while you are there.
to #73 – I said to respond to reasonable stuff. When you are parrotting talking points, you aren’t here to discuss nor further understanding. You are here to throw sand in the gears. Use your own judgement.
July 15th, 2005 at 11:51 amHow pathetic is all this? Repugs refuse to defend the US military (including the CIA) by refusing to seriously go after whoever “outted” Valerie Plame.
Aren’t the Repugs supposed to be for God and Country? Our ability to track WMD worldwide through the CIA NOC that Novak wrote about just went to h**l in a handbasket. CIA agents were killed as a result.
This once again illustrates just how shallow, self serving, unethical, immoral, criminal, and evil the Head Chimp and his Henchmen are. To this I now add any and all Republicans who fail to speak out against Rove, Buch, Cheney, &Co.
Just think about all the blood on these guys hands… it’s like it’s the 1980’s in Central America all over again. Only this time its on a global scale… :-(
July 15th, 2005 at 11:53 amGood editorial, Turtle. Were you not aware that Walter Pincus of the WaPo knew about the effort to discredit Wilson in 2002?
http://www.niemanwatchdog.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=Showcase.view&showcaseid=0019
http://www.tpmcafe.com/story/2005/7/10/95928/2698
July 15th, 2005 at 11:55 amThe MSM has reported that Rove has committed no crime.
Should we just send Fitzgerald home?
July 15th, 2005 at 11:56 amjesus h. christ…the pretzel logic from Steed and the rest of the myopic Rove sychophants is soooo last week. they seem to be devoid of ANY ability to accept facts and place the blame for this whole stupid event squarely at the feet of the rove. he’s toast people. bush’s brain has a cancerous tumor. but the caveate? if you remove it, the head dies, and the bush house of cards collapses like a shack in a hurricane.
steed…you are to be commended for your tenuous grasp on reality. it’s amazing you can even form complete sentences…hang in there, and PLEASE, never stop defending rove. he can always use another moron in his posse.
July 15th, 2005 at 12:02 pmwtmoore and rest, give it a rest. Rove will be cleared of all accusations. Time to move on to the next Republican target in your quest to regain power.
July 15th, 2005 at 12:17 pmI am cynical enough to think that even if bush43 is forced to ask rove to leave, that rove will continue to work for him through backdoor means (no J Gannon jokes). That is unless he’s sitting in a Federal Crossbar Hotel. We can always hope.
Also, bushco will go on w/o Rove. It just won’t be as politically Machavellian or savay.
July 15th, 2005 at 12:17 pmBlah, blah, nazis, zionists, halliburton, blah, vietnam, iraq, national guard, nazis, torture, gitmo, blah, patriot act, lies, lies, plame, treason, rove, nazis, blah, rove, rove, rove, rove, nazis, rove, rove, rove, rove, rove, nazis, blah, blah, blah…
And thus I have summed up what like three years of dhimmicrat talking points? Yes, a winning strategy for sure, LOL. New title for this blog: Think Rove!
July 15th, 2005 at 12:19 pmWhat’s the big deal with #34… Ah ha… so there are some extremists out there on the left too. I could post link after link to Right Wing, protest sign carrying “God Hates Fags” goobers. And you could knock that straw man right down. Ok, there are extremists with boderline and inflamatory views… so what?
It’s not relevant to the Plame scandal.
July 15th, 2005 at 12:24 pmBlah, blah, evil, terrorists, environmentalist wackos, blah, smoke ‘em out, WMDs, evil, evil, evil, Jesus, blah, evil, spin, lies, Clinton, treason, swift boat, evil, Antichrist, Intelligent Design, Jesus, End Times, bring ‘em on, abstinence, evil, evil, evil, evil, evil, Rapture, blah, blah, blah…
And thus I have summed up what like three years of Evangelical Republican talking points? Yes, a winning strategy for sure, LOL. New title for this blog: Think Evil!
July 15th, 2005 at 12:35 pmZUG, You beat me to it.
July 15th, 2005 at 12:36 pmYou left out Islamofascists.
July 15th, 2005 at 12:37 pmGive it up Sam,
Your angry because Clinton took away your welfare check and I happen to agree with that.
Stop spreading your legs (for your brother) and start using your head for once.
Who the hell cares what MSM says, they report to morons and morons only so keep listening. Soon you’ll be a good canidate for a labotomy.
I know someone who can do the procedure and you won’t feel a thing.
July 15th, 2005 at 12:39 pmThanks Narc, I had not read the Pincus stuff, I started from Wilson’s op-ed and went from there, I didn’t think it preceded that, naive Googler that I am.
Is Pincus saying that the WH ignored Wilson’s trip and evidence in 2002 because of the incorrect view of Plame’s role or is he saying that they got the smear ready in 2002 in case Wilson blew the whistle? If true, that’s worse than I thought.
July 15th, 2005 at 12:41 pmI think that one could safely infer that. Read the Comments at TPM, the second link.
July 15th, 2005 at 12:45 pmFBA,
You’re a crackpot, too.
Your rational is unfounded.
,S.
July 15th, 2005 at 12:52 pmStephen,
July 15th, 2005 at 12:56 pmWhen somebody calls themselves “fake” they are admitting they have nothing factual.
If you haven’t noticed, FBA, there’s been an abrupt shift in politics.
Lincoln now seems more like a modern day Democrat.
July 15th, 2005 at 12:58 pmIslamofascists… indeed. I left out Culture of Life too. Can’t forget the COL.
July 15th, 2005 at 1:10 pmCome sit on the philosopher’s knee. I’ll teach you a little something about history.
July 15th, 2005 at 1:12 pmCulture of Life! 0h. My. God! We can’t forget that, or dhimmicrats!
July 15th, 2005 at 1:27 pmSusan,
I’m guessing you weigh about 300 lbs, live off welfare in a trailer somewhere in Arkansas which is why you seem to have so much time to spend here. Am I far off?
July 15th, 2005 at 1:34 pmsam, you’re showing yourself as a fool.
Be a man, or try to be one at least. Admit your mistakes and move on. You made a big one when you voted for bush. We know it, now it’s your turn to own up to it.
Grow up dude.
July 15th, 2005 at 1:53 pmSpecial toys for Rove and friends…
http://www.jesuschristsuperstore.net/fchristians.html
July 15th, 2005 at 2:05 pmListen Kindness,
Do I have remind you who the fool is here? Who won the last election? Not Kerry. Who has contol of the House and the Senate? Not the democrats. Who is getting ready to nominate a Supreme Court justice that will most likely be neither a moderate or an originalist? Not Kerry. So again, who is the fool? It is your kind that needs to grow up and get out into the real world. Sorry Dude, time to move outta Momma’s house.
July 15th, 2005 at 2:11 pmSam, I thought you supported Rove, why are you talking so negatively about him now?
You’ve described him to a tee so for that we do have something in common.
But, I’m still not paying for your imbred children, so get over it and close those hairy legs.
July 15th, 2005 at 2:13 pmSusan,
You must have me confused with someone else. Check again. You also sound like a man. Are you a drag queen or something?
July 15th, 2005 at 2:18 pm[...] (via ThinkProgress.org) [...]
July 15th, 2005 at 2:22 pm“God Hates Fags?â€? that guy is a democrat, enjoy reality. zug and tre, i like the single syllable names, keep it simple huh? I discussed Rove in that post, I know that’s all you guys think about, the lefts boogyman, under your beds and in your closets, LOL.
July 15th, 2005 at 2:37 pm“Listen to Norm Coleman today  he makes a ton of sense.”
We have officially jumped the shark. I didn’t realize you could put those words, in that order, in a sentence without the universe exploding. You know, that whole matter-anti matter thing.
July 15th, 2005 at 3:09 pmAdd to the point: “Rove Didn’t Leak The Name So He’s Not Guilty”
The hypocrisy of the Bushniks* resorting to a “didn’t inhale” excuse like not saying her “name” would be laughable if it weren’t so twisted. (Bushnik – because anyone who’s a true conservative would be outraged to the very core by Rove’s cynical, anti-American tactics; After all, Bush I – no liberal by any stretch – fired him in ‘92).
July 15th, 2005 at 3:10 pmNews Flash: Another Hurricane is headed for the US, and Chickenlittle says there has never ever been a Hurricane of this size this early in the “history of the Weather Channel.” DailyKos says it could just be a trick by Rove using his “high Magi” connections and “Halliburtons weather machine based in his secret lair somewhere in an unnamed red state.” Chickenlittle said this was “proof the sky is falling and the chimpyMcBushhitlerburton Zionist conspiracy has reached its final pinnacle of ultimate evil,” know to the public in past less enlightened years as: hurricane season. When asked about this horrifying new development, former VP candidate John “leach” Edwards said, “It is clear the American people deserve what they get, I offered to heal the sick and make the lame walk, toss Chirac’s salad on live TV, sign Kyoto in Dick Cheney’s blood, catch Osama and give him a weggie, erase poverty, and pick the pockets of every doctor in the country, but they chose the path of darkness over capitulation and nonsense. Clearly, like the forged memos Rather dashed his career against, Roves fingerprints are all over this storm.” Former First Lady Hillary Clintoon was unavailable for comment, she is being treated in a Washington hospital for what insiders are calling, “Either bipolar disorder or the effects of Halliburtons much feared mindcontrol ray.” Her symptoms have come on slowly, but lately have become more profound and are frightening feminists, they include her newfound morality and support for the military.
July 15th, 2005 at 3:14 pmClaim: Rove was just trying to “wave reporters off” of a story that was wrong.
Fact: Joseph Wilson’s conclusions about the essential baselessness of the Niger/uranium rumors have been proven utterly and completely correct by events. And, the administration knew it was correct even at the time. Wilson’s conclusions matched those that had already been reported by TWO high-level U.S. officials who looked into the matter in February 2002: the U.S. Ambassador to Niger Barbro Owens-Kirkpatrick and the Deputy Commander of the U.S. European Command, 4-star Marine General Carlton Fulford. In fact, they were based in part on documents that the United Nations investigators were able within hours to conclusively establish were forgeries.
July 15th, 2005 at 3:25 pmThe paddling sure gets furious on a sinking ship.
July 15th, 2005 at 3:28 pmTake a deep breath, GOP. You’re about to drown in your own bile.
thanx sam…
to be included in your ad hominem attacks is quaint. why are you here? to wage intellectual war against logic and reason, or to prove yourself worthy of the target on your chickenhawk chest?
climb down from the cross moron, we need the wood to build the gallows to hang your buddies…
July 15th, 2005 at 3:40 pmwtmoore,
I am here as a missionary to convert as many liberals as I can. Won’t you come and join the Republican party? lol.
July 15th, 2005 at 4:33 pmSee, we do have a sense of humor afterall.
Here’s a comment about the Nazi parallels being offered by both sides and the answer to which party more accurately fits said parallel.
In any fascist hierarchy the core tenet is an absolute and unquestioning fealty to official doctrine. The fascist state, by its nature, cannot tolerate dissension because its goals are so black and white, and the most minute acceptance of gray threatens to undermine the entire structure. Any fascist follower who deviates from this rigid narrowthink, who expresses doubt or unease, is summarily devoured by his or her comrades and/or superiors. Failure to step back in line and squelch the vocalizing of those doubts in the Nazi regime meant a trip to Siberia, imprisonment or execution.
The fascist must label all those outside his or her worldview as “The Enemy.”
The reason fascist regimes too often succeed and last is because they understand that fear is a far stronger stabilizer of their peoples than fondness. For the fascist, hoping to achieve your goal by engaging the populace, by working to earn their admiration and trust, risks diluting the goal and leaves you vulnerable to the sway of public opinion. Ideally, the fascist will successfully ignore and even silence the wants and desires of the populace. Better yet, the fascist will control the media, spoonfeeding to the populace only those things which the fascist regime wishes them to know. Above all, what distinguishes the fascist is the concretion of blind loyalty to doctrine and an entrenched hatred toward any dissenting opinion.
Now I would say that the weakness of the Democratic party and liberals in general is the chaotic diversity of opinion. Liberal philosophy is more of a cloud, where neo-conservative doctrine is a rock. When presented with an event that requires reflection, the liberal will try to understand the background and nuances that led to this event. They want to know the backstory before forming a full opinion. This is taken by neo-cons as wimpishness when it is, in reality, mature and fair judiciousness. Knowing the cause of an event is always the best way to resolve its effect.
The neo-con, on the other hand, has at his and her disposal thousands of available sources (Rush, Fox News, etc.) that repeat nearly word for word what neo-con followers should and must think about this event, talking points always issued from the top. These sources alone are more than adequately informative for the average neo-con to issue their beliefs with total conviction and righteousness. They trust these sources implicitly. Thus, they have no need to seek out alternate expressions. This is taken by liberals as blind ignorance, which in fact it is.
Now back to the Nazis. Prior to WWII, Hitler cozied to the industrialists of not only his nation but to foreign entities as well–> Henry Ford and George Bush’s grandfathers, Prescott Bush and George Herbert Walker, being key allies in reinvigorating German manufacturing. To push through his proposals, Hitler seized control of the media, packed the courts with judges whose aberrant rulings would have the stamp of reason and legality long enough for Hitler to make the judiciary irrelevant, attacked intellectuals, rid campuses of all those who taught “decadent” ideas, fomented fear against “enemies of the state” (Jews, Communists and Intellectuals) and demanded from his followers absolute loyalty to the party.
To this day, you will find elderly German nationals who remain fond of Hitler. In their minds he restored a Germany sucked dry by the Treaty of Versailles. They recall the late 1930s as a time of hope and pride in nation. What they often rue is that Hitler went too far (i.e. slaughtering millions and ravaging nations for their resources).
But let’s say that Hitler never initiated WWII. Let’s say he remained focused only on building his nation, albeit at the expense of all those fellow citizens rejecting his doctrine.
So far, the Bush administration has parroted nearly every single move made by the Nazi regime prior to WWII. Kristallnacht with Hitler, used to drum up the hatred of the Jews and actually blamed on the Jews themselves, as well as the Reichstag fire set by Hitler’s own crew and blamed on Communists each have a policy mirror in the forged Niger document trumpeting Saddam’s nuclear ambition and an impending mushroom cloud on our shores. Both the Hitler scenario and the Bush scenario callously worked to stir up fear of “The Enemy,” and thus caused the populations of both eras to rally behind their leader for actions those leaders had long craved.
You have to recall that both Hitler and Bush were at equivalent benchmarks of their rule. Both still had to play to the crowd. Both felt they had much left to do. They still needed to play to the crowd. When the Hitler regime stated that their investigation proved the Jews themselves had broken and torched their owns shops to siphon insurance money out of the economy, the American media took the storyline and ran with it, effectively killing any outrage on our shores.
Now take Bush.
With the Niger document, his entire administration cowed a lazy media into repeating the neo-con line. By the time the truth was revealed, it was relegated to the back pages.
Bottom line, the Nazi parallel PERFECTLY fits the mindset of lockstepping neo-cons. I don’t say Republicans. The breed in power now would make Eisenhower roll in his grave. The neo-con has embraced extremist thought, fervently believing that the ends always justifies ANY means and that all outside opinions are to be zealously rebuked, slandered and squashed. Of course liberals can also be fascists if they embrace divisive extremism and hold all the reins of power, yet we have never seen that bloom in this nation when liberals had the chance. So let’s not talk about hypotheticals. Let’s talk about reality.
Neo-cons hold all the reins of power.
They deny the sharing of information to any who question their motives and agenda.
They suspect everyone.
They attack by any means, using lies, egregious slander and subterfuge, to undermine the ability of the opposition to command the soapbox.
They accuse liberals of hating America.
They proclaim themselves to be the party of God, which means all those outside the party are sinners, deserving of disrespect.
They conjure fantasy threats to provoke desired reactions that further propel their agenda.
They torture people in secret.
They spy on their own people.
Even when presented with solid facts, they deny, deny, attack, attack and lie and lie.
———————————————————————
In summary, Nazis were fascists, and neo-cons are fascists and thus it is correct to declare that neo-cons are very much like Nazis. And George Bush? In every way, Bush is a strategic doppelganger to Hitler.
July 15th, 2005 at 4:47 pmWith a name like Sam it is safe to say that you could go both ways.
Which is Sam, Samual or Samantha?
Some of us do not hide our identity. My entire 300 pounds, phone number and place of employment is posted on my website.
Are you too retarded to click?
July 15th, 2005 at 4:56 pmThe Associated Press issued a CORRECTION to its inital report claiming that Joe Wilson stated that his wife was not a CIA operative.
It’s retraction states that the clear intent of Wilson was to state that his wife’s carrer as an undercover CIA operative STOPPED the moment Robert Novak blew her cover. The AP retacted its story corrected its misprepresentation of the context of what wilson said on CNN, and Wilson himself has also clarified the intent of his comments as well.
So the BS reich-wing talking point that Valerie Plame wasn’t even undercover when her name was release is false – or at least people who keep using this quote out of context have no leg to stand on.
July 15th, 2005 at 5:17 pmhey sam_bo…
haven’t you heard? we cook and eat missionary’s.
a sense of humor does not excuse you from being a myopic sycophant. whistling towards the gallows is foolhardy. in the end, i suspect you enjoy the grief, ’cause there ain’t no way in hell you’ll convert a true believer, or in this case, a believer of the truth. face it moron…most of what you postulate is regurgitated from the ad nauseum right wingnut talking points. being a shill is one thing…being an idiot is another. either way, you reek of mendacity…
July 15th, 2005 at 5:31 pmHow long does America have to live with the stench in the White House? It’s time to torch the Turd Blossom. Nothing less than a democratic Daisy Cutter will suffice to blow the shifty fart away. I dub Karl the “Pepe Le Pew” of 1600 Penn. Pepe thought that he was irresistable too.
July 15th, 2005 at 6:01 pmYeah hell we are just like the nazis you bunch of freaking leftist losers:
Soldier survives attack; captures, medically treats sniper (Video)
Pfc. Stephen Tschiderer is a native of Mendon, N.Y. â€â€
During a routine patrol in Baghdad June 2, Army Pfc. Stephen Tschiderer, a medic, was shot in the chest by an enemy sniper, hiding in a van just 75 yards away. The incident was filmed by the insurgents.
Tschiderer, with E Troop, 101st “Saber� Cavalry Division, attached to 3rd Battalion, 156th Infantry Regiment, 256th Brigade Combat Team, 3rd Infantry Division, was knocked to the ground from the impact, but he popped right back up, took cover and located the enemy’s position.
After tracking down the now-wounded sniper with a team from B Company, 4th Battalion, 1st Iraqi Army Brigade, Tschiderer secured the terrorist with a pair of handcuffs and gave medical aid to the terrorist who’d tried to kill him just minutes before
http://www.armytimes.com/story.php?f=1-292925-976420.php
Now STFU.
July 15th, 2005 at 6:08 pmFBA:
You are getting rabid on us. Please take a deep breath, and step away from the keyboard for a moment.
Ideas on a message board are nothing to get excited over.
July 15th, 2005 at 6:24 pmIf the brownshirt fits, wear it.
July 15th, 2005 at 7:03 pmHey fba. Why don’t you “shut the f**k up?” Golly, I thought you moralists were so aghast at such crassness in American culture. Hypocrite.
And what is the point of your link? Your automatic assumption is that the soldier is a neo-con toady such as yourself. Even if he is a republican, not one of us liberals would have anything but admiration for his actions. What I love is how you seem to claim propriety over his selflish act. The guy doesn’t know you exist, pal. He would likely kick your teeth in for trying to exploit what he did.
You are clearly guilty of your ignorant groupthink, and yes, this does equate you to the Nazi persona. Also, don’t come on a progressive site and tell anyone here to silence themselves. I guess you’re the type who pisses on your host’s toilet seat.
You talk tough, boy, but you do so only because of your anonymous safety net. Get a grip on maturity. You contribute zip to infromative discussion with your inane invectives. But this brings up my suspicion about all of you worms, who seem to be seething en masse in the wake of this latest scandal from the most corrupt administration in American history. You’re taking marching orders from the head drone. You think that you can destabilize us. What a frickin joke. It is truly pathetic. I guarantee nearly every liberal here is far more educated than you. This means we are better able to sift the data to discern truth. Beyond that, we have a desire to study each issue from all sides because we do not want to be wrong. I believe you are incapable of admitting you have ever been wrong about an issue supported by liberals. In your warped view, any liberal policy that actually and verifiably benefits Americans, and not just one sector, must be some sneaky prequel to dismantling gun rights or forcing women to have abortions.
It never ceases to astound me how lunkish and intemperate you folks can be. Grow up.
July 15th, 2005 at 7:06 pmSorry, should have read “selfless act”
July 15th, 2005 at 7:07 pmSteed,
July 15th, 2005 at 8:04 pmIf you could only spell nepotism, you might even gain a shred of credibility.
Okay, one, this passage bugs me:
‘“The former ambassador also told Committee staff that he was the source of a Washington Post article (â€?CIA Did Not Share Doubt on Iraq Data; Bush Used Report of Uranium Bid,â€? June 12, 2003) which said, “among the Envoy’s conclusions was that the documents may have been forged because ‘the dates were wrong and the names were wrong.’â€? Committee staff asked how the former ambassador could have come to the conclusion that the “dates were wrong and the names were wrongâ€? when he had never seen the CIA reports and had no knowledge of what names and dates were in the reports. The former ambassador said that he may have “misspokenâ€? to the reporter when he said he concluded the documents were “forged.â€? He also said he may have become confused about his own recollection after the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reported in March 2003 that the names and dates on the documents were not correct and may have thought he had seen the names himself. The former ambassador reiterated that he had been able to collect the names of the government officials which should have been on the documents.â€?’
I flat out don’t believe any characterization of what someone says that is primarily built around quoting single words. And just to make sure we don’t get a kiss, we don’t get any attribution. That’s just garbage.
Two, the comment about Valerie Wilson not being a covert agent at the time?
IT DOESN’T MATTER!!!!!!!!!!!
I don’t know why people are focusing on that one redundant (yes, redundant, it is a 1980s version of most terrorism laws, which punish things that are already illegal) law, when the fact that Plame was a covert agent is (was, now) itself classified material, the release of which through deliberate action or negligence is legally actionable! This was the equivalent of fire-bombing someone’s car, while it was sitting in a parking lot surrounded by other people’s cars, because they publically disagreed with you.
Defending this “outing” is simple, clear, and definitive proof that any who participate in this disinformation campaign have mortgaged their hopes and dreams on the chance that what the GOP and its corporate and “religious” allies say is true is the actual state of reality. Taken with the Downing Street Minutes, we have the lynchpin of PNAC’s plan for a Pax Americana. It’s gone beyond a question of political debate, of rhetorical argument, of social values, it is now, to them, a question of defending an indefensible dogma.
Bush was not kidding when he said “you’re either with us, or against us.” And people have, and will fight, kill, and die in order to have that kind of certainty and simplicity in their lives. You wonder why your friends and co-workers seem to be so irrational in sticking to this? Because you’re taking away from them a world of black-and-white, of good-and-evil, and where we get to ride off into the sunset a la Regan.
People don’t want to believe that good is insanely complex (some might say “it’s hard work”), and evil which has the superior claim to simplicity. Don’t believe me? If you view your opponents as inhuman beasts deserving of death or worse, then that makes life very simple. It also makes doing evil to them very, very easy.
July 15th, 2005 at 8:11 pmCandy,
Thank you for pointing out the erosion of this discussion. It seems to me the Bush loyalists (a tiny minority indeed) wouldn’t even waste their time coming as trolls to a progressive website if they weren’t truly frightened that their boys are in deep yogurt.
Note to trolls: Coming onto this discussion to tell us we are stupid and delusional will do nothing. First, we’re not the kind of people who run because we’ve been attacked, especially when the attacks contain the sort of schoolyard bully invective we have long outgrown. Second, do you really expect to persuade us to your viewpoint by calling us names and telling us we’re stupid? How very sad for all of you. I can’t begin to imagine what has happened to you if you are an adult who spends time lurking on progressive discussion groups just to spew bile all over the place. Don’t you have children to feed? Homes to clean? Jobs to do? How sad. I’ll keep you in my prayers.
July 15th, 2005 at 8:14 pmyes yes clandy, you clearly have the high ground here, with your party distributing anti-Semitic literature at DNC HQ, relying on F9/11 and all it’s lies, Durbin referring to GITMO as though it were one of your leftist summer camps of the 20th century, Your buddies who threaten me and make disparaging remarks about my wife, your dhimmicrat buddies who refer to Ms. Rice and Gen. Powell as “Uncle Toms.” What was I thinking getting pissed off at a bunch of trust fund revolutionaries like yourselves who know nothing of history? If you don’t like me here, have me banned like you libs have threatened in the past, it is your birthright, censorship of opposition, god knows you don’t have the stomachs or the balls to do anything else that is so clearly in your leftist nature. I note today your dhimmicrat buddies showed their hand when they asked the Library of Congress if they could impeach Rove, clearly they know now they have no case, the bluffing is over, now you all fold again, true losers.
July 15th, 2005 at 8:36 pmMomForSchools, no we don’t feed our kids, we abort them because they are not people, and when the trailer gets to full of trash we just burn it down, the guvment brings a new one. LOL.
July 15th, 2005 at 8:46 pmGrazie, Mom.
Really, if you dissect the behaviors of neocon Republicans, you can’t help but gasp at their puerile, deliquent mentality. These guys are in charge of the most critical nation on Earth in the spheres of military might, political influence and global trade. Supposedly Bush and his comrades are adults, yet as Stealth notes, they find it far easier to hate and destroy than to understand and build. As with all Bushisms, in which phrases like Clear Skies means More Toxic Air, and Healthy Forests means No Forests, the much-bandied word “compassion” actually means “punishment.”
Neocons and their supporters are clinically psychotic.
Bullies hate themselves and rather than looking inward to expunge the source of this hatred or to get over what Daddy did or to confront Daddy and tell him off, they blame people of true compassion and work to inflict as much misery as possible, to ridicule the desire for global civility. Misery does love company and in this, the Bush administration’s Pez-dispensing parade of acolytes is a master, an absolute Samurai of hateful and bullying arrogance.
July 15th, 2005 at 8:47 pmHey fba, I am Jewish, you punk. First, like Polly the Parrot, you harp on an event outside the control of the Conyers meeting. In the hallway someone passed out anti-Semitic literature. Get it through your skull to the kernel of brain that keeps your mouth moving—>This bigot was not part of the meeting, not invited, not participating and not endorsed.
You want to talk about anti-Semitism and which party is more inclined then you are stepping into an all-encompassing cowpie.
Second note, and you have earned the title of dimwit, I grew up so poor I only had one pair of shoes and one pair of pants to wear to school. I had one dress suit for Temple. I never got anything but hand-me-downs from my older brother. Trust fund kids? What the hell is everyone in your beloved administration? God, you are blind.
July 15th, 2005 at 8:53 pmAnd on fba’s anti-Semitic tirade how about a personal experience? As a kid hunting for bottles in a local farm’s trashpile, along with a friend, we were confronted by the farmer, toting a shotgun. He had posted at the front of his property a large billboard praising Christ. Tacked to the bottom of the sign were Nixon/Agnew signs. Obviously he was a Republican. We had no idea we were even on his property because we came through a forest in the back, saw a bunch of overgrown trash and started digging. Now as he escorted us off his property, keeping the gun level on two eight year-olds, he gave us pamphlets stating that Jews had infiltrated the government, that they needed to be found out and exterminated. My friend, loud of mouth, said something in Hebrew. Catching on, the farmer’s face turned red and we kicked up our heels. The last thing we heard and saw was your fellow Republican trying to pock holes in us with a load of rock salt.
July 15th, 2005 at 8:59 pmBy the way, as I have pointed out before, I’m no born again Xtian, nor am I a long time Republican, I have only voted Republican in one presidential race, 2004 thank you, and I know you all very well, because I was one of you pre 9/11, so, my past has more in common with punks than preachers. I started out trying to be reasonable here, but the level of discussions was subterranean when I arrived, you are just shocked I’m as rude as you are. I’m a Republican because they kill my enemies, because I agree with more of their platforms though not all. I think it’s funny as hell you posers scream about Rove yet gave Berger a pass on his highjinx, that looked a lot like obstruction of justice from here, and as I have said before, if Rove broke the law, and I don’t think he did and you all know it, let him swing, but you girls gotta prove it first. Did you say the same about Berger? No, you were to busy with the Bush/Israeli conspiracy to commit 9/11 that blew the fuse in your tinfoil hats.
July 15th, 2005 at 9:02 pmExtending fba’s tortured logic, if I go to the Republican National Convention and hand our pro-liberal pamphlets, then every single member of the Republican party must also be a liberal.
Also, don’t deign to bloat your importance to us. What, you think we’re shaking in our boots because of anything you have to say? Maybe if you said something authentically insightful we’d stop and think. So far you’ve offered nothing but second and third generation party tripe, decayed on arrival.
July 15th, 2005 at 9:03 pmClandy, that sounds like BS, but if it’s true tell me, do you support Israel and Jerusalem as the capitol?
July 15th, 2005 at 9:13 pmRight, fba. You were a Democrat pre 9/11. Either you’re lying to make it seem as if conversion is possible (hallelujah) or your morals are so malleable that they must have been built on a base of quicksand. If it’s true that you were once a progressive, then you must have believed protecting the environment had great importance. If you subsequently changed your identity to a Republican, empirically proven to loathe environmental protections, then you are a flip-flopper who might again flip with the next wind. Who wants such a fair weather friend? Not us.
At any rate, you theoretically better Americans still don’t get the liberal stance after 9/11. We wanted Bin Laden’s head on a stick, not Saddam’s… and before you turn that into a love of Saddam, we hated that bastard too. But 9/11 was caused by Bin Laden, still on the lam, still able to orchestrate another attack. Saddam was caged and could do NOTHING to harm us on our own soil. Where did Bush put the resources? Not into catching the man responsible for 9/11. I call that a crime and a betrayal of our nation’s security.
And where do you get off lumping everyone together about Sandy Berger? I don’t know his full motives but I can accept it was a stupid and suspicious thing to do, taking those documents in such a way. But wouldn’t you agree that if he had seriously compromised this nation an Attorney General under a Republican administration would have made mincemeat out of him, maybe in the pursuit of justice but most definitely to score a political point? Why don’t you read what David Gergen said about the issue? Gergen found it suspect that an investigation by the Bush administration into Sandy Berger, ongoing for months, was only related to the public on the eve of the release of the 9/11 commission’s report. Sherlock Holmes’ barber would deduce the connection in a heartbeat.
As far as Rove goes, it is not only liberals who should want the truth, it is all TRUE Americans. Any member of either party who willfully undercuts our capacity to fight terrorism in the pursuit of political gain should be outed and charged with treason if found guilty. And again, in anticipation of your spin, we’re not talking about subjective events, like when a liberal or maybe Newsweek says something and you folks say it encourages our enemies, thus equating it to treason. No, I’m talking about actual, objectively understood treason like hobbling a hard-fought undercover operation by outing one its agents, which then allows our enemies to track her movements back to her in country contacts and voids their usefulness.
July 15th, 2005 at 9:25 pmShut up Buckshot (fake), you cant even use a name that states that your for real.
You admit you’re a fake and expect people to ponder your idiocy.
Go to the hospital they have a bed waiting for you in the pysch ward.
July 15th, 2005 at 9:35 pmHere’s a shocker: I do not support Jerusalem as the Capitol. In my mind, Jerusalem is too critical to too many cultures to belong to one state. It should rightly be an international entity governed by the U.N., one duty that this body could excel at. And in practical terms, having Israel declare Jerusalem as the capitol would do nothing to increase security and would instead have a massive and endless blowback. Ancient Jewish and Christian holy sites would suddenly become fair game, breaking the tenuous truce on direct assault. In retaliation, Muslim sites would be attacked. History would lose some of its most important sites and in the process thousands would die and be maimed. In Israel it is mainly the orthodox forces pushing for Jerusalem. This is so short-sighted and I’m afraid it will result in more decades of bloodshed.
I actually blame the British overseers for much of the problem. The initial mapping of Israel could not have been more idiotic. There are many Jews who will never accept compromise with the Palestinians. Still, enough voices in israel are pushing for a truly stable foundation to establish secure peace with the Palestinians. With Arafat out of the way, ending his reign of cozying to terrorists in Arabic and spouting slogans of peace in English, ending his embezzling of Palestinian resources, there is hope that an effective dialogue can demonstrably alter the landscape. I don’t support the settlements beyond internationally accepted borders. However, once Israel does its part, the Palestinians had better step to the plate and squelch the elements in their midst who continue to blame the innocent for their plight.
The whole point is that in any conflict, if you remove any doubts about your integrity, if you prove your honor, then any violence pursuant to that can be addressed with the might of truth. This is where I believe the Bush administration has utterly failed.
July 15th, 2005 at 9:40 pmFBA vacillates between being abusive to posters here and then claiming to be a victim of abuse by people here. Another oddity often associated with fascism. And I’d say he’s a bit unbalanced. No major revelation there.
July 15th, 2005 at 10:07 pmThe cold hard truth is that Bush And Company believe solely in power and profiteering amongst their cabal. Worse, they will do anything and everything to protect that.
So we have an administration that knowingly outs a CIA agent, that deliberately ignores 9/11 warnings, that deliberately concocts lies to go to Iraq, that deliberately underpursues Osama Bin laden, that protects terrorist regimes like Saudi Arabia and Uzbekistan, that thought that undermining a British investigation into who turned out to be the London bombing Mastermind was worth getting publicity while the Democrats convened in Boston, and with Valerie Plame destroyed a ten year network that had infiltrated the direct source of Osama Bin Laden’s capital.
They do these things because they are evil and they only have one morality; that which advances their own cause. There is no low too low for these neo cons. Bush and company would blow up America if they thought it was in their financial best interest. That’s how sick BushCo is.
July 15th, 2005 at 10:11 pmSaying Bush and company are capable of murder in the pursuit of ravenous profit, financial and political, is like saying dogs can bark.
But let’s get back to the purpose of these progressive forums: to dispense information vital to revealing the immorality and factual criminality of this administration, which crept in on a promise to restore transparency and integrity. I for one admit I am full of hate but I will support my reasons for feeling this way. I love my country. I love the best aspects of it. I love that we put a man on the moon in the space of a decade. We have historically been a nation built on the industrials engines resulting from scientific research. The hateworthy attribute of this administration and the Republican party is general is its warfare against education and intellect, as if having knowledge makes us automatically less than American. With this attitude prevailing more and more, which I believe is planting the seed of impending economic submission to more forward thinking powers, we can expect more of our economy to center on the moving of money. This will leave middle and lower echelon laborers, who historically vote Democrat, floundering. In such a state of perma-dread over low or no finances, they will not be able to muster the energy to fight back against the entrenched corporate backed power elites. The Republican party is a blood brother to corporate indifference to its fellow citizenry. To pump more blood into corporate coffers it is vital to the Republican that the citizenry is as somnabulent as possible. The best way to keep the public ill-informed is to starve the opposition, i.e. the middle and lower classes, and to starve their educational opportunities. If you doubt this tactic just look at urban districts with high minority populations. These kids are sent to schools without adequate teachings materials, in atmospheres of violence and must in general learn from the lowest grade of teacher. They are developmentally disabled right off the bat because this nation has yet to demand and verify parity in our schools. Oh yes, school vouchers, the biggest crock imaginable. Exactly how does a poor urban mother get her child to some outlying school that, if any good, will be inundated by attendance requests and forced to deny most? Are we going to revive massive bussing? And what of that child? Forced to sit in a bus for as much as four hours a day, two there and two back, how well can they perform with that tight schedule against those children privileged enough to live near the school? And with all that time lost each day, how will it affect important family time? How will it affect that child’s extracurricular activities?
Republicans deride intelligence. They do it every day. The only answer is they hate knowledge and the ability to acquire it. This means they prefer ignorance and submission. Partcipating in the derision of intellect is the first step on the path to accepting fascism.
July 15th, 2005 at 10:33 pmAsk yourselves why Republicans would attack the “intellectual elite.” It’s a disdain that implies intellectuals cannot be trusted. It suggests that any conclusions derived from intellectual introspection must be doubted, possibly as a result of all those swelling neurons firing all at once. The typical attack also places all who have achieved higher educations into some uniform group, a lunacy that has no basis in reality. If having an in-depth education is a problem for Republicans there must be a reason, because even they have reasons, however specious, for hating the expanding myriad of things they do. There can be only one true deduction to be made: Republicans hate those who are educated enough to look beyond soundbite sloganeering to see their actual motives.
Now if they were completely comfortable with their motives they would have no problem with the revelation. Yet they are not comfortable. This means that they fear the revelation. This further means they know the revelation, if understood by the populace, could provoke an angry response that derailed their plan. So whenever something is revealed that threatens the Republican agenda their automatic response is always massively unihibited slander slathered on the messenger. It doesn’t matter who the messenger is or what he or she has revealed. The Republican reaction is always the same. Attack and destroy and do it fast before the truth begins to sink in.
The only effective way we can ever counter this is to stick to our guns. The only way that will work is to get the media to pay attention. I am not one of those who believe the media is either liberal or conservative. I believe any capitalistic monolith such as the MSM will divest itself of all loyalty to its nation in exchange for maximum profits. They long ago abandoned any pretense to providing a public service, an outgrowth of deregulation. Although they utilize our publicly owned frequencies on TV and radio, the paucity of oversight allows them to ply their wares not to educate but to maximize profit. This is precisely what has given birth to so much crass and foul programming, the kind of thing Aldous Huxley spoke of, the kind of thing Howard Beale raged against in Network. Corporations play to our basest desires. The media is no exception. Car chases ad nauseum, tits a’flyin’, reality shows hoping for infidelities, the endless pursuit of the shocking… It is all a result of governmental policies that have cut the reins and the body of this deregulation has occured under Republican administrations.
Republicans can hate the state of our culture but its genetic essence is entirely theirs.
July 15th, 2005 at 11:19 pmClandy,
July 15th, 2005 at 11:41 pmI never said I was a dhimmicrat, that’s you jumping to conclusions. Bush is far from perfect, this war is way to PC considering the ramifications to civilization, and nobody will address our border situation for fear of being branded a racist, but when push came to shove he did some of what needed to be done. More than the coward dhimmicrats. What I think you people don’t get is we are fighting an enemy without borders, who we cannot negotiate or reason with, and who unlike the USSR, has nothing to lose. This is a world war. How naive can you be? I’m not going to waste much time reasoning with you, because as you lose this debate, you will not concede at all. You say you support Israel, then how can you think the insanity that permeates the Pals is changing because Arafat is dead now? Have you ever noticed Israel does not exist on their flag? The hate indoctrination of their youth? Many on your side of the fence claim Israel is the problem, if we just walked away from them, our problems would be over. That is wrong and blaming 9/11, Iraq and every other problem in the world on the Jews is nothing new. The thought Jerusalem could be managed by an impotent and corrupt organization like the UN would be laughable if it was not so vulgar. It’s not an accident there are mosques sitting on temples of other religions, like Jerusalem, all around the world, it is nothing but an extermination of the competition. Tell me, do muslims allow other temples to exist willingly? How about freedom of religion? Those are truths, like them or not. Go here my Jewish friend, you are in with the wrong crowd.
Go here to see your allies in action: http://zombietime.com/
Then tell me they are not anti-Semites.
Here to see your people stand tough: http://www.idfisrael.com/index.htm
http://www.onejerusalem.org/blog/index.asp
http://haganah.org.il/haganah/
Go here to see what arab media is saying:
http://memri.org/index.html
Stop kidding yourself. And no, I’m not Jewish or a Christian.
Your late for the pysch ward Buckshot/fake.
Lights out at 10pm.
July 16th, 2005 at 12:07 amSomeone set fba’s clock to the wrong time. It’s 11:41 not 12:00 and the cuckoos out and calling.Cuckoo… Cuckoo.
July 16th, 2005 at 12:27 amWhacky.
First, you calling Democrats cowards is a major insult to all those Democrats in uniform who are fighting abroad. You think every soldier is a Republican? Get a grip.
We get that we are fighting a unique enemy far better than you Republicans do. We want them squashed. What we don’t want is the opening of new territories for them to train and multiply. We also want a secondary assault against whatever underpins their hatred of us. This may, in fact, force us to question some of our activities abroad and our support for oppressive regimes. The only way to succeed against terrorism is to attack all its aspects, branches and roots.
And where do you get off suggesting I am blaming Israel? For your illumination, the death of Arafat was a positive. It did allow more moderate Palestinian voices more of a say. Whether this will result in measurable progress remains to be seen. The main point is that Israel must take the high road to protect itself from international criticism. This will help in future battles against terrorist acts. But what I am not willing to do is demonize and dehumanize the Muslim community as a whole. They are human beings. They inherently want lives of peace. To simply paint them as mindless ogres intent only on mayhem is a simplistic tack that will produce no positive result. Certainly the fanatic elements, unfortunately cowing the rest of their peoples, will not respond to reason or negotiation. They must be crushed. But in tandem with that action we must crush the oppression that draws more and more Muslims into the terrorist fold. That is not a liberal position. It is a strategic imperative that has worked for thousands of years when confronted with such an enemy. To continue relying on oil as an energy source, as Bush does, is the grandest of follies because it is this industry that is at the core of our support for oppression, the kind that causes those oppressed to want our extermination.
If you think you’re telling me something new about Muslim intolerance for other religions, you are not. We have similar elements here in our country, places where it would be suicide to build a synagogue. Intolerance is widespread in Muslim societies as well as the disgusting oppression of women. But it is our duty to take the high road and to conduct ourselves with the clearest and most fair principle. Secret torture chambers win us no friends, not in the Muslim world or among our allies. And frankly, if a foreign force showed up in this country to depose a tyrant, I might be grateful until they shot my whole family or drew into my family’s midst a suicide bomber. Having rid me of that tyrant would not prevent me from wanting a piece of their hide. That is the mindset of too many Iraqis and even those who have not lost loved ones are directly affected by physical and economic chaos. That sort of atmosphere is fertile ground for the rise of another Saddam Hussein, a srtongman who will give them stability in exchange for total subjugation. The fear is that this potential strongman will also be a religious extremist, which will make Bush’ exercise in Iraq the greatest failure in American history.
Our soldiers were sent to the wrong country without enough resources to get the job done in the most expeditious manner. Bush played it on the sly and then on the cheap. Hundreds might be whole and healthy were it not for Bush giving tax cuts to the rich and underfunding our troops. As a liberal who cares about our troops, I want them to go into battle with every possible protection devised by the mind of man. Since this was not done and has yet to be done I have a full right to call Bush a traitorous bastard.
July 16th, 2005 at 1:28 amDear Clandy Stein,
July 16th, 2005 at 2:37 amYou are the best extemporanious writer since Molly Ivins! You even (finally) forced FBA to post a coherent arguement in comment#154. It wasn’t a convincing argument, but I think you made him (or her?) think. Thank you.
I fear that America’s great optimism is being manipulated as gullibility. We are giving up our drive to seek truth in order to hold on to what we want to beleive. Education makes you a cynic. Ignorance lets you believe: A close confidant of our president must be a noble man. A great guy like OJ Simpson could never commit a heinous crime…
July 16th, 2005 at 4:06 amTo exonerate them both is the American way. There are so many Regular-Joes out here that want to believe that America is good that we cannot fathom less.
One thing the Republicans have is a nebulous version of our nation’s Manifest Destiny. It can be painted in the granduer of majestic purple mountains and fields of golden grain It stems from a missionary zeal that has created a superiority cancer. Democrats, however, are left with dealing with the fall-out. It’s a circle that man sees as a balance. To break out of this viscious circle is seen by Republicans as an offset of this balance. Democrats realize that what is needed is a slight change in axis i.e. we are rotating around the wrong pole.
We can continue on this axis until we spin out of control or we can adjust ourselves to the truth.
Thank God we live in a nation that has the Constitutional Right to correct itself.
Bravo Jeff!
Candy, thanks for giving your time to outwit, outlast and outplay fake.
You have more patience than I.
July 16th, 2005 at 10:31 amCheck it out…
From WP:
“Rove’s comments to CNN on Aug. 31, 2004, when he said, “I’ll repeat what I said to ABC News when this whole thing broke some number of months ago. I didn’t know her name. I didn’t leak her name.”
The next day, July 7, Bush took off for a trip to Africa. Secretary of State Colin L. Powell, who was on the trip, carried with him a memo containing information about Plame, as well as other intelligence on the yellowcake claim. It is on this trip that, prosecutors believe, some White House aides might have learned about Plame.
The origin of the Plame information is central to the case. Prosecutors are trying to determine if White House officials shared information about Plame based on the State Department memo, or from conversation with reporters, as Rove has testified, or somewhere else. If it turns out Plame’s identity was learned from the memo, it would undermine the GOP defense that Rove and other administration officials were simply discussing information they had learned from reporters…”
Isn’t it pretty obvious what happened? A bunch of good ol’ boys, sittin’ around on their plane, basking in the big win they just had… and then there’s this uppity ambassador… who the hell does he think he is?
Let’s put the screws to him, boys…
And the plan was hatched.
July 17th, 2005 at 2:11 pmOh yeah, here’s the link…
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/16/AR2005071601364_pf.html
July 17th, 2005 at 2:12 pmIf I can just interrupt the “us vs. them” article pasting:
It’s significant that Bush has changed his message from anyone “involved” to anyone “who committed a crime”.
July 18th, 2005 at 1:48 pmYou’ve been fsck’ed.
http://bayosphere.com/node/812
July 18th, 2005 at 6:41 pmIt was argued that Miller and Cooper should reveal their source because there was no confidentiality if one were covering a crime. If there is no crime, as the Republicans claim, then Judith Miller should be immediately released from prison.
July 19th, 2005 at 9:32 amTo all of you:
July 19th, 2005 at 2:00 pmGet over yourselves. Rove will never be punished for any
crime regarding Plame for one reason and one reason only:
He didn’t break the law. You all know it. Bush has been totally consistent in saying all along that only someone who was involved in committing a crime should be fired or
punished and, frankly, I would agree, as would any
“Rational,Reasonable Person”. The problem with the Left
is that, in the face of overwhelming facts that disprove their assertions, they always, ALWAYS resort to emotional
and petty name-calling and moral outrage. Boo-hoo.
Let’s see, Prospero, if we can dissect your tortured harangue. We’ll assume Rove is not convicted of a crime. This in itself does not mean he did not commit a crime. It just means he got away with it. As we saw with O.J. Simpson, a man can be acquitted and still be guilty as sin. Now even if what Rove did was not a crime, it was duplicitous because it was intended to slur a man who presented information contrary to administration claims. At the least, Rove’s behavior in this matter was highly unethical and downright sleazy. The info Wilson attained undermined Bush’s rationale for taking this nation to war. He was attacked for the revelation. We went to war. Thousands of American soldiers have been wounded, many permanently disabled, families have been torn asunder, careers have been wrecked and nearly two thousand have died. In addition, thousands of innocent Iraqis have died and we continue to spend an enormous portion of our finances to support this war while Bush and Company ask NOTHING of the wealthy and in fact reward them with more and more tax breaks. Take a damn minute to step back from your squat diatribe to see that Rove desired to suppress information that may have sidelined the war in Iraq. Since Wilson was proven correct about the uranium purchase, and since Rove knew this at the time, Rove conspired to obstruct this truth, ergo he lied. Is that ethical in your moralist universe, Mr. prospero Republican? Are your morals so vapid that a lie on this scale, causing untold chaos in the lives of so many Americans and the DEATHS of nearly two thousand, is acceptable and any criticisms of this lie should be brushed aside? I wonder what damn lie would get your goat, maybe something earth-shattering like a president lying about an infidelity? Gosh, let’s get going on the gallows.
Prospero, you are a fool, a chump, a dolt and the most worthless of pseudo-moral and falsely patriotic hypocrites.
July 19th, 2005 at 7:14 pm[...] Think Progress » How To Talk To A Conservative About Karl Rove (If You Must) – A heavily link, annotated breakdown of the standard pro-administration speaking points about Karl Rove and the Plame affair and the facts. [...]
July 21st, 2005 at 10:29 amWhy would you name a friggin site using Ann Coulter’s wit?
July 21st, 2005 at 7:26 pm“How to talk to a Conservative…” is there NO originality?
Way to go Prospero.hopefully the thread will return to actual dialouge and not this projectile diarrhea.
A classic example of what a waste of time the comments section is. Somebody actually spent some time reasoning and typing a response to the likes of Steed Lankershim? Great name, btw.
July 22nd, 2005 at 10:53 amBushies really need to stop making rules for others, because obviously they cannot live up to their own rules… http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/20/AR2005072002517.html?nav=hcmodule From the WP:”A classified State Department memorandum central to a federal leak investigation contained information about CIA officer Valerie Plame in a paragraph marked “(S)” for secret, a clear indication that any Bush administration official who read it should have been aware the information was classified, according to current and former government officials.”
He knew, and he lied to the FBI
http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewWeb&articleId=10016 -An Unlikely Story Karl Rove’s alibi would be easier to believe if he hadn’t hidden it from FBI investigators in 2003. One more reason not to trust this administration.
http://prissypatriot.blogspot.com
July 23rd, 2005 at 1:07 am[...] The GOP is strong on national security?!? A top aide leaks the name of a covert agent and a CIA front firm. Now their Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff says, “The truth of the matter is, a fully loaded airplane with jet fuel, a commercial airliner, has the capacity to kill 3,000 people. A bomb in a subway car may kill 30 people. When you start to think about your priorities, you’re going to think about making sure you don’t have a catastrophic thing first.”. Geez, this metrocard ain’t looking so hot now. [...]
July 29th, 2005 at 4:52 pmTWO DAYS AND NO FURTHER COMMENTS HERE ON THIS MAJOR ISSUE. WE BETTER STAY ON TOP OF THIS. THE WHITE HOUSE AND ROVE HAVE A WAY OF COVERING UP TREASONS IN THE FLASH OF NANO SECONDS!
July 31st, 2005 at 11:04 amHey, does it occur to anyone that since the PNAC and their plans, as well as the Bush Presidency, all either revolve around or depend and rely upon big, impressive, high impact terrorist attacks… Why in heavens name wouldn’t the destruction of the CIA’s ability to track wmd’s around the world, not also fit into the plan? I mean, from the PNAC’s present perspective, wouldn’t this be a very good thing? Kinda makes one wonder what might be coming down the pike next, huh?
Obwon
August 2nd, 2005 at 2:17 pmReply to: Usenet nyc.politics
August 2nd, 2005 at 2:22 pmthank you
TREASON
all we have seen from Bush is a:
COWARDLY COVERUP OF TRAITORIOUS TREASON!
August 8th, 2005 at 3:23 pmTime is passing as the “on going investigation” continues. Meanwhile, persons in the White House, at the highest levels of our government, ie “Karl Rove and Scooter Libby” stand accused of breaking their trust with the American People. Yet THEY STILL HOLD TOP LEVEL CLEARANCE. Doesn’t it seem wrong, that people accused of felony crimes against out government, accused of abusing their access to classified material, yet they continue to hold that same clearance of which they are accused of abusing, for political means no less! No undercover operation is safe until these vindictive, dangerous political operatives are removed from our employ! After all, who will they perceive as having crossed them next?
August 10th, 2005 at 4:51 amYou’ll notice there hasn’t been any more criticism of the President coming from people who have loved ones serving undercover.
Misson Accomplished…
August 11th, 2005 at 5:32 pmGood Service
August 20th, 2005 at 2:22 amBush Presidency, all either revolve around or depend and rely upon big, impressive, high impact terrorist attacks…
The Senator who worked with Morroccan intelligence is on the Baseball committee now and that is where the real terrorsts are and the reason for the existence of the CIA.
August 22nd, 2005 at 2:37 pm“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
Quoted in 1918, by REPUBLICAN President Theodore Roosevelt…
August 24th, 2005 at 11:39 pmPlame was in Vanity Fair in July.. She was not a covert agent. Move on already. shouldnt you be bringing up the phony downing street memos or something by now
September 16th, 2005 at 10:55 amHey, John B. Plame was no longer a covert agent in Vanity Fair in July because Novak blew her cover previously. Real simple. It was the CIA that brought the complaint, and the Department of Justice that took it to the Grand Jury while under the command of that well-known leftist John Ashcroft. If you wish to dispute those facts, I’m here. If you don’t wish to dispute those facts, perhaps you might speculate on why they occurred.
September 16th, 2005 at 1:55 pmEveryone is missing the big picture, U.S.
Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald’s grand
jury is convened, indictments are imminent.
The Carl Rove-Valerie Plame incident has teeth
but Fitzgerald’s investigation has now extended
it’s reach into other crimes that this administration
and past administrations were involved in.
The investigations now cover a wide range of
governmental malfeasance, money laundering,
and other crimes including a probe of the question
concerning who assassinated John F. Kennedy Jr.,
aka JJ.
It has been reported that a Special Forces
Division 4 ex-operative who is speaking out
concerning JJ’s assassination. He is naming
Bush 41, Clinton and Bush 43 as co conspirators.
And you thought these guys, Clinton and Bush 41
were just hanging out together because they
what, enjoyed each others company…
Apparently, JJ was considering to enter the
public arena of politics and preparing for
either a run against Hillary Clinton for Senate
or a run for the White house in 2000 against
George W Bush. He felt he could win either
of these races.
There are secret reports that were filled by the
ex-operative, who’s life is in danger for speaking
out, stating that JJ plane was broken in half
just aft of the cabin and this damage was caused
by C-4 explosive. You can find this story at:
http://tomflocco.com/fs/PurgeTheEvil.htm
It is expected that Fitzgerald will go public
sometime in October 2005, but this is still
speculation, only Fitzgerald know when he will
wrap up his investigation.
This is why it has taken over two years to look
in these crimes. Rove-Plame was a no brainier
and was wrapped up long ago, it’s the long
reaching aspects into other crimes that is taking
so long.
Bush has been warned not to interfere with a
Federal Investigation. The U.S. intelligence
community is monitoring the work of all the
prosecutors and grand juries.
Serious crimes with supporting evidence involving
September 17th, 2005 at 6:25 amthree branches of government and the media have
already threatened the long term survival of the
Republic.
Everyone is missing the big picture, U.S.
Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald’s grand
jury is convened, indictments are imminent.
The Carl Rove-Valerie Plame incident has teeth
but Fitzgerald’s investigation has now extended
it’s reach into other crimes that this administration
and past administrations were involved in.
The investigations now cover a wide range of
governmental malfeasance, money laundering,
and other crimes including a probe of the question
concerning who assassinated John F. Kennedy Jr.,
aka JJ.
It has been reported that a Special Forces
Division 4 ex-operative who is speaking out
concerning JJ’s assassination. He is naming
Bush 41, Clinton and Bush 43 as co conspirators.
And you thought these guys, Clinton and Bush 41
were just hanging out together because they
what, enjoyed each others company…
Apparently, JJ was considering to enter the
public arena of politics and preparing for
either a run against Hillary Clinton for Senate
or a run for the White house in 2000 against
George W Bush. He felt he could win either
of these races.
There are secret reports that were filled by the
ex-operative, who’s life is in danger for speaking
out, stating that JJ plane was broken in half
just aft of the cabin and this damage was caused
by C-4 explosive. You can find this story at:
http://tomflocco.com/fs/PurgeTheEvil.htm
It is expected that Fitzgerald will go public
sometime in October 2005, but this is still
speculation, only Fitzgerald know when he will
wrap up his investigation.
This is why it has taken over two years to look
in these crimes. Rove-Plame was a no brainier
and was wrapped up long ago, it’s the long
reaching aspects into other crimes that is taking
so long.
Bush has been warned not to interfere with a
Federal Investigation. The U.S. intelligence
community is monitoring the work of all the
prosecutors and grand juries.
Serious crimes with supporting evidence involving
September 17th, 2005 at 6:25 amthree branches of government and the media have
already threatened the long term survival of the
Republic.
I agree w/ Charles. The media are the biggest enemy.
servant5150
September 22nd, 2005 at 4:05 pmHookah Shisha
LOL KI love what liberals consider evidence.. so Mclean made explicit statements about not commenting and then all the person posting this garbage is
“But he then added with regard to a question about Rove’s involvement, “I spoke with those individuals, as I pointed out, and those individuals assured me they were not involved in this.â€
Boy that is such a damming statement better get the jail cells ready.
In all seriousiness I am an auditor and if i presented that as evidence of misappropriation of assets or misstatement I would be laughed out of my bosses office
But to a liberal thats evidence… but clinton never did anything wrong
October 12th, 2005 at 2:21 pmCLAIM: Rove Didn’t Leak The Name So He’s Not Guilty
Rove: “I didn’t know her name and didn’t leak her name.†Rove attorney Robert Luskin said “he did not tell any reporter that Valerie Plame worked for the CIA.â€
FACT: National Security Law Says Identifying Covert Agent Is Illegal
Rove at the very least identified Plame as “Wilson’s wife.†Under section 421 of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act, the disclosure of “any information identifying [a] covert agent†is illegal.
Again you are the person spreading misinformation. The facts are that plume was not on assignment or had not been on assignment for the past 3 years so she was not covered by the national security law: Also by plume’s own statement she identified herself as a CIA agent to help wilson with fund raising in 2000… 3 years before this crap came out…
Get your facts right… please
October 12th, 2005 at 2:25 pmDon’t worry Steed your precious boy Rove still broke some sort of law and we’re about to find out what. That you can call Wilson a liar with a straight face while supporting a pack of even bigger liars is stunning. Then again the leaps of logic you people make never cease to amaze
October 14th, 2005 at 12:11 am[...] I’m waiting for the next link in the chain of conspiracies and dirty tricks… Shrubbo’s right hander, Karl Rove. [...]
October 18th, 2005 at 10:20 amHmm…I’m not sure this has been addressed on this page, but has anyone here ever read the brief that 36 news organizations (The NYTimes among them) sent to the US Crt of Appeals in DC in March of this year? It seems that in their brief defending Miller and Cooper, the news agencies alleged that no crime was committed precisely because Plame was outed not once but twice by the CIA (a long time prior to Novak). But, logically, then, neither Rove nor Libby committed a crime. For that matter, anyone who defended Kerry’s “outing” of a covert agent by pointing to prior “outings”, ought to at least be able to rationally see how that argument works not just for Cooper and Miller (as the brief intends), but also for Rove et al…
October 27th, 2005 at 12:00 amhere’s the link: http://www.bakerlaw.com/files/tbl_s10News/FileUpload44/10159/Amici%20Brief%20032305%20(Final).PDF
In my last post I said the NYTimes was “among them” – in actuality the NYTimes was not among the 36, but no doubt encouraged the submission of the briefing. My apologies there. But the argument remains untouched.
Thanks!!
October 27th, 2005 at 2:07 pmyou guys are so illinformed it’s hilarious.
November 3rd, 2005 at 6:21 pmsorry for the typos…
November 3rd, 2005 at 6:59 pm1860
You are invited to check out the sites on 365
November 5th, 2005 at 2:45 pm230
You can also take a look at some helpful info dedicated to 1275
November 5th, 2005 at 11:14 pmmeridia reviews meridia review
February 3rd, 2007 at 7:46 amLilly
I could not believe the amount of quality material on this site. The site is extremely eyecatching and pulls the reader straight it, the articles are great quality and are very professionally written. I have seen too many of these sites where it looks…
March 20th, 2008 at 12:37 am