Karl Rove - Valerie Plame - Joseph Wilson - Exposing a CIA covert operative

[Ray]

Ray --- you can claim to want to wait until the investigation is complete (or like most in the Administration - hope that a bigger news story comes along) -- but you will notice that no one in the Adminstration is disputing the fact that Karl Rove passed information about 'Wilson's Wife' to Mr. Cooper. They are saying he learned it from someone else. Yet, he is still involved.

According to Fox news today Karl Rove was approached by the reporter; the reporter new the name of Wilson's wife and that she was a CIA agent. When a state secret is no longer secret, one can hardly be accused of leaking it. FoxNews is accused of right-leaning, and they may be; but if this comment originated at the White House, then it would be a disputation. On the other hand, did the White House confirm that Rove leaked the info?

If the investigation finds that Rove did something illegal, then he should be tried and sentanced.

 

[michaeledward]

:idunno:

http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/09/30/wilson.cia/

"If there's a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is," Bush told reporters at an impromptu news conference during a fund-raising stop in Chicago, Illinois. "If the person has violated law, that person will be taken care of.

​

Tom - keep buying that spin. Keep defending the indefensible. By the way, what is the definition of 'is'?

Ray - you are arguing that this leak is a good leak? It took the Administration close to a week to find some way to spin the story, and to find someone willing to leak it with their spin.

And just to review the timing, Mr. Rove spoke to Mr. Cooper before Mr. Novak released his column, which means before the secret wasn't secret any longer.

 

[Tgace]

Perhaps we should wait for the special prosecutors report to see if any laws have been broken? :idunno:

Before we "buy into" the partisan politics.

 

[michaeledward]

It is not about jail. It is not about a crime.

It is about the cover-up. It is about the integrity of the White House.

:idunno:

 

[Tgace]

Hmmm... seems like that was an issue a couple of administrations ago too.....hmmm.

The game of pointing fingers at each other over dirty politics continues. "He without sin..."

Partisan politics.

 

[michaeledward]

Hmmm... seems like that was an issue a couple of administrations ago too.....hmmm.

The game of pointing fingers at each other over dirty politics continues. "He without sin..."

Partisan politics.

But, this administration came to town pledging to be 'without sin' (restore honor and dignity - I think is how they put it).

 

[Ray]

Ray - you are arguing that this leak is a good leak? It took the Administration close to a week to find some way to spin the story, and to find someone willing to leak it with their spin.

In no way am I saying that this leak is a good leak. I'm saying: give the guy a trial before putting him in prison, that's my point.

The side note was a media report today that Rove didn't tell the reporter the name of the wife and what her job was; the reporter said it all in the conversation. Not that I believe that report any more [or any less] than the other reports that stated it the other way around.

 

[Ray]

But, this administration came to town pledging to be 'without sin' (restore honor and dignity - I think is how they put it).

I'd like to see/hear the original quote, in context. Where can I find it?


"If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us."

 

[ginshun]

"without sin" doesn't seem like a quote that would come form the president.

I personally don't think that Bush is any less crooked than Clinton. He's not as good at explaining himself and doublespeak though, that is for sure.

 

[michaeledward]

I'd like to see/hear the original quote, in context. Where can I find it?


"If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us."

Republican National Convention - August 3, 2000
Acceptance Speech - Governor George W. Bush. - excerpt

So many of us held our first child and saw a better self reflected in her eyes. And in that family love, many have found the sign and symbol of an even greater love, and have been touched by faith.

We discovered that who we are is more than important than what we have. And we know we must renew our values to restore our country.

This is the vision of America's founders. They never saw our nation's greatness in rising wealth or in advancing armies, but in small, unnumbered acts of caring and courage and self-denial. Their highest hope, as Robert Frost described it, was to occupy the land with character. And that, 13 generations later, is still our goal, to occupy the land with character.

In a responsibility era, each of us has important tasks, work that only we can do. Each of us is responsible to love and guide our children and to help a neighbor in need. Synagogues, churches and mosques are responsible, not only to worship, but to serve. Corporations are responsible to treat their workers fairly and to leave the air and waters clean.

And our nation's leaders our responsible to confront problems, not pass them onto others.

And to lead this nation to a responsibility era, that president himself must be responsible. So when I put my hand on the Bible, I will swear to not only uphold the laws of our land, I will swear to uphold the honor and dignity of the office to which I have been elected, so help me God.

​

 

[Tgace]

"I did not have sexual relations with that woman."



Partisan Politics.....

Easier to stick to things that can be proven, like the law. If he broke the law, even of he lied to investigators, than can him. This other crap is a witch hunt.

 

[sgtmac_46]

I'm amazed at the new found love for CIA operatives by the left. Before this, the CIA was another word for "SATAN" by leftists. Very interesting.

Seriously, though, rarely has so much been made of so little. Boiled down, Rove's statements amounted to stating that Joseph Wilson lied when he made the statement that his wife had nothing to do with his assignment in Niger.

According to columnist Robert Novac:

"
I was curious why a high-ranking official in President Bill Clinton's National Security Council (NSC) was given this assignment. Wilson had become a vocal opponent of President Bush's policies in Iraq after contributing to Al Gore in the last election cycle and John Kerry in this one. During a long conversation with a senior administration official, I asked why Wilson was assigned the mission to Niger. He said Wilson had been sent by the CIA's counterproliferation section at the suggestion of one of its employees, his wife." The whole thing has been best described as a "Tempest in a teapot". It's a political issue designed solely to damage the administration spread mostly by folks who could care less about CIA operatives.

Furthermore, it's no more an issue of national security than Bill Clinton's affair with Monica Lewinski. Both issues were invented by political hacks to divert attention from the real issues.

That's not to say an investigation shoudn't be conducted, and if someone broke the law, prosecuted. However, someone explain to me how this type of political opportunism is of any real issue to everyday American's.

As far as "leaks" are concerned, Washington has more leaks than the Titanic. Rare is the Congressman, on both sides, who hasn't leaked "sensitive" information for political gain.

 

[Tgace]

Until evidence comes out proving otherwise, thats how Im seeing it too. And the political dimension (without the "security" smoke screen) of this was alluded to way back when this story first broke.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20031005-120005-7859r.htm

The Democrats haven't been doing too well lately.
They're on the brink of losing the California governorship. The economy, their strongest issue against President Bush, appears to be recovering. And their sudden front-runner for the presidential nomination is a general who admired Nixon and Reagan — and appears in no hurry to register as a Democrat.

The Democrats' biggest problem during Mr. Bush's presidency has been an inability to gain lasting political traction for their issues, from the Bush tax cuts to the corporate accounting scandal to the war in Iraq and its aftermath.

But now Democratic officials and strategists say they finally have an issue with legs: the allegation that someone in the Bush administration tried to Bush administration tried to punish a political enemy by illegally disclosing that his wife is a CIA operative.

:shrug:

 

[sgtmac_46]

Until evidence comes out proving otherwise, thats how Im seeing it too. And the political dimension (without the "security" smoke screen) of this was alluded to way back when this story first broke.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20031005-120005-7859r.htm

:shrug:

I'd say the Democrats might want to bring their A game...but this IS apparently their A game. If the Democrats had anything better, they'd use it. I find it comforting that this is the biggest smoking gun they could come up with. If this is all they have, there must not be too much there TO have.

 

[DngrRuss]

Geez...
I'm jsut racking up the neg points...
So much for free speech and a little sarcasm...

 

[Ray]

Republican National Convention - August 3, 2000
Acceptance Speech - Governor George W. Bush. - excerpt

And to lead this nation to a responsibility era, that president himself must be responsible. So when I put my hand on the Bible, I will swear to not only uphold the laws of our land, I will swear to uphold the honor and dignity of the office to which I have been elected, so help me God.​

​

Actually I mean the quote that said the administration would be "without sin." I find that to be an interesting boast that one could be "without sin" - especially one who professes to be Christian.

Anyway...If Rove is guilty then let him pay the penalty. If he's not, then let's find something else to talk about. But let the investigation get finished, and not use the media reports to determine guilt. After all, if my opinion had been used in a number of instances then several "free people" would now be in jail and visa versa.

 

[michaeledward]

[/indent][/indent]Actually I mean the quote that said the administration would be "without sin." I find that to be an interesting boast that one could be "without sin" - especially one who professes to be Christian.

Anyway...If Rove is guilty then let him pay the penalty. If he's not, then let's find something else to talk about. But let the investigation get finished, and not use the media reports to determine guilt. After all, if my opinion had been used in a number of instances then several "free people" would now be in jail and visa versa.

Hey, I'm sorry I wasn't clear enough for you to follow along. Let me recap.

You see, Tgace made a reference to the New Testament.

The game of pointing fingers at each other over dirty politics continues. "He without sin..."

Then I picked up on that phrase ... you see, I am an athiest, who is pretty familiar with the Bible.

But, this administration came to town pledging to be 'without sin' (restore honor and dignity - I think is how they put it).

This time, I made the reference a bit more clear for you, right after the 'without sin' part, I explained, apparently not clearly enough, what was meant by the 'without sin' phrase. It's in the bold font.




I will repeat myself again. The noise (if that is how you want to describe it) has very little to do with criminal guilt or innocence. It is not about the criminal statute.

Yes, the investigation should continue. Yes, if Rove broke the law he should face trial, verdict and if appropriate punishment.

The issue is YOUR PRESIDENT LIED TO YOU. He said if anyone was involved, they would be taken care of.

Mr. Rove was involved. Confirming the facts with Mr. Novak, and attempting to steer Mr. Cooper away from a false story (these are the best Republican National Committee offerings on the undisputed activities) is involved.

Please, spin the definition of 'involved' in such a way that Karl Rove is free from it. The President's spokesperson has told us that he, personally, spoke with Karl Rove and Mr. Rove was not invovled.


I was betrayed by President Clinton, when he swore to America that he "did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinski". I was angry and upset when I learned I was lied to.

And so many here, are attempting to give Mr. Bush, Mr. McClellan and Mr. Rove a pass on a similar, if much more serious, matter.

It's not the crime - It's the cover up.

 

[sgtmac_46]

Hey, I'm sorry I wasn't clear enough for you to follow along. Let me recap.

You see, Tgace made a reference to the New Testament.

Then I picked up on that phrase ... you see, I am an athiest, who is pretty familiar with the Bible.


This time, I made the reference a bit more clear for you, right after the 'without sin' part, I explained, apparently not clearly enough, what was meant by the 'without sin' phrase. It's in the bold font.




I will repeat myself again. The noise (if that is how you want to describe it) has very little to do with criminal guilt or innocence. It is not about the criminal statute.

Yes, the investigation should continue. Yes, if Rove broke the law he should face trial, verdict and if appropriate punishment.

The issue is YOUR PRESIDENT LIED TO YOU. He said if anyone was involved, they would be taken care of.

Mr. Rove was involved. Confirming the facts with Mr. Novak, and attempting to steer Mr. Cooper away from a false story (these are the best Republican National Committee offerings on the undisputed activities) is involved.

Please, spin the definition of 'involved' in such a way that Karl Rove is free from it. The President's spokesperson has told us that he, personally, spoke with Karl Rove and Mr. Rove was not invovled.


I was betrayed by President Clinton, when he swore to America that he "did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinski". I was angry and upset when I learned I was lied to.

And so many here, are attempting to give Mr. Bush, Mr. McClellan and Mr. Rove a pass on a similar, if much more serious, matter.

It's not the crime - It's the cover up.

So, in short, it's about holding Bush to a higher standard because he's supposedly a christian and said he would return honor and dignity to the office? And here I thought this was just political opportunism.

 

[Tgace]

13. Did President Bush promise to fire anyone involved in the leak? (SOLID) No. As we have discussed ad nauseam here, the President said no such thing, but only that anyone who was found to have "violated the law" would be taken care of. Captain Ed has further slain the contention that Bush's remarks during the G8 questionaire were even directed to the firing question, and even if they were, his "pledge" to fire anyone involved still specifically was predicated on lawbreaking. Expect Reid and Wilson to studiously ignore this during their press conference this afternoon. It is true, however, that Scott McClellan did promise that the leaker would be fired, but it is also the perogative of the President to overrule or correct the statements of his press secretary, who has one of the most difficult jobs in the world.

Seems dependant on legality to me. If this is about "dirty politics" the last person out of DC please turn off the lights.

 

[michaeledward]

13. Did President Bush promise to fire anyone involved in the leak? (SOLID) No. As we have discussed ad nauseam here, the President said no such thing, but only that anyone who was found to have "violated the law" would be taken care of. Captain Ed has further slain the contention that Bush's remarks during the G8 questionaire were even directed to the firing question, and even if they were, his "pledge" to fire anyone involved still specifically was predicated on lawbreaking. Expect Reid and Wilson to studiously ignore this during their press conference this afternoon. It is true, however, that Scott McClellan did promise that the leaker would be fired, but it is also the perogative of the President to overrule or correct the statements of his press secretary, who has one of the most difficult jobs in the world

Seems dependant on legality to me. If this is about "dirty politics" the last person out of DC please turn off the lights.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/10/20031006-5.html#6

Q Scott, the President just expressed his desire to get to the bottom of this CIA leak issue. And he said he wanted to hold accountable whoever was responsible --

MR. McCLELLAN: Absolutely.

Q -- responsible for this. But can you confirm that the President would fire anyone on his staff found to have leaked classified information?

MR. McCLELLAN: I think I made that very clear last week. The topic came up, and I said that if anyone in this administration was responsible for the leaking of classified information, they would no longer work in this administration.

Hey, as long as words don't mean anything.