AP: On Rove's Behalf, WH Issued Denials, Which Have Now Fallen Apart

Article is a recapping of recent events in the Plame/Rove matter, but check out the AP headline!

http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGBRWILR1BE.html

On Rove's Behalf, the White House Issued Denials, Which Have Now Fallen Apart
By Pete Yost
Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) - The White House is suddenly facing damaging evidence that it misled the public by insisting for two years that presidential adviser Karl Rove wasn't involved in leaking the identity of a female CIA officer.

Rove told Time magazine reporter Matthew Cooper that the woman "apparently works" for the CIA and that she had authorized her husband's trip to Africa to assess allegations that Iraq was trying to obtain yellowcake uranium for nuclear weapons, according to a July 11, 2003, e-mail by Cooper obtained by Newsweek magazine.

The e-mail is now in the hands of federal prosecutors who are hunting down the leakers inside the Bush administration who revealed the name of Valerie Plame to the news media.

The revelation about Rove prompted Democratic calls for President Bush to follow through on his promise to fire leakers of Plame's identity, and triggered 61 questions during two press briefings for White House spokesman Scott McClellan.

It was McClellan who provided the previous assurances about no role for Rove, but he refused to repeat those assurances Monday.

MORE

to calling them what they are; liars!

A CBS report yesterday said that the whole incident may turn out to be nothing more than "an embarrassment" for the White House.

An embarrassment?!? Thank God nobody had sex ! We only have a serious breach of national security, no sex, so I guess it is only an embarrassment.

I think CBS displayed cowardice yet again, fearful of the traitorous gangsters in charge of the Nation. :mad:

... nothing more than "an embarrassment" for the White House.

Or, it may turn out to be recognized as the most astonishing combination of stupidity and incompetence ever seen in American foreign policy, driven by an "ideology" of insatiable greed and the unavoidable paranoia of the insatiably greedy.

But you're exactly right, thank God nobody had sex! That's what morality is all about. Says so, right there in the Bible.

One reads a lot on the web about 70 CIA operatives being killed because her identity was revealed. Is this true? If so, our lawmakers should be concerned about this?

that whether or not any CIA operatives got killed is itself classified information, or even more probably classified guesswork because who knows which of the agents killed in Saudi Arabia and Iraq were specifically targeted because of the leak?


(Possibly only a few Al Qua ida operatives.)


But what is clear is that a great many people have died, including many American soldiers because of the Administration's contempt for the opinion of anybody that disagrees with it, from army generals, to state department personnel, to intelligence personnel, to our erstwhile allies, to people such as Mr. Wilson who, when he saw the administration on the verge of making a mistake tried to stop it, and after the administration had gone ahead and made the mistake anyway, and then lied about it, exposed the lie.

If memory serves, many thought it was just a "second-rate burglary," a story that would blow over within a few weeks.

Oh what a tangled web we weave....

What I find so exquisite is that - back in the Watergate days, it was a charge like perjury that brought down some of the goons.

And how wonderful would it be to turn to some freeper you know who gives you shit about how Clinton LIED UNDER OATH!!!!!!! and you could turn around and say something like - "yeah, Clinton lied and NOBODY DIED. But rove lied and commited TREASON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Now take your stained blue dress and stuff it!" :evilgrin:

except it's hard to imagine Dick Cheney that thin.

And yes, it's hard to imagine dick that thin. But he'd sure get that way eating prison food, wouldn't he?

Frankly, I doubt he'd ever reach that well-deserved point. Way too slippery. But it WILL be nice to see him squirm.

And who knows? I mean, we all thought, at one point, that Nixon/Agnew were invulnerable, too.

Only in horizontal stripes an as a chain gang. Or maybe in Maricopa County Pink!
:evilgrin:

THEY LIE SO MUCH-THE LIES ARE NOW ALL PART OF MIXED BAG.

maybe trying to give the appearance of spine

...but I wouldn't be too encouraged by this. Even though Rove violating the IIPA makes for a bigger story than Watergate (lives are at stake and unverified sources have claimed that 90 operatives working under Plame have since been assassinated) you can't say that this story has caught fire. I'm 46 and I was around during Watergate and this is still a wet log trying to catch fire. I just don't see the MSM changing their entire mindset because of Karl Rove outing an agent, no more than they did with the revelation of the Downing St. minutes or the followup revelation that the Bush administration flew close to 22,000 missions and dropped 600 bombs on 391 Iraqi targets *before* the official start of the invasion, or... well, you get my drift.

JP
http://jurassicpork.blogspot.com

We knew about it in 1972 and he did not leave until much later. The Rove story is only now getting into the open. It will take at least another year before the repercussions become clear even though the outing occurred some time ago.

because everytime the ADMIN mouthpieces say anything-or their GOP ops--MORE ????? arise

Just enough time to hold the Midterm Elections, get a Democratic majority, and have President Pelosi!
:party: :bounce: :dem: :grouphug: :woohoo:

Cheers! Glad you're here!

Now get to work...

SWEET!!!


:toast:


:party:


:bounce:

They are actually getiing close!

Sadly, many people will tolerate all sort of obfuscation and deliberate misleading, but we can take heart in knowing that most people get mightily pissed off when lied to.

These assholes have been studious to not say outright lies, and the endless conflation of "terrorism" and "Saddam Hussein" is a classic example. They didn't say he had a hand in 9-11, but so thoroughly intimated it that people took that as the message. (What's really juicy is the video clip of Junior stating that "we never said Saddam Hussein had anything to do with 9-11.")

What they've done in all this equivocation, prevarication and assorted mendacity is to have actually told MANY lies. Letting them run for cover with "mistakes" and other excuses shouldn't be allowed to happen.

Here's how Junior lied about the Rove issue: he said that Rove had nothing to do with the Plame leak. To say such a thing is to flatly state that he knows for a fact his complete innocence, so when "newfound information" proves otherwise, that provides no cover; he's lied about his very certainty. He can't go back and say "oops, I misspoke", the only cover he can have is that he was a sucker and got duped; he's about as capable of that as he is of flying to Mars.

Here's why the 16 words statement was a lie: he claimed to have learned this from Britain. We didn't, and he knew it: we'd already discredited the evidence and we knew they were using the same evidence. There's no way to hide there, he deliberately lied and said that this came from the Brits.

There are more and more of them, and they shouldn't be allowed to escape from the odious word LIE. It's the breaking point for most people.

.
White House transcript of Monday 7/11/05 press conference:

"For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
Monday, July 11, 2005

"Press Briefing by Scott McClellan
James S. Brady Briefing Room

"1:06 P.M. EDT

. . . snip . . .

"MR. McCLELLAN: And with that, I will be glad to go to your questions. Terry.

"Q Does the President stand by his pledge to fire anyone involved in the leak of a name of a CIA operative?

"MR. McCLELLAN: Terry, I appreciate your question. I think your question is being asked relating to some reports that are in reference to an ongoing criminal investigation. The criminal investigation that you reference is something that continues at this point. And as I've previously stated, while that investigation is ongoing, the White House is not going to comment on it. The President directed the White House to cooperate fully with the investigation, and as part of cooperating fully with the investigation, we made a decision that we weren't going to comment on it while it is ongoing.

"Q Excuse me, but I wasn't actually talking about any investigation. But in June of 2004, the President said that he would fire anybody who was involved in this leak, to press of information. And I just want to know, is that still his position?

"MR. McCLELLAN: Yes, but this question is coming up in the context of this ongoing investigation, and that's why I said that our policy continues to be that we're not going to get into commenting on an ongoing criminal investigation from this podium. The prosecutors overseeing the investigation had expressed a preference to us that one way to help the investigation is not to be commenting on it from this podium. And so that's why we are not going to get into commenting on it while it is an ongoing investigation, or questions related to it.

"Q Scott, if I could -- if I could point out, contradictory to that statement, on September 29th, 2003, while the investigation was ongoing, you clearly commented on it. You were the first one who said, if anybody from the White House was involved, they would be fired. And then on June 10th of 2004, at Sea Island Plantation, in the midst of this investigation is when the President made his comment that, yes, he would fire anybody from the White House who was involved. So why have you commented on this during the process of the investigation in the past, but now you've suddenly drawn a curtain around it under the statement of, "We're not going to comment on an ongoing investigation"?

"MR. McCLELLAN: Again, John, I appreciate the question. I know you want to get to the bottom of this. No one wants to get to the bottom of it more than the President of the United States. And I think the way to be most helpful is to not get into commenting on it while it is an ongoing investigation. That's something that the people overseeing the investigation have expressed a preference that we follow. And that's why we're continuing to follow that approach and that policy.

"Now, I remember very well what was previously said. And at some point, I will be glad to talk about it, but not until after the investigation is complete.

"Q So could I just ask, when did you change your mind to say that it was okay to comment during the course of an investigation before, but now it's not?

"MR. McCLELLAN: Well, I think maybe you missed what I was saying in reference to Terry's question at the beginning. There came a point when the investigation got underway when those overseeing the investigation asked that it would be their -- or said that it would be their preference that we not get into discussing it while it is ongoing. I think that's the way to be most helpful to help them advance the investigation and get to the bottom of it.

"Q Scott, can I ask you this; did Karl Rove commit a crime?

"MR. McCLELLAN: Again, David, this is a question relating to an ongoing investigation, and you have my response related to the investigation. And I don't think you should read anything into it other than we're going to continue not to comment on it while it's ongoing.

"Q Do you stand by your statement from the fall of 2003 when you were asked specifically about Karl and Elliott Abrams and Scooter Libby, and you said, "I've gone to each of those gentlemen, and they have told me they are not involved in this" -- do you stand by that statement?

"MR. McCLELLAN: And if you will recall, I said that as part of helping the investigators move forward on the investigation we're not going to get into commenting on it. That was something I stated back near that time, as well.

"Q Scott, I mean, just -- I mean, this is ridiculous. The notion that you're going to stand before us after having commented with that level of detail and tell people watching this that somehow you decided not to talk. You've got a public record out there. Do you stand by your remarks from that podium, or not?

"MR. McCLELLAN: And again, David, I'm well aware, like you, of what was previously said, and I will be glad to talk about it at the appropriate time. The appropriate time is when the investigation --

"Q Why are you choosing when it's appropriate and when it's inappropriate?

"MR. McCLELLAN: If you'll let me finish --

"Q No, you're not finishing -- you're not saying anything. You stood at that podium and said that Karl Rove was not involved. And now we find out that he spoke out about Joseph Wilson's wife. So don't you owe the American public a fuller explanation? Was he involved, or was he not? Because, contrary to what you told the American people, he did, indeed, talk about his wife, didn't he?

"MR. McCLELLAN: David, there will be a time to talk about this, but now is not the time to talk about it.

"Q Do you think people will accept that, what you're saying today?"

. . . more at . . . http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/07/20050711-3.html#



It's been my personal observation that this White House "launders" its written transcripts somewhat, particularly when they are of George W. Bush. That being said, I strongly suggest that you engage the video with audio on this webpage -- watch it -- and read along with the transcript. That is, if you want to sit through a Scott McClellan dodge game with the White Housse press corp.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/07/20050711-3.html#




.

Watching that press conference yesterday, I felt so good that a little voice inside me said "tsk, tsk...you're being a BAD Democrat...BAD"! Then I got up, did a little jig, singing, "I'm bad, I'm baaaad"! (I've been waiting for a little karmic justice for Scottie for a long time.)

Watching THAT insufferable SOB do the shuck and jive would have been much more pleasurable, considering he would have laced his "answers" with plenty of spite, doing even more damage to the White House's official message.

Evil Kumquat

And BTW - Welcome to DU!

:toast:

He really stuck it to Scotty yesterday. Check out www.davidcorn.com ; he does great work.

Without Jimmy Jeff to lob softballs to "Beam me tha fug outta here" Scotty the White House press corp grew a few teeth yesturday. Maybe after a few more bullshit dodge sessions maybe they might grow a fang or two.

The only thing Scottie didn't do was break out in a torrential sweat and collapse on his forked tongue.

Rove/Bush really hung Scottie out to twist in the wind on this one.

Scottie or did Scottie lie and he never did talk to them!!!

Lying to the Press Secretary and then he goes out and perpetuates the Lies telling the public

and right now Bush is the biggest Liar
No WMD in Iraq
No firing of Rove
Downing Street Memo
Niger connection in his State of the Union address

oh they got some Big ones in there!!!

...last night. There were several parts where the video and the transcript didn't jibe. I think the guy who does these transcriptions is Winston Smith. Remember that press conference that Bush did inside the White House a couple of months ago during prime time? He concluded the press conference by telling the reporters, "Thank you for your interest," and the transcript read the next day, "Thank you for your questions."

Of course, that wasn't as egregious an omission as removing off the White House website the list of the Coalition of Willing and a video clip of Bush telling the American public that he "just (wasn't) that concerned about bin Laden."

JP
http://jurassicpork.blogspot.com

will be fun to watch.

Watch the spin now! 0' Boy

So, Karl. How does it feel to be the sacrificial goat?

I hope the press keeps it up! :evilgrin: It looks like they may be doing their job at last!

after buying into the WMD lies lock, stock, and barrel. It's about time they spoke the truth!!

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

How did Judith Miller get the information herself?

Someone with the knowledge and security clearance had to tell her, no?

Your link never says one word about how she would have that knowledge, I think your theory is a Little more than flawed.


If it were a glass it would not even hold water.

We still need to know who told Judith? That is the crux of the investigation. She is not privy to classified CIA info. Somebody on the inside had to fee this info to the press.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Why would Rove's attorney admit that he did it if he didn't do it?

I think that Rove was so smug in his seeming invincibility that he and his lawyer didn't have a chance to get on the same page. Of course, as is well known, Rove's using the lame "I didn't inhale" defense, saying, essentially, "My client didn't willingly divulge any state secrets to Matt Cooper, although he'd spoken to him regarding the identity of an agent. Oops."

Read this about Rover's lawyer. I got this off Daily Kos. It's priceless:
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2005_07_10.php#006045

JP
http://jurassicpork.blogspot.com

I find this hard to believe. Where did you get this tidbit of information? Do you understand how big DC is? Do you truly believe that "most people in DC knew this"?

the "most people knew this already" line that is. And then like the good little meme it is, it starts to circulate and even find its way into liberal discourse.

"Most people" STILL don't know who "Valerie Plame" is. If the question is "most political insiders," it's still bull that "most" of them knew a) who she was and b) that she was NOC for the agency. And if they did, they were supposed to keep it a secret. And violating that secret was breaking the law. Period.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

It's a right wing talking point and you are just spreading it. You have no evidence that even the "power brokers in DC" knew Plame was an undercover CIA operative. Knock off the right wing spin.

Awwwww....what's the matter bobby? Are you shy?

FSC

The fact he didnt NAME her has NOTHING to do with whether he IDENTIFIED her:

"Whoever, having or having had authorized access to classified
information that identifies a covert agent, intentionally discloses any
information identifying such covert agent to any individual not
authorized to receive classified information, knowing that the
information disclosed so identifies such covert agent"
http://foi.missouri.edu/bushinfopolicies/protection.html

Stop spreading rigth wing bullshit. Naming her or not is irrelevent - HE IDENTIFIED A COVERT AGENT. If he knew she was covert agent, then he broke the law, it's that simple.

You might want to up your post count a bit before you expect people to take such views seriously...Especially since the "most people in DC knew" line of reasoning is directly from Limbaugh's talking points...

No offense, just saying. :hi:

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

:rofl:

Why do you bother?

I heard the editor from the NY Post making last night on "Hardball." "Rove didn't know Plame was covert, but was correcting the 'lie' that Wilson told about being sent by VP Dickhead." And, Chris Matthews affirmed it by also saying that was a lie. And, that KKKarl was trying to tell the world that nothing he said should be believed...thus, Saddam WAS trying to buy Uranium from Niger, etc.

Only part is...Wilson didn't lie...the request for him to go to Niger DID come out of Cheney's office, at the SUGGESTION from a covert CIA operative named Valerie Plame.

KKKarl's whole defense is going to turn on this issue...who authorized his trip to Niger. I doubt Plame had the authority, on her own, to send him--it had to come from higher up---at those higher ups are named BUSH & CHENEY.

:eyes: Get the hell out of here with your BS!

The issue here is that "someone" told "someone else" WHAT his wife did for a living I.E. “an Agency operative on weapons of mass destruction.”

Just because people knew that the two(Wilson and Plame) were married is nothing...the fact that someone knew she was a covert agent for the CIA and TOLD someone who then wrote a news article with that information added is the issue.

I see where the AIM story is going but still one has to ask...Where did Miller get her information from in the first place? If it were "common knowledge" about Mrs Plames' position in the CIA then there is no "source" to cover for right?

This post is not an attack mind you, just questioning where the writer in the AIM story is going.

just one.

Will this new theory be promoted on the airwaves today? This takes just enough mental gymnastics that Rush may try to feed it to the dittoheads. Smells like dittohead material to me.

Julie

Well of course people knew that! As mentioned in another post, most people didn't know the covert agent part of her job.

I know many people who work for the CIA. What I don't know is whether they are under deep cover doing a job that isn't their "public personna".

I have to take your arguments with a grain of salt I'm afraid, bobby. I've heard those same points elsewhere.

And, by the way, welcome to DU. Just don't be offended if your defense of Rove is greeted with some scepticism.

I've heard those same points elsewhere.

Coughcoughcoughfreerepubliccoughcoughcough

I never said that.

;)

The feeling that I've heard this bull before. This describes what you're experiencing.

:toast:

When Rove outed Plame as working for the agency NOT merely the front company, he exposed the front company and its employees plus everyone who had done business with them overseas.

When Valerie met people at a cocktail party, and they said, "So, what do YOU do?" her answer was to give the name of the front company, NOT the CIA. Do I have that right?

So, by outing Plame, Rove destroyed not just Plame, but a carefully constructed CIA front company and ALL its carefully cultivated contacts?

Contacts which were used to identify WMD around the world for the protection of United States citizens???

I guess I did give the impression it was known she was CIA. I didn't mean to.

You're right, the knowledge that she was CIA was a danger to all her contacts and those associated with her at the front company.

Scientists believed to be involved with WMD programs and attempt to recruit them. Anyone seen having dinner with her at scientific conventions is probably in hot water back home. Or, you know, sleeping with the fishes.

I'd like to hear about just one and please source it. Thanks.

Welcome to Du, btw.

she never spoke to Fitzgerald's staff, so she can't be accused of lying to them. Also, it is not a crime for a civilian to tell someone that a person is an undercover operative, only for a federal employee. I have a good friend who may, or may not, work for a federal agency in an undercover capacity. I can legally tell you who he is, but he can't. I can give you his name, put it on a billboard in Times square, with no legal repurcussions, since I don't carry a security clearance, but my downstairs neighbor, who works for the White House in a secretarial capacity, can't. So Miller did not commit a crime if she told someone that Wilson's wife was an undercover operative, the law does not apply to her. Can you explain why she would go ot jail for 18 months when she commited no crime? She could simply have said, "look, I told Novak over coffee and donuts" and the legal case would be over.

Miller is in jail beause she withheld evidence from an investigation. Not because of anything she did, but because of what she did not do. She is not being charged with releasing any protected information, merely refusing to cooperate with the investigation.

Despite what some would have you think, this is not a privilege of the press. They are free to publish material, but they are not free to withhold it from investigations.

he/she was plainly saying that Miller was in jail because she was the leak. I was pointing out that, if that were the case that a: she committed no crime, and b: she could simply say to the prosecutor "yup, it was me" and walk away. obviously she didn't do that. Do you think the Times would be spending millions of dollars in her defense if she was the leaker (which, again, is not a federal crime)

I agree, the federal courts, including the Supreme Court, have ruled that she must either turn over the material or face a term for contempt. Therefore there is no federal protection. She chose jail. that's her choice.

interestingly, 45 states have laws on the books granting this right. I would argue that since a preponderance of States grant the protection, and my copy of the Bill of Rights specifically states that powers not enumerated, and rights not deliminated, are reserved for the States, that the federal government should grant this protection as well. As of now, it doesn't exist, so Miller's in Jail. But she's not there as the leaker.

TITLE 50 > CHAPTER 15 > SUBCHAPTER IV > § 421.
Protection of identities of certain United States undercover intelligence officers, agents, informants, and sources
<http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode50/usc_sec_50_00000421----000-.html>

QUOTE:

(c) Disclosure of information by persons in course of pattern of activities intended to identify and expose covert agents

"Whoever, in the course of a pattern of activities intended to identify and expose covert agents and with reason to believe that such activities would impair or impede the foreign intelligence activities of the United States, discloses any information that identifies an individual as a covert agent to any individual not authorized to receive classified information, knowing that the information disclosed so identifies such individual and that the United States is taking affirmative measures to conceal such individual’s classified intelligence relationship to the United States, shall be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than three years, or both."
===============================

After covering the intelligence world for 20+ years, Miller had to have known that efforts on her part to disclose any information that identified Plame as a covert agent was wrong.

Additionally, she had to have known that by doing so, she was going to impair or impede the foreign intelligence activities of the United States when Plame's global network was compromised.

She also had to have known that the information disclosed identified Plame as a covert agent, and that the United States had gone to great lengths over a period of 15-20 years to conceal Plame's classified intelligence relationship to the United States.

Miller should try to get used to prison life...she may have to stay there for a while.

miller doesn't, to the best of my knowledge, carry a clearance, therefore any information she possesses has already been disclosed the chinese wall has been breached. the crime is committed by the person who told her, not when she repeats the information.

oh yes, one more thing. If she had committed a crime, she could not be compelled to provide testimony to incriminate herself, she could simply plead the fifth before the Grand Jury. They can't send her to jail for that. so there's something else afoot.

Novack said in his piece that his sources (plural) were two highly placed administration officials.

although the assertion (made by so many RW sources) has never been proved. Wilson is just the messenger bringing the news that BushCo lies about Iraq. So we should kill the messenger?

...otherwise, your credibility is going to be VERY suspect.

The conspirators intention was to discredit Wilson and his information on the Niger yellow cake deal and get back at Wilson by publishing the fact that Wilson went to Niger because his wife who was a CIA person sent him there. Rove knew Wilson's wife was CIA and also knew or should have known that she was under cover and managed agents who were under cover.

Here is my screenplay scenario of it.

The White House (meaning Rove and his co-conspirators) was in trouble because the Niger yellow cake forgery story was about to wake up the public to the fact that the whole Iraq war was based on fraud. So Rove, et al. needed to stop the Niger story. Also, Cheney was being blamed for sending Wilson to Niger, and Rove and his co-conspirators wanted to "clear" Cheney's name.

The publication of Wilson's Niger article set off smoke alarms at the White House. Someone, possibly Rove and the president himself or Colin Powell or someone from Cheney's office or Rove's or Powell's or the president's office asked for background information about Wilson's trip to Niger from Tenet and the top brass at the CIA. The CIA sent someone to investigate who reported back pretty much what Rove told Cooper, something to the effect that this was just a rogue trip by Wilson, arranged by his wife and a third CIA person, and that Wilson had not gone at the request of Cheney or Tenet (which was what the investigator had been asked to find out).

Rove and his co-conspirators (or Rove on behalf of his co-conspirators) were told the results of the investigation. Rove knew full well that the information was top secret. He knew that neither Cheney nor Tenet had authorized the trip. He knew that the CIA was conducting top secret CIA activities with regard to tracing wmd transactions. He knew that the Niger trip was organized so that the person going would be someone not obviously associated with the CIA who would be trusted by the Africans. He knew that this was a mission that had been unobtrusively arranged, that it had not been organized or carried out by anyone directly associated with the CIA or arranged or taken with any ceremony or publicity. Rove carefully selected the journalists he most trusted and, when giving them the information, warned them to protect his identity. He knew he wasn't supposed to be sharing this information so he told them not even to ascribe the story to the White House.

Rove's base instincts just got the best of him. He is so used to being able to get by with lies and leaks and other crimes that outing a CIA agent was just business as usual. He did not stop to think about the damage his act would do to our ability to gather intelligence about all sorts of WMDs and other transactions around the world.

Did Rove and his co-conspirators intentionally out Plame? You bet. He intentionally told the press that she had arranged a CIA operation associated with identifying the actors in an illegal WMD transaction. Did Rove and his co-conspirators know or should they have known at the time they did it that Plame was a CIA undercover agent? You bet. It was pretty obvious from the facts they were disseminating and their general knoweledge about how the CIA operates and the work being done to control WMDs that the people who would have arranged the trip to Niger would have been the same ones arranging other under cover trips to other parts of the world to gather intelligence on WMDs. Did he think that Plamed was just a receptionist at the CIA -- or a file clerk? People at those low levels would not be recommending who should carry out a mission even if the mission itself was not top secret. Only people who generally were involved in arranging missions would do that sort of thing. After all, the guy who sweeps the flor at the White House does not decide the protocol at White House dinners. Neither does a lowly CIA employee decide who is sent to Africa to find out whether a WMD transaction took place. Rove had the intent to state that Wilson's wife was a CIA agent, and he knew or should have known, even if he didn't consciously think about it, he sure should have. He's the criminal. Miller may be a co-conspirator, but that makes them both guilty. It doesn't let one or the other off the hook. Of course, the details are just my best guess at the moment.

Unless Miller is a CIA employee, she is not the source for this story. Miller has to have found out about Plame and heard that Plame played a role in sending Wilson to Niger from someone within the CIA as Rove did. Someone higher than Plame's direct boss at the CIA was a co-conspirator, probably Tenet.

She doesn't work for the CIA as far as I know.

The white house is starting to get really HOT!!!

could you both know that Plame was an agent?

You trolls think we're all as dumb as you.

:-)

Yer fired! You may now go play tiddly winks with Gannon/Guckert.......

Left of Cool

The site claims to represent a grass-roots group opposing slanted media. But the links include "Conservative Columnists" & "Conservative Organizations."

Articles on the site indicate this is a valuable source for the latest Right Wing Talking Points. Thanks!

www.aim.org/index

Unless he testified that he communicated with cooper or miller then he committed perjury. that's pretty hardcore.

Gannon's web sites?

Which of the crack WH press corp is going to have the balls to ask the emperor himself why he hasn't fired anyone yet, like he said he'd do 2 years ago?

When is the next pretend press conference scheduled?

The White House is suddenly facing damaging evidence

Ha ha ha. They've been piling up damaging evidence on the Rose Garden lawn for almost 6 years, high enough for an Alabama yard sale. And the media just starts to notice, so now it's "suddenly" . . . .

Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

Read last few paragraphs -- no questioning of the smear. Rove and Luskin given free reign. . .

Smear still being pushed. . . .WHO KNOWS PETE YOST AP REPORTED AND CAN CALL HIM AND EDUMUCATE HIM??????

three times on TV yesterday and not one person refuted it. Some witch on Hardball said it and of course Tweety was well into his next question and let it ride.

and after all, it was her fucking job to investigate nuclear weapons proliferation, so what if she authorised it?

:popcorn:

feeling a little empathy for the other side,
don't you guys think dumb-boy (bush) and other admin officials feel REALLY betrayed and pissed off?

that is of course if their previous statements of anger 2 years ago are true,
or maybe they are really angry that their political advisor is telling them to cover Karl Rove's ass?

oh wait, same person

and wake up with fleas.

Karma is a bitch and it has Bush and his cronies' number.

a maternal fornicator.

:patriot:

Empathy? For TREASON?

They're mad alright - mad that their intimidation and threats no longer work!

Mad at being outed and no let up in sight.

The Court Jester -- what a perfect analogy!

So the clueless king = Bush, and Basil Rathbone = Rove.

The "irony" of it!!!!

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Rove doing the perp walk. I love it. It'll drive the idiot freeper lurkers bananas.

:rofl:

I'd like to see Dick Chain-ey, too!

Seriously though, folks....
Miller was the Go-to gal for Bushco's invasion of the "liberal" NYT; she printed whatever they told her, but knew she had to keep "Plame" out, so she gave it to Cooper. But her source was Rove. Now, of course, she as much as has said she fears for her life if she talks.
They know where she lives.
Mrs. E. Howard Hunt, anyone? Dita Beard?

whether or not he gave her actual name to the reporter. After all the name of Wilson's wife was a matter of public record. Guilty by admission of treason? Yes, if he knew her identity was classified and he knowingly identified her. The second part is true - the first part needs to be decided. And the elephant in the room is, did George Bush know Rove was going to out Plame? What did the president know and when did he know it?

During their 1-minute speaches this morning, a few Democratic Senators are laying down the foundation to future Senate floor debate on the Plame outing by Rove.

This may not be much, but its something.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

say you need to cut that article down to four paragraphs. And a link would be nice.

You're the first to say it!
What did the president know and when did he know it?

I want to know if Rove got his information from Bush (and did Bush jr. get it from Bush sr?) or was it the Office of Special Plans?

The four- to five-person intelligence team was established by Douglas J. Feith, the under secretary of defense for policy and another strong advocate for military action against Mr. Hussein. It was formed not long after the Sept. 11 attacks to take on special assignments in the global war on terror.

The team's specialty is using powerful computers and new software to scan and sort documents and reports from the Central Intelligence Agency, the Defense Intelligence Agency and other intelligence agencies.

The team's current task, described by one official as "data mining," is to glean individual details that may collectively point to Iraq's wider connections to terrorism, but which may have been obscured by formal assessments that play down the overall Iraqi threat.

In an interview tonight, Mr. Wolfowitz said the members of the special intelligence team "are helping us sift through enormous amounts of incredibly valuable data that our many intelligence resources have vacuumed up." He emphasized, "They are not making independent intelligence assessments."

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/10/24/international/24INTE.html?ex=1120795200&en=6640eb7350890f7f&ei=5070

And I am getting happier.

FSC

concerning deep throat's revelation, thats why all of them have decided to grow some balls and start using their college education in journalism for something. :spank:

Haven't heard the press connecting the dots yet...
It's so simple, the memo's reveals that the administration "fixes the
intelligence around the policy", to make the case for war in Iraq based on WMD's, Wilson upsets the WMD myth and thus the case for war in Iraq. Rove reveals Plume's name in order to continue the case for war!
I mean really! do WE have to spell it out for them?!!!!

This is my first post. So I am saying hi. Its great to see the MSM finally wake up and start hounding Scottie. I was discouraged by the coverage on the cable shows last night. I thought Countdown did ok, but did Hardball cover it? I know Fox really didnt

Glad to have you with us. :hi:

:toast:

allow them to remove the rovemeister from the right hand of bush the almighty. We need to have this slime ball front and center for the next year and a half to re-enforce the notion that these guys are truly among the sleaziest humans that we've ever allowed into public office. This may be a dead horse, as one of the earlier posters noted, but it still stinks and the more we wave the smell in the direction of the MSM and the 'swing voters' the better our chances that they'll have had enough of the whole sorry lot in time for '06.

I say keep it up scotty...keep it up karl...keep it up geedubya...and rummy...and dicky...and condi...and the rest...cause the more you open your mouths the better the chances that you'll take the whole repig cabal down with you.

Rove is NOT a elected official. He should be indicted and let a jury decide his fate. After all it is the American way.

BTW: Rove needs to lose his security clearances ASAP.

Inside Washington hasn't been in touch with the REALITY of this country FOR MANY, MANY YEARS.

We cannot CODDLE half ASS Democratic Pols anymore, if we want our country and party to SUCCEED

Didn't he have something to do with the "scoop" of outing her? If so, wouldn't all this news be good for bringing Gannongate back?

Googling:

http://democraticwhip.house.gov/media/press.cfm?pressReleaseID=1021

Hoyer Statement on "Jeff Gannon" Connection to Valerie Plame Leak
WASHINGTON DC – House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer released the following statement regarding revelations that a man who went by the name of “Jeff Gannon,” and who was given White House media credentials despite his lack of qualifications, was given access to classified documents which disclosed the identity of Undercover CIA Operative Valerie Plame:

“Valid questions are being raised regarding the Bush White House’s relationship with James Guckert, also known as “Jeff Gannon,” and his access to documents that revealed the identity of Undercover CIA Operative Valerie Plame


also http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/2/9/191334/0754
http://americablog.blogspot.com/2005/02/what-was-gannons-role-in-valerie-plame.html

and misdemeanors re: DSM.

Gannon/guckert link is too beautiful.

By PETE YOST, Associated Press Writer
11 minutes ago



WASHINGTON - The White House is suddenly facing damaging evidence that it misled the public by insisting for two years that presidential adviser Karl Rove wasn't involved in leaking the identity of a female CIA officer.

Rove told Time magazine reporter Matthew Cooper that the woman "apparently works" for the CIA and that she had authorized her husband's trip to Africa to assess allegations that Iraq was trying to obtain yellowcake uranium for nuclear weapons, according to a July 11, 2003, e-mail by Cooper obtained by Newsweek magazine.

The e-mail is now in the hands of federal prosecutors who are hunting down the leakers inside the Bush administration who revealed the name of Valerie Plame to the news media.

The revelation about Rove prompted Democratic calls for President Bush to follow through on his promise to fire leakers of Plame's identity, and triggered 61 questions during two press briefings for White House spokesman Scott McClellan.

more:http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050712/ap_on_go_pr_wh/cia_leak_investigation_12

The trickle is beginning to gain water.

who has been protecting Rove from the start of this thing? Was Bu$h involved in the leak? Is that why he's protecting the leaker because he is one of them? This is getting good. Pass the :popcorn:

Not once did Rove leak her name as a CIA agent. ALL he said was "Wilson's Wife" was a CIA agent :rant:

But thats like saying "I wont tell you her name but her initials are Valerie Plame".

Here's a tidbit from Law Professor and LA Times Columnist, Rosa Brooks:
"Without access to the other information held by the prosecutor, it's impossible to say whether a jury would be likely to actually convict Rove of violating the Intelligence Identities Protection Act. But assuming the substantive accuracy of the leaked email, Special Counsel Fitzgerald appears to have a strong prima facia case for seeking an indictment against Rove. ... The fact that Rove claims neither to have known nor used Valerie Plame's name is irrelevant, as is the fact that Rove claims never to have asked Cooper to publish the information."
I hope that more of this stuff surfaces; scum usually does. I have never heard of an American administration with less regard for the rule of law and which has committed more bald-faced felonies. Bushco is our national disgrace. How long, oh Lord, how long?

:dem:
powwowdancer out

"I did not have sexual relations with that woman." I love Clinton, but that one has been their trump card for a while now.

It's always the coverup.

Obstruction charges are what I expect Fitzgerald will be filing. That and perjury.

And reduce the charges to obstruction and perjury if he "sings".

Rhetorically, it's treason, but the bar for what is rhetorically treason was lowered considerably by the Right during the Clinton presidency. Legally, it does not rise to the level of treason

...we have to make damn sure Rove, and all those associated with his crime in the White House are convicted of treason in the court of public opinion!

Chapter and verse from the U.S. Code:

CHAPTER 115--TREASON, SEDITION, AND SUBVERSIVE ACTIVITIES

Sec. 2381. Treason

Whoever, (that'd be KKKarl) owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, (it is quite arguable that blowing a C.I.A. operative's ID would definitely aid "the enemy," this is where Shrub's "vague" definition of "the enemy" could bite him in the ass), is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, (YOWZA!) or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

The only sticking point that I can see is intent. Does the prosecution have to prove that he intended to aid the enemy, or is this an "ignorance of the law is no excuse" kinda thing? If the latter, Rove's flaccid, blubbery man-titties are firmly wedged in THE RINGER!

CHAPTER 115--TREASON, SEDITION, AND SUBVERSIVE ACTIVITIES

Sec. 2382. Misprision of treason

Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States and having knowledge of the commission of any treason against them, (arguably le shrub hisself!) conceals and does not, as soon as may be, disclose and make known the same (what if it IS the president?) to the President or to some judge of the United States, or to the governor or to some judge or justice of a particular State, is guilty of misprision of treason and shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than seven years, or both.

Or am I just giddy with the smell of BushCo blood in the water? Must... Have... Answers...

:dem:
powwowdancer out

I do believe it is treason, but what the hey.

Bush, Inc and the rest of their ilk get away with it daily. Now just why did we impeach Clinton? Oh, yeah, right, he lied to the public about a bj.

It's good to be 'round like minds, and it's cheaper than therapy. (I've got the "Blue State Blues"). :banghead: Also, as an addendum to observations regarding the Clinton pudendum conundrum; he was impeached for the same reason that Bush can commit multiple felonies with depraved impunity... A legislative branch generously peopled with treacherous Rethug hacks and ward-heelers with zero shame and obscenely deep pockets. :grr: Personally, I'd like to see Ken Starr slapped in the dock and vigorously wrung out in order to pay back some of that WAD o' money he wasted. You may not be able to get blood from a turnip, but you can sure as hell sell the tubers and the greens!! Three words that could be a lifeline to our beleaguered democracy? MID TERM ELECTIONS! Selah.

:dem:
powwowdancer out.

w/o Question . . . why is AP accepting Rove and Luskin's version?

and in the article I read from the NY Post it said Rove talked to Cooper about correcting him that it was Plame who authorized the niger trip Not Cheney!!!!!!

its interesting how the news media is going around that

could it be that the Niger Statement was made in President Bush's statement in the State of the Union???

it seems to me that he went on Tim Russert's show only to talk about how he DIDN'T send Wilson to Niger. Like he was desperate to get that message out.

But I thought that Cheney sending Wilson was mentioned in the SOTU. i'm still trying to find a reference. anyone got a link?

If Rove did give Cooper the out to testify about what he was told, is he setting himself up to take the drop for someone else?

Could he be protecting Cheney, or even the Kennebunkport Cowboy himself?

Cooper's email about the "Spoke to Rove on double super secret (I added emphasis) background..." if he wasn't revealing anything of importance? Why all the double, super and secret stuff if it was so innocuous? I want a reporter to ask Snotty Scotty why Rove was speaking at all with a reporter with assurance his name wouldn't be revealed.

and the maliciousness is there!!!

it would make me think it was unreliable bullshit if it can't be attributed.

double super secret? that means double super LIE to anyone serious about writing political news.

confidentiality agreement. The Times had already handed over the emails, so the story was coming out. Now if on top of all that, Rove had hidden behind Cooper's agreement and forced Cooper to serve jail time it would make Karl Christian look even worse. Since the memos were out, it was better for Karl Christian's PR to let Cooper off the hook. It just shows that Cooper probably doesn't know anything more than is in the memos - or, Karl Christian thinks Cooper doesn't know anything more...

But once the Feds get done chewing up Cooper there will be a lot more questions. We're really in just the first stages here. I can't believe that Rove and the worried men around him don't know that.

Cooper has verified for the first time that something indeed was revealed. That will only whet the appetite of those investigating this debacle for more.

opens up more worm cans. But I can't think of any viable reason why Rove would waive his privilege, unless he thought that would be the lesser of two evils - which means he doesn't think Cooper has much more to give beyond the content of the memos. I guess we'll just have to wait and see... :shrug:

His lawyer carelessly blabbed something to the WSJ that allowed Cooper's lawyer to treat it as a release.

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com

Here is what Marshall has to say about it:

. . . But as the article makes clear, there really was no sudden personal communication from Rove, at least not as I understood it to have occurred in the initial reports.

What seems to have happened is that Luskin availed himself of the opportunity to talk tough and categorically to the Journal at his client's apparent expense. The key of course is the second to last graf that I've excerpted, in which the Times author says Luskin was 'surprised' at what Cooper and his attorney read into his statement to the Journal. He had meant it only as a blanket restatement of their position to date.

Presumably, once Cooper and his attorney took this interpretation with the judge, there was no turning back for Luskin. What could he say?. . .

Special Prosecutor to get to the bottom of this issue". That is implying that Bush can't do it himself. That is implying that Bush doesn't already know the truth. But he does now. Rove's lawyer and the released emails both say that Rove was involved in leaking the Plame information. So that means that Rove lied to Bush, right? That means that Bush's Assistant Chief of Staff lied to him and disobeyed a direct order to cooperate fully with the SP. So why does Bush have to wait until the investigation "gets to the bottom" of things? He already knows that Rove lied to him and willfully disobeyed a direct order - why wait to take action on those things?

was promoting a story on the hearsay of a Top Official who was out to get Wilson

Can we say Cooper is an accessory to a crime!!!

what's up with her? why isn't she "off the hook?" is she deeper in the mix? does she have a connection to Cheney and not Rove?

cut Judith Miller loose as well? i'm thinking that her imprisonment might be protecting HER source which might not be Rove.

maybe it's Cheney, is what i'm thinking.

there's still a lot of speculation that scooter (cheney's man, as much as karl is georgie's man) is novak's 2nd source and judith's primary. As much as i love seeing rove squirm, don't forget that the WHOLE admin is squirming to.

Here's the link from my thread yesterday, which died a swift and terrible death. It explains exactly how and why Cooper decided to testify, and it was NOT a "direct" waiver from Rove. Fascinating stuff...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=1618315&mesg_id=1618315

It doesn't really matter. It's a "cluster event".

:hi:

Cooper. Matt Cooper.
Licensed to print.

Oh, and welcome to DU. :hi:

You make me want to see the movie again!

Colossal jackass failure*

what the meaning of is is. But Snotty Scotty flat out lied.

Because of democracy, everyone gets fair chance to: hide any facts, obtain the best legal defense, pour on the stupid "news"to the media, ask god for another natural catastrophe, or just plain, get on the hip boots, 'cause it's going to get very deep for the next couple of years! After that "what the hell"!
Might mention too, that if Gannon could be found, he might be willing to goat for another million or two! After all that is his "advertised employment"!

Treason
Misprision of Treason
Conspiracy to Commit Treason

I do so like the sound of these things...................

i didn't think it would -- but i am actually floored at how much coverage there is.

someone started a thread last nite regarding the WH press corps fileting of McClellen yesterday -- that the reason for the new attitude of blood sport is because they no longer fear retribution from turdface.

methinks there's going to be lots of payback. imagine all the reporters who were threatened by Rove -- they've been cut loose. let the games begin.

President Bush, at an Oval Office photo opportunity Tuesday, was asked directly whether he would fire Rove — in keeping with a pledge in June, 2004, to dismiss any leakers in the case. The president did not respond.

For the second day, White House press secretary Scott McClellan refused to answer questions about Rove.

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050712/ap_on_go_pr_wh/cia_leak_investigation_16

I don't remember where I read it this a.m., but it was suggeted this goes extremely deep. My hope is that Fitz will be a pitbull until it is all out in the open. When this begins to unravel we can really enjoy the show. My question is whether it was bush or cheney that okayed the leak?

in the logs from the trip to africa where everyone was on the plane and supposedly powell would have handed over the folder on plame.

Let's see.......

Bush will say....."but he's my bestist fwiend in the ho wide wurl"



or....."he had no idea this twaz ilweegal"

That quote is TOO SMALL, with too many words UNQUOTED for me.

They want this story to DIE. And, if Rove is unindictable, it might -- as a ROVE story.

But, this is promising, just not iron clad yet.

As in the spy movies they will probably pull the judge and the electricity. No one can see 'it' happen if there is no power. They won't prosecute if there is no judge! i.e. I wonder to what lengths they will go to hide this case?

that someone would think perhaps Wilson had two or more wives... Ah, I see, what are their names??? Which one was the CIA agent?

Pathetic. GAWD!

TWIG

shows what kind of a universe we live in.

Has anyone considered, knowing how politically shrewd the evil bastard is, that Rove set this all up in advance?

Knowing somehow that he will really be vindicated when it turns out he DIDN'T leak the info. That way he can further harden the stigma of a 'Liberal Media'.

Point well taken but DUers have pretty much agreed to refrain from such a label on this incredible POS.

Welcome to DU!

:hi:

...pretty fucking brilliant if you ask me. You're forgetting that the evidence is already in. Only question left is who told Rove.

:toast:

:puke:

Excerpt from phone conversation 11 July, 2003


MC: Hello?
KR: Yo, Coop, whatsup man.
MC: Huh, oh, Rove? Fuck, why are you waking me up dude? It's like 10 on a Sunday. I just got in bed, you asshole!
KR: Chill out man! I've got some gossip you are gonna love. You know that prick who keeps saying W was lying about the Afro-Uranium? Well, it turns out it was his wife, a goddamned super-spy, who sent him over there in the first place!
MC: A chick super spy? Is she hot?
KR: Not to me! I mean, uhm, she looks like a prude. You know how I like 'em.
MC: Sure, Karl. Did you make it to Rumsfield's Saturday? I heard they were making hunch punch with Everclear..


As can clearly be determined from this excerpt, Karl Rove never mentions Valerie Plame by name and is thus innocent of everything except for being a closet queen.

:toast: