Newsweek: Rove was the leaker

[fluxrad]

Article here (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8525978/site/newsweek/).

From the article:

Cooper wrote that Rove offered him a "big warning" not to "get too far out on Wilson." Rove told Cooper that Wilson's trip had not been authorized by "DCIA"—CIA Director George Tenet—or Vice President Dick Cheney. Rather, "it was, KR said, wilson's wife, who apparently works at the agency on wmd [weapons of mass destruction] issues who authorized the trip." Wilson's wife is Plame, then an undercover agent working as an analyst in the CIA's Directorate of Operations counterproliferation division. (Cooper later included the essence of what Rove told him in an online story.)

This email was sent two days before Robert Novak broke the story.

[[censored]]

[ QUOTE ]
Article here (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8525978/site/newsweek/).

From the article:

Cooper wrote that Rove offered him a "big warning" not to "get too far out on Wilson." Rove told Cooper that Wilson's trip had not been authorized by "DCIA"—CIA Director George Tenet—or Vice President Dick Cheney. Rather, "it was, KR said, wilson's wife, who apparently works at the agency on wmd [weapons of mass destruction] issues who authorized the trip." Wilson's wife is Plame, then an undercover agent working as an analyst in the CIA's Directorate of Operations counterproliferation division. (Cooper later included the essence of what Rove told him in an online story.)

This email was sent two days before Robert Novak broke the story.

[/ QUOTE ]


If true, Rove has to go. He most likely has a pretty good legal defense here but the white house already made this a big deal (by agreeing to a special prosecuter and through the president's statements) so they should follow through.

Rove already served his purpose, this is just a bump in the road.

[Colonel Kataffy]

[ QUOTE ]

Rove already served his purpose, this is just a bump in the road.


[/ QUOTE ]

You greatly underestimate Rove's role in the current administration.

[partygirluk]

If they ever find out who leaked the story, will that individual(s) face criminal charges?

[Broken Glass Can]

[ QUOTE ]
If they ever find out who leaked the story, will that individual(s) face criminal charges?

[/ QUOTE ]

Unless Rove leaked it to Novak, there is no problem, since it was Novak that informed the world. Rove had no reason to warn Novak off boostering Wilson (the husband) because Novak isn't a liberal dedicated to boostering administration opponents (unlike the TIME and NYT reporters).

Rove has said he never mentioned her name to the TIME reporter, so this is a tenuous link at most.

The Story in summary (http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20050710/pl_afp/usjusticemediarove_050710203623)

[Colonel Kataffy]

[ QUOTE ]
Unless Rove leaked it to Novak, there is no problem, since it was Novak that informed the world.

[/ QUOTE ]

So basically what your saying is that as long as Rove says "promise not to tell anyone" he can tell classified information to anyone he wants.


Please, tell me that the names of our covert operatives aren't protected with the same method of security that a 12 year old girl keeps on the name of the boy she has a crush on.

[ptmusic]

[ QUOTE ]

Unless Rove leaked it to Novak, there is no problem, since it was Novak that informed the world.

[/ QUOTE ]

No problem for who? I think this is a big problem for Rove, and no problem for Novak.

-ptmusic

[[censored]]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Unless Rove leaked it to Novak, there is no problem, since it was Novak that informed the world.

[/ QUOTE ]

No problem for who? I think this is a big problem for Rove, and no problem for Novak.

-ptmusic

[/ QUOTE ]

Ya I think ptmusic has this right.

[fluxrad]

[ QUOTE ]
If true, Rove has to go to prison.

[/ QUOTE ]

FYP.

[[censored]]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If true, Rove has to go to prison.

[/ QUOTE ]

FYP.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you look at the standard for a criminal conviction it it very high and I doubt this will happen.

But really I don't care, I care about The President and The Party. They must be protected and to that Rove would have to go.

[[censored]]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Rove already served his purpose, this is just a bump in the road.


[/ QUOTE ]

You greatly underestimate Rove's role in the current administration.

[/ QUOTE ]

No I understand how the administration works and how politics work. I am not some liberal wack job who focuses too much energy on just one person not wanting to admit that they were getting beat before Karl Rove and will continue to get beat long after Karl Rove.

Of course these same wack jobs put too much emphasis on guys like Newt Gengrich and Rush Limbaugh. Anything to avoid aknowledging their failed ideology.

These days they focus on Tom Delay, Karl Rove and Fox news.

[Exsubmariner]

[ QUOTE ]
The e-mail characterizing the conversation continues: "not only the genesis of the trip is flawed an[d] suspect but so is the report. he [Rove] implied strongly there's still plenty to implicate iraqi interest in acquiring uranium fro[m] Niger ... "

Story continues below ↓
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
advertisement

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nothing in the Cooper e-mail suggests that Rove used Plame's name or knew she was a covert operative . Nonetheless, it is significant that Rove was speaking to Cooper before Novak's column appeared; in other words, before Plame's identity had been published. Fitzgerald has been looking for evidence that Rove spoke to other reporters as well. "Karl Rove has shared with Fitzgerald all the information he has about any potentially relevant contacts he has had with any reporters, including Matt Cooper," Luskin told NEWSWEEK.

A source close to Rove, who declined to be identified because he did not wish to run afoul of the prosecutor or government investigators, added that there was "absolutely no inconsistency" between Cooper's e-mail and what Rove has testified to during his three grand-jury appearances in the case. "A fair reading of the e-mail makes clear that the information conveyed was not part of an organized effort to disclose Plame's identity, but was an effort to discourage Time from publishing things that turned out to be false," the source said, referring to claims in circulation at the time that Cheney and high-level CIA officials arranged for Wilson's trip to Africa.



[/ QUOTE ]
Karl has nothing to worry about. Once again, we see the truth twisted/omitted by the seminar democratic lefty operatives who work this board to undermine the President of the United States.
X

[AngryCola]

[ QUOTE ]
work this board to undermine the President of the United States.

[/ QUOTE ]


Hahahahahahahahaha!

Ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooohhhhhhhhhhhh...


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

-End logical argument-

[whiskeytown]

Rove said that someone's wife is a CIA operative -

BUT he didn't use her name.... - just said he was the ambassador's wife - so TECHINCALLY, he didn't name her - sorry - but the prosecution ain't gonna see it that way..

what a [censored] lawyer - LOL - stick a fork in Rove - he's done - (thank god) till he becomes a political advisor behind the scenes in the next election.

RB

[fluxrad]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Nothing in the Cooper e-mail suggests that Rove used Plame's name or knew she was a covert operative...

[/ QUOTE ]


Karl has nothing to worry about. Once again, we see the truth twisted/omitted by the seminar democratic lefty operatives who work this board to undermine the President of the United States.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're right. He just said Wilson's Wife. But since he didn't actually say her name everything's copacetic.

Do you happen to know what the definition of the word "is" is, by chance?

[Exsubmariner]

I thought the definition was whatever Bill Clinton needed it to be to get out of getting caught in a lie....

[Victor]

plausable deniability.

[Broken Glass Can]

From the Washington Post. Why Rove has nothing to worry about:

"White House Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove spoke with at least one reporter about Valerie Plame's role at the CIA before she was identified as a covert agent in a newspaper column two years ago, but Rove's lawyer said yesterday that his client did not identify her by name.

To be considered a violation of the law, a disclosure by a government official must have been deliberate, the person doing it must have known that the CIA officer was a covert agent, and he or she must have known that the government was actively concealing the covert agent's identity.

Rove's conversation with Cooper could be significant because it indicates a White House official was discussing Plame prior to her being publicly named and could lead to evidence of how Novak learned her name.

"Rove did not mention her name to Cooper," Luskin said. "This was not an effort to encourage Time to disclose her identity. What he was doing was discouraging Time from perpetuating some statements that had been made publicly and weren't true."

By Josh White
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, July 11, 2005; Page A01

[fluxrad]

BGC, are you daft?

He didn't mention her name. He said, as was stated in the Newsweek article, it was "Wilson's wife" when talking about the ambassador.

Out of curiosity, how many people do you think that might have narrowed the field down to? Is the ambassador mormon? Does the ambassador have a second family living somewhere that we don't know about? Seriously. I'm honestly asking you: Which of Wilson's wives do you think Rove was talking about?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Rove already served his purpose, this is just a bump in the road.


[/ QUOTE ]

You greatly underestimate Rove's role in the current administration.

[/ QUOTE ]

No I understand how the administration works and how politics work. I am not some liberal wack job who focuses too much energy on just one person not wanting to admit that they were getting beat before Karl Rove and will continue to get beat long after Karl Rove.

Of course these same wack jobs put too much emphasis on guys like Newt Gengrich and Rush Limbaugh. Anything to avoid aknowledging their failed ideology.

These days they focus on Tom Delay, Karl Rove and Fox news.

[/ QUOTE ]

And "conservative wack jobs" have been after Bill and Hillary Clinton for more than decade. What's your point.

[etgryphon]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Unless Rove leaked it to Novak, there is no problem, since it was Novak that informed the world.

[/ QUOTE ]

No problem for who? I think this is a big problem for Rove, and no problem for Novak.

-ptmusic

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly. Novak is not at fault in the eyes of the law. Morally, it is deplorable. Rove is in big trouble because of this. If he did it out of spite, then burn baby burn. I hope he goes to jail.

But, it is a hard burden of proof for the proscutor to prove. They have to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that Rove MEANT to aid and aibet the enemy or conciously tell classified information. Without direct information from Rove himself this is going to hard to prove.

Especially if he never used Plume's name. If all the information from Rove is one-sided from the reporters, then it will be very hard to prove this. Rove basically has to admit to leaking the information in a damaging way.

And there is two chances of that: No Way and No How.

I have zero tolerance for classified leaks.

-Gryph

[etgryphon]

[ QUOTE ]
BGC, are you daft?

He didn't mention her name. He said, as was stated in the Newsweek article, it was "Wilson's wife" when talking about the ambassador.

Out of curiosity, how many people do you think that might have narrowed the field down to? Is the ambassador mormon? Does the ambassador have a second family living somewhere that we don't know about? Seriously. I'm honestly asking you: Which of Wilson's wives do you think Rove was talking about?

[/ QUOTE ]

It sucks doesn't it? But in the eyes of the law, he'll probably walk away from this. They only thing that we can hope if it is true is that he resigns because of the uproar.

Need to get rid of the appearance of evil.

-Gryph

[Broken Glass Can]

I knew this guy Wilson was scum. He and his wife had their pictures taken for Vanity Fair magazine. Good way to stay out of the limelight. /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

I didn't know he had multiple wives. Thanks for telling me about his moral depravity. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[ptmusic]

From AP:

"For two years, the White House has insisted that presidential adviser Karl Rove had nothing to do with the leak of a CIA officer's identity. And President Bush said the leaker would be fired."

Either Rove is fired AND the White House admits it was wrong about Rove, or this is going to be one of the great about face spins in history.

-ptmusic

[zipo]

>>Either Rove is fired AND the White House admits it was wrong about Rove, or this is going to be one of the great about face spins in history.<<

Given the abysmal track record of this administration, I'll lay 8:1 on the latter.

[[censored]]

[ QUOTE ]
From AP:

"For two years, the White House has insisted that presidential adviser Karl Rove had nothing to do with the leak of a CIA officer's identity. And President Bush said the leaker would be fired."

Either Rove is fired AND the White House admits it was wrong about Rove, or this is going to be one of the great about face spins in history.

-ptmusic

[/ QUOTE ]

ok I like President Bush alot but I cannot possibly see how anyone can disagree with pt here.

this is an open and shut case for me and I like Karl Rove.

[fluxrad]

[ QUOTE ]
I knew this guy Wilson was scum. He and his wife had their pictures taken for Vanity Fair magazine. Good way to stay out of the limelight. /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

I didn't know he had multiple wives. Thanks for telling me about his moral depravity. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Way to dodge the issue, buttercup.

[touchfaith]

Most corrupt White House in history.

Fake reporters, lie to justify a war, leaking a CIA operatives name...

What will they get caught at next?

What a joke the chimp is.

[BCPVP]

If Rove is charged with anything, it will be under this law:

Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982
(a) Disclosure of information by persons having or having had access to
classified information that identifies covert agent

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 and that the
United States is taking affirmative measures to conceal such covert
agent's intelligence relationship to the United States, shall be fined
not more than $50,000 or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

(b) Disclosure of information by persons who learn identity of covert
agents as result of having access to classified information

Whoever, as a result of having authorized access to classified
information, learns the identify of a covert agent and 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 and that
the United States is taking affirmative measures to conceal such covert
agent's intelligence relationship to the United States, shall be fined
not more than $25,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

(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 not more
than $15,000 or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

And to get to that step, it needs to be shown that Plame qualified as a covert agent; which requires this:
(A) a present or retired officer or employee of an intelligence agency or a present or retired member of the Armed Forces assigned to duty with an intelligence agency—
(i) whose identity as such an officer, employee, or member is classified information, and
(ii) who is serving outside the United States or has within the last five years served outside the United States; or
(B) a United States citizen whose intelligence relationship to the United States is classified information, and—
(i) who resides and acts outside the United States as an agent of, or informant or source of operational assistance to, an intelligence agency, or
(ii) who is at the time of the disclosure acting as an agent of, or informant to, the foreign counterintelligence or foreign counterterrorism components of the Federal Bureau of Investigation; or
(C) an individual, other than a United States citizen, whose past or present intelligence relationship to the United States is classified information and who is a present or former agent of, or a present or former informant or source of operational assistance to, an intelligence agency.


So we need to determine if Plame has served outside the U.S. within the last 5 years of the leak. If so, then we need to determine if Rove knew that a) Plame was a covert agent or b) Rove found out she was a covert agent through access to classified information (important because hearing it in the men's room doesn't count) or c) Rove outed Plame in a pattern of activites intended to out her (which this would not be since the leak wasn't part of a pattern). Sounds a little tough to prove.


As a side note, I wonder if anyone knows of a few plausible explanations as to why Plame may have been outed...?

On an even further side note, I've heard that many in the media already knew Plame was CIA. Is this true?

[Cyrus]

cons of this page would indignantly dismiss vile Dems' "allegations" about Karl Rove's Machiavelian politics and ruthless lack of scruples with one-phrase posts (suchasthis'un!) but I now all too gladly see that the tune has changed and we are seeing feverishly put together posts of 100 words-or-more, which is a damn good sight for sore eyes, I tell ya!

BCPVP gets into the mud pit ! (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Number=2847433&page=124&view =expanded&sb=6&o=&fpart=)

[tolbiny]

"this is going to be one of the great about face spins in history."

I doubt it - they don't seem to be doing much spinning on issues like this. They will ignore it as much as possible - say what a great man Rove is and talk about how long he has "served" his country whenever it comes up - and deny an reporters who ask such questions access.

[Jedi Flopper]

[ QUOTE ]
From AP:

"For two years, the White House has insisted that presidential adviser Karl Rove had nothing to do with the leak of a CIA officer's identity. And President Bush said the leaker would be fired."

Either Rove is fired AND the White House admits it was wrong about Rove, or this is going to be one of the great about face spins in history.

-ptmusic

[/ QUOTE ]

"I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky" You AKs just ran into bullets /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Felix_Nietsche]

Put this on your bulliton board and free to taunt me if I'm wrong. Karl Rove gets cleared.

Facts:
*Karl Rove was the source for Matt Cooper at Time Magazine
*Karl Rove voluntarily released Matt Cooper from protecting him as an anomonous source.
*The subject of the email that Karl Rove sent to Matt Cooper was Joseph Wilson. The former ambassador sent to Niger to investigate the "yellow cake" uranium intelligence. The purpose of the email was to discredit Joseph Wilson who was (1) Bad mouthing Bush (2) Overstating his role in the "yello cake" uranium story. Rove wanted to expose Wilson as a liar and therefore gave Matt Cooper the story.
*Judith Miller of the NY Times claims her source gave her a waiver to testify but she refuses to do so despite this alledged waiver.
*Judith Miller's source is ***NOT*** Karl Rove.
*It was Robert Novak, who revealed Valerie Plames's name.

Unconfirmed Rumors:
*In Karl Rove's email he did did not reveal Wilson's wife name.
*Judith Miller's source was another reporter. LOL /images/graemlins/smile.gif She is too embarassed to reveal this fact which would discredit her and the New York Times.

This is a non story. Karl Rove walks away without a scratch and the liberal kooks will be left fuming.... The real story is Judith Miller's source who she is too embarassed to reveal. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[ptmusic]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
From AP:

"For two years, the White House has insisted that presidential adviser Karl Rove had nothing to do with the leak of a CIA officer's identity. And President Bush said the leaker would be fired."

Either Rove is fired AND the White House admits it was wrong about Rove, or this is going to be one of the great about face spins in history.

-ptmusic

[/ QUOTE ]

"I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky" You AKs just ran into bullets /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

What followed that certainly ranks up there as one of the great about face spins also. With Rovegate (I haven't heard that yet, just anticipating it), if Bush does not fire Rove AFTER SWEARING THAT HE WOULD FIRE ANY PERSON IN HIS ADMINISTRATION WHO TURNED OUT TO BE THE LEAK, then we have another great about face spins.

I'm not sure which of the two will end up being the rockets, btw; probably Monicagate.

-ptmusic

[ptmusic]

I agree that Rove will likely get "cleared" one way or another. The real question is will he get fired, and how much credibility with the public is the White House willing to lose in order to protect him?

The answer: probably a whole lot. This adminstration has a history of NOT holding people accountable (e.g. the bad prewar intelligence: who got canned over that? The former CIA head got a big award, though....).

-ptmusic

[[censored]]

I'm 95% certain that my I am going to turn out to be right now.

The White House is starting to look absolutely ridiculous now.

[fluxrad]

Felix. You didn't even address the fact that Rove leaked Plame to Cooper. This isn't in dispute. The only part in question is whether he said "Wilson's wife" or "Plame."

Of course, I'm sure you wouldn't let semantics get in the way of firing the man who leaked the name of a CIA operative, would you?

Would you?

I mean...it's one thing to say Rove will be cleared (as I agree he probably will be, as unfortunate as that is). It's another thing to have the gaul to say he should be cleared.

Personally, I love this story. It truly shows who's an honest-to-god Conservative (I'm looking at you [censored]) vs. those of you who would get on your knees to suck Bush's cock if he asked you to.

[[censored]]

[ QUOTE ]
Felix. You didn't even address the fact that Rove leaked Plame to Cooper. This isn't in dispute. The only part in question is whether he said "Wilson's wife" or "Plame."

Of course, I'm sure you wouldn't let semantics get in the way of firing the man who leaked the name of a CIA operative, would you?

Would you?

I mean...it's one thing to say Rove will be cleared (as I agree he probably will be, as unfortunate as that is). It's another thing to have the gaul to say he should be cleared.

Personally, I love this story. It truly shows who's an honest-to-god Conservative (I'm looking at you [censored]) vs. those of you who would get on your knees to suck Bush's cock if he asked you to.

[/ QUOTE ]

To be clear I am not saying that Rove should be punished under the law because I do not have enough facts to make the determination nor do I understand the actual law.

but IMO there is another issue and that is the one of principle. President Bush said "the person responsible for the leak will be fired" He did not say "we will determine if the information leaked constitutes a criminal act and if so then this person would be fired" if he had I may feel differently. Clearly then if Rove was the leak, which doesn't really seem to be in dispute anymore, he has to be fired. Let's not forget this wasn't johnny assistant to whogivesafuck saying the person responsible would be fired it was The President of The United States a position that I myself look to as something of value and worthy of respect.

Additionally there is the issue of honesty. When the story first came out The White House through statements, made it clear that Karl Rove was not involved period. well clearly that isn't the case. The goal here should not be to see if words can be parsed into a way where the deception can be explained away or to hope that everyone will forget. The goal should be preserve the intergrity of The President, The White House and The Party.

I was absolutely appalled by the disgraceful sham of a press conference that occurred today and yesterday. It was sikening to watch. There is absolutely no excuse for that.

that is my case for principle but there is also some political considerations. Karl Rove regardless of how intelligent and how great a political strategist he is, is still just one man. He is not more important than The President, he is not more important than The Party and he is certainly not more important then the conservative principles and ideals we are working towards. As long as he remains all that will be ignored and weakened.

Listen I am not some RINO. I am as solidly behind this administration as any reasonable person. I am also a fan of Karl Rove. He did some great work and accomplished some wonderful things. But Karl Rove should resign or be asked to.

[Broken Glass Can]

[censored], I think you are wrong on several points here.

First, all Presidents are against leaking and will come out strongly against it in an attempt to reduce them. W has done a good job with that. But you don't cut off your nose to spite your face. What Bush says to Rove in private, we do not know, but to demand that he do what we want him to do, and to do it in public, is not our place. It is W's decision on what to do about leaks in his administration.

Second, as far as the White House Press Office. They are there to share what the President wants to say. If the President wants to remain quiet, that is his right. The press can ask all the questions they want, but there is no obligation that these questions be answered. Leaks are an internal matter for the President, it is up to him how much his White House will say on the topic. If the press repeats the same question over and over, it is to their discredit for not gathering information on all issues out there, but rather creating spin by their question selection.

Thirdly, there is a long history of attacks on this administration by the press and by Democrats. W is wise to not cave in to their demands all the time. Honestly, a truly neutral press would look at the law and not be in attack mode. They would just ask "Do these leaks concern you?" and that would be all. We are not in a vacuum here. Good judges are being smeared, Tom DeLay was smeared, Bush's policies in many areas have been smeared. W knows the score, and he can do and say what he wants in light of this unfair treatment of his administration.

True fairness means that we let W take care of internal administration problems and not swallow his attackers' spin as the gospel truth (I'm not suggesting that you are doing this, btw).

Let's not let the press theatrics drive this story. Let's look just at the facts. Like you, I want the integrity of the White House to be upheld. The best way to do that is for W to do what he honestly thinks is best, not to cave to pressure against his good judgement, and to do whatever he does in public or private as he thinks appropriate.

[slamdunkpro]

A couple of facts being glossed over (or outright omitted) by the press.

Aldrich Ames admitted revealing Plame to the Russians in 93. She was recalled at that time for her safety. At this point her covert career was all but over.

She was working in an overt job at the CIA for the last 9 years . She was most recently posted in a management position (overt) at CIA headquarters.

Therefore – Rove revealed nothing classified or did nothing to expose a “covert agent”.

Still if the President is true to his word Rove should go.

[MoreWineII]

Of course he'll be cleared. He's still a piece of [censored] though.

[[censored]]

interesting post.

a note -- my belief that Rove should resign as nothing to do with anything liberals or democrates are saying. I could care less. I only feel this way based on my own judgement. I hate that democrates are going to derive pleasure from it.

[[censored]]

Yes.

Does it matter?

Not really.

[BCPVP]

[ QUOTE ]
Aldrich Ames admitted revealing Plame to the Russians in 93. She was recalled at that time for her safety. At this point her covert career was all but over.

She was working in an overt job at the CIA for the last 9 years . She was most recently posted in a management position (overt) at CIA headquarters.

[/ QUOTE ]
If this is true, then Rove did not break the law. Plame would have had to have served outside the U.S. within the last 5 years to qualify as a covert agent.

Whether Rove should be fired, I don't know. It's not like he still couldn't give Bush advice on political stuff if fired even if he didn't have the official title.

[[censored]]

[ QUOTE ]


Whether Rove should be fired, I don't know. It's not like he still couldn't give Bush advice on political stuff if fired even if he didn't have the official title.

[/ QUOTE ]

precisely.

[Malachii]

If the positions were reversed, the Republicans would be pressing their advantage equally hard. Actually, they would probably be pressing harder, since they seem to have a much more organized and well funded political flak machine.

[Mike Gallo]

If they ever find out who leaked the story, will that individual(s) face criminal charges?

The individual would face the same fate as American pop idol Michael Jackson.

[Mike Gallo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If true, Rove has to go to prison.

[/ QUOTE ]

FYP.

[/ QUOTE ]

People said the same thing about Michael Jackson.

[US Conservative]

nm

[Chris Alger]

[ QUOTE ]
First, all Presidents are against leaking and will come out strongly against it in an attempt to reduce them.

[/ QUOTE ]
You'd have to know absolutely nothing about politics to believe this. All Presidents encourage, condone and participate in leaking information. You think that Bush gets upset every time he reads (or has read to him) any of the daily stories that quote "White House officials" describing the progress of the war and other information based on classified reports?

[ QUOTE ]
[The White House Press Office] are there to share what the President wants to say. If the President wants to remain quiet, that is his right. The press can ask all the questions they want, but there is no obligation that these questions be answered.

[/ QUOTE ]
A public servant should be free to refuse meaningful communication with those for whom he is supposed to work? This is valid only in despotic governments, and indeed only to those who sympathize with such systems. Your candor is a good example of how Republicans are increasingly uncloseting their latent fascism.

[ QUOTE ]
Honestly, a truly neutral press would look at the law and not be in attack mode. They would just ask "Do these leaks concern you?" and that would be all.

[/ QUOTE ]
The notion of the press in an "attack mode" is of course delusional. The interesting point you make is that the press should condone apparent law breaking involving national security -- as defined by those who invoke it most often -- unless it palpably "concerns" the rest of us. As shown by the U.S.'s subversion of the UN Charter, torture proscriptions and other legislation, "rule of law" by the Republicons is just another slogan they use to screw people.

[Chris Alger]

[ QUOTE ]
It was Robert Novak, who revealed Valerie Plames's name.
Unconfirmed Rumors:
*In Karl Rove's email he did did not reveal Wilson's wife name.

[/ QUOTE ]
I wonder if you got this identification-but-not-by-name business from the dumb guy press (like Hannity). Nothing in the statute at issue requires identification by name. The wording was obviously designed to prevent culprits like Rove from using this lame, obvious loophole.

But of course Rove likely gets away with it. After all, most of Republicons aren't even aware that Bush's Dad pardoned a half-dozen or so White House criminals.

[BCPVP]

Question to Chris Alger: how can Rove be cleared of anything if he's not the target of the investigation?

Second, are you aware that Rove has told the grand jury that it was Novak who told him that Plame worked at the CIA? So Rove has not committed any crime and instead has shed light on a habitual liar.

[jokerswild]

You are a good example. You hate America and will do anything to destroy it.

[SheetWise]

Joe Wilson started this ball rolling when he came out publicly stating he had been sent to Niger by the Vice President (false). He then claimed he had written a report (false), that the VP had reviewed the (non-existent) report (false), and that his report had conclusively determined the President lied (again, false). We can get that timeline and conclusion even from the 911 Commission.

Joe Wilson took every opportunity to tell these lies, and the press willingly obliged him. Was there a way to correct the record without mentioning Wilsons wife, and the incestuous nature of the trip? Did Wilson expect that he could make his claims because it would be illegal to mention the truth about his wife? I don't know. What is clear is that when Rove was questioned about Wilsons claims, he told the reporter not to go out on a limb with the Wilson story, and that he had heard it was his wife who sent him. That is hardly enough information to 'out' a deep cover operative, and it was by his own notes given to him as 'background' -- that he should consider the information when deciding how much credibility to give Wilson. Besides, there is no information that Plame was working covertly, had cover, or ever tried to hide what she was doing.

[SheetWise]

[ QUOTE ]
Judith Miller's source was another reporter. LOL She is too embarassed to reveal this fact which would discredit her and the New York Times.


[/ QUOTE ]
That is the real story here.