Newsweek: Rove was the leaker

[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 [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[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 [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] 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. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[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 [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ 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.