Jump to content


Getting an "Insecure Connection" warning for Exisle? No worry

Details in this thread

Rove: "I've Already Said Too Much"

Top News Valerie Plame Rove Grand Jury testimony Matthew Cooper Time Magazine 2005

  • Please log in to reply
158 replies to this topic

#1 Caretaker

Caretaker
  • Islander
  • 1,741 posts

Posted 17 July 2005 - 02:58 PM

http://www.time.com/...1083878,00.html

Quote

New York – In his 2 1/2 hour testimony last Wednesday before the grand jury investigating the CIA leak case, TIME White House correspondent Matthew Cooper testified that when he called White House political advisor Karl Rove the week of July 6, 2003, Rove did not reveal Joe Wilson’s wife’s name and did not reveal her covert status to Cooper. But he did say that Wilson’s wife works at the “Agency on WMD.” This was the first time Cooper had ever heard of Wilson’s wife.

Cooper writes in this week’s issue that he testified that, although it’s not reflected in his notes or subsequent emails, he had a distinct memory of Rove ending the call by saying, “I’ve already said too much.” Cooper writes this could have meant he was worried about being indiscreet or just late for a meeting or something else. “I don’t know, but that sign-off has been in my memory for two years,” Cooper writes.

I'm not sure what this all means, but I'm sure will hear the pundits discussing it and spinning it this week.

#2 Hibblette

Hibblette
  • Islander
  • 4,228 posts

Posted 17 July 2005 - 04:21 PM

It looks like, according to this article, that they will take the he didn't reveal how covert she was.  Well...he did confirm she was with the agency and that she was working on the WMD's-at that time that would have been pretty covert.

He should have told him nothing.

He did say too much.  :unsure:

Edited by Hibblette, 17 July 2005 - 04:22 PM.

"There are many ways of going forward, but there is only one way of standing still."  FDR explaining why Liberals are so often divided and Conservatives are so often united.

"I am not a member of any organized political party. I am a Democrat."  Will Rogers

#3 emsparks

emsparks
  • Forever Missed
  • 2,426 posts

Posted 17 July 2005 - 04:35 PM

Caretaker, on Jul 17 2005, 03:58 PM, said:

...
I'm not sure what this all means, but I'm sure will hear the pundits discussing it and spinning it this week.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


In the world of security clearances it means a great deal.

There is a rule that can lose you your security clearance; it could also lose you, your freedom. It is explicitly spelt out. It goes something like this. “If in the newspaper you read about a project that you know is secret, and you are asked about it, under no circumstances are you to comment on the project.” You are not to confirm any reports of secret information, no matter who asks you for that conformation. Mr. Rove in his saying that he said too much, is apparently aware that the information he was commenting on was both secret and he might be breaking the espionage act by giving it out.

I think that given the appellate court judge’s comments concerning his decision to force the reporters to divulge their sources, the special prosecutor is looking to prosecute the original leaker with a violation of the espionage act. Which is a far more serious charge then that of leaking the name of a CIA agent, which on to itself is bad enough.

Most people here, and the media in general don’t have any idea how big this can potentially get. The leaker whom-so-ever may not have broken the law about releasing the name of a CIA operator, but they may have broken a whole host of other more serious laws. AND this testimony is very close to being a smoking gun…

In the world of national security, a whole different set of rules apply, civilian law only partially applies.

In civilian and military law there is one of a number of guiding rules which is:

“Ignorance of the law is no defense.”

Edited by emsparks, 17 July 2005 - 06:22 PM.

Sparky::

Think!
Question Authority, Authoritatively.

#4 Hibblette

Hibblette
  • Islander
  • 4,228 posts

Posted 17 July 2005 - 04:54 PM

^Yep Sparky that is exactly the truth.

Now the reporter might not have known that WMD's and the Agency would be covert-but in my knowledge of this-Mr. Rove should have known that was a covert issue.  Good grief.  It's what we were going into Iraq for.

And my question is that why was she brought up-Cooper says that was the first he heard of her.  So he didn't call to confirm a story about her.  I guess to confirm the story about Wilson over in Niger?  

This is...extremely high voltage actually.

And Rove should have said - no comment.
"There are many ways of going forward, but there is only one way of standing still."  FDR explaining why Liberals are so often divided and Conservatives are so often united.

"I am not a member of any organized political party. I am a Democrat."  Will Rogers

#5 Delvo

Delvo
  • Islander
  • 9,273 posts

Posted 18 July 2005 - 12:33 PM

Hibblette, on Jul 17 2005, 04:54 PM, said:

my question is that why was she brought up-Cooper says that was the first he heard of her.  So he didn't call to confirm a story about her.  I guess to confirm the story about Wilson over in Niger?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It was being said that Wilson had been sent to Niger by Cheney or someone else in the Administration. Since that was not true, Rove was trying to clear up the fact that they did not in fact send Wilson themselves; his wife (whose identity was so secret that Wilson and she had already spilled it themselves in public interviews and on his website's bio) had pushed for him to be sent. How did she have any ability to push for such a thing? Because of where she worked.

#6 MuseZack

MuseZack

    132nd S.O.C.

  • Demigod
  • 5,432 posts

Posted 18 July 2005 - 12:59 PM

Delvo, on Jul 18 2005, 05:33 PM, said:

Hibblette, on Jul 17 2005, 04:54 PM, said:

my question is that why was she brought up-Cooper says that was the first he heard of her.  So he didn't call to confirm a story about her.  I guess to confirm the story about Wilson over in Niger?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It was being said that Wilson had been sent to Niger by Cheney or someone else in the Administration. Since that was not true, Rove was trying to clear up the fact that they did not in fact send Wilson themselves; his wife (whose identity was so secret that Wilson and she had already spilled it themselves in public interviews and on his website's bio) had pushed for him to be sent. How did she have any ability to push for such a thing? Because of where she worked.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


A few bullet points of clarity:

•Wilson never said Cheney sent him to Niger.  He said that the CIA told him that the VP's office had concerns about the Uranium from Africa story, and so the CIA was sending him (along with at least two other people) to Africa to check the story out-- a job for which Wilson, as a retired diplomat with extensive experience in Francophone Africa as well as Iraq, was ideally suited.
•The issue was never the existence of Wilson's wife (he was supposed to keep her in a closet or something?) but the fact that she worked for the CIA while pretending to work for a (front company) energy consulting firm.
•Valerie Plame/Wilson had no authority to send him on a fun-filled unpaid trip to the choice vacation spot of...um, Niger.  (No offense to any Nigeriens on the board, but I never have understood why an unpaid trip to a poverty-stricken, malarial, landlocked desert of a country was supposed to be such a plum prize, anyway.)
"Some day, after we have mastered the wind, the waves, the tides, and gravity,
We shall harness for God the energies of Love.
Then, for the second time in the history of the world,
we will have discovered fire."
--Father Pierre Teilhard de Chardin

#7 Eskaminzim

Eskaminzim

    Head eggs and butt toast

  • Islander
  • 559 posts

Posted 18 July 2005 - 01:04 PM

Delvo, *who* was saying such a thing, and *when* were they saying it?  The closest thing I've seen is Wilson stating that there was some interest in yellowcake from someone in the Vice President's office or on the Vice President's staff and that someone decided it was a good thing to look into--which it most definitely was.  

Someone in the office or the staff is not the same as the Vice President himself, and Wilson even admits this...that he doubts Cheney even knew him, or what was happening at the time.

Sounds like someone in Cheney's office got a wild hair to investigate the allegations of yellowcake down in Niger and then asked around who might be a good person for the job, and Wilson got picked through a recommendation from his wife.

So *who* was saying it was definitely coming from Cheney?

And if one says "well, the office/Cheney, same thing, he needs to fry", then I would ask, then, why "Wilson's wife/Valerie Plame...NOT the same thing, the man's innocent!" is all very cool?  (And you probably won't say that at all...just throwing it in for anyone else who might have an answer to that one).

And *when* were these allegations made?  Before or after the article?  Cause the timeline to me seems very suspect.  How could Rove stop something from happening that was NOT going to happen at all?  It seems to me that he's tailoring his story to fit what went on after the fact, but then again, that could just be me.

I've never heard Wilson state that Chaney sent him anywhere OR was even aware of the trip until AFTER the article came out.  WELL after.  So who was saying such things that Rove felt he needed to spill states secrets to defend the administration against?

If you could tell me, complete with dates of those statements, I'd sure appreciate it, because right now, I'm like, totally confused.

Thanks!

#8 Nonprofit

Nonprofit
  • Islander
  • 2,163 posts

Posted 18 July 2005 - 01:35 PM

It was Wilson who decided to punish Rove, making the false claim that Rove outed his wife as a covert CIA operative when, in fact, she's just a CIA employee, which is common knowledge.  But  Rove is not the target.....Don't be fooled its Bush they are going after.


http://www.cnn.com/2...ford/index.html

Quote

(CNN) -- The 1982 Intelligence Identities Protection Act is the federal statute that apparently is at the heart of the investigation by a special prosecutor into who in the government leaked the identity of a covert CIA operative to a newspaper columnist two years ago.

The law makes it a crime to knowingly disclose the identity of an agent and specifies penalties of a fine amounting to as much as $25,000 or up to five years in prison, or both.

CNN anchor Kyra Phillips talked Thursday with Bruce Sanford, a Washington-based First Amendment attorney who helped draft the law.

PHILLIPS: Well, aside from maybe partisan politics, looking strictly at the law that you drafted, do you see any evidence, according to this law, any evidence of any criminal wrongdoing?

SANFORD: No, I think it's pretty clear that what Karl Rove said to Time magazine's Matthew Cooper doesn't even come close to the kind of knowing violation that is required by the act. Really, the act really requires an intent to harm national security, and that certainly can't be said in these circumstances, I think.

SANFORD: That's pretty clear from the notes, the e-mails that Time magazine released to the grand jury that [White House political adviser] Karl Rove said that [former Ambassador Joseph] Wilson's wife -- he didn't even use her name -- but Wilson's wife "apparently works" at the CIA.

It seems to me there's a substantial question whether she qualifies as the kind of covert agent that was envisioned by the act. There are very tight requirements for that.

And there is a substantial doubt whether the agency was taking the kind of affirmative measures to conceal her identity that the act talks about.

PHILLIPS: So, Bruce, how would you define a covert agent?

SANFORD: I think a covert agent under the act has to be someone who has deep cover, who is working abroad. Not just traveling abroad, but is stationed and working abroad sometime within the last five years.

And USA Today reported that Joe Wilson's book has even made -- if you do the timeline, the Wilsons were married in 1998. There's some question whether she was even abroad during the last five years.

She really had a desk job at [CIA headquarters in] Langley [Virginia] and was driving in and out of the CIA every day. That's not exactly deep cover.

PHILLIPS: Well, breaking the law or partisan politics, do you think Valerie Plame [Wilson's wife] is now damaged goods?

SANFORD: Well, ... it is worth remembering that when Robert Novak, the columnist, disclosed her identity in his column, he had called the CIA to tell them he was going to do that, and they didn't stop him.

They did not do what the CIA normally does in that situation if they want to protect or continue to protect somebody's identity. ...

They didn't call his syndicate. They didn't scream at him, say you're going to endanger her life or [en]danger her career, that sort of thing. They just sort of shrugged and said, "Well, I guess she won't be getting any more overseas assignments."

I don't think that's the kind of affirmative measures that the agency needs to be taking in order to invoke the statute.

This about says it all. There was no crime,  no law was broken according to a man who helped draft that law.


http://www.washtimes...21257-9887r.htm
  

Quote

A former CIA covert agent who supervised Mrs. Plame early in her career yesterday took issue with her identification as an "undercover agent," saying that she worked for more than five years at the agency's headquarters in Langley and that most of her neighbors and friends knew that she was a CIA employee.
    "She made no bones about the fact that she was an agency employee and her husband was a diplomat," Fred Rustmann, a covert agent from 1966 to 1990, told The Washington Times.

"Her neighbors knew this, her friends knew this, his friends knew this. A lot of blame could be put on to central cover staff and the agency because they weren't minding the store here. ... The agency never changed her cover status."
    Mr. Rustmann, who spent 20 of his 24 years in the agency under "nonofficial cover" -- also known as a NOC, the same status as the wife of Mr. Wilson -- also said that she worked under extremely light cover.
    In addition, Mrs. Plame hadn't been out as an NOC since 1997, when she returned from her last assignment, married Mr. Wilson and had twins, USA Today reported yesterday.

The distinction matters because a law that forbids disclosing the name of undercover CIA operatives applies to agents that had been on overseas assignment "within the last five years."    

"She was home for such a long time, she went to work every day at Langley, she was in an analytical type job, she was married to a high-profile diplomat with two kids," Mr. Rustmann said. "Most people who knew Valerie and her husband, I think, would have thought that she was an overt CIA employee."

So once again, where is the crime, when no law was broken.  It has to be proven Karl Rove intentionally gave up a covert agent with the knowledge that she was deep undercover. And this is very important -- the CIA had to be taking the affirmative measures to keep her identity secret. The CIA did not do that, they (CIA) took no measures to protect that identity. They gave her a desk job in Langley. You don't really have somebody deep undercover going back and forth to Langley daily, where people can see them, now do you?


This article is also from TIME back from Oct. 27, 2003
http://www.time.com/...,524486,00.html

Quote

"The Unmasking of Valerie Plame Sheds Light on the Shadowy World of NOCs," a Spy with Nonofficial Cover is an NOC.

Plame worked as a spy internationally in more than one role. Fred Rustmann, a former CIA official who put in 24 years as a spymaster and was Plame's boss for a few years, says Plame worked under official cover in Europe in the early 1990s — say, as a U.S. embassy attache — before switching to nonofficial cover a few years later. Mostly Plame posed as a business analyst or a student in what Rustmann describes as a "nice European city." Plame was never a so-called deep-cover NOC, he said, meaning the agency did not create a complex cover story about her education, background, job, personal life and even hobbies and habits that would stand up to intense scrutiny by foreign governments. "[NOCs] are on corporate rolls, and if anybody calls the corporation, the secretary says, 'Yeah, he works for us,'" says Rustmann. "The degree of backstopping to a NOC's cover is a very good indication of how deep that cover really is."

<snip>

Though Plame's cover is now blown, it probably began to unravel years ago when Wilson first asked her out. Rustmann describes Plame as an "exceptional officer" but says her ability to remain under cover was jeopardized by her marriage in 1998 to the higher-profile American diplomat. Plame all but came in from the cold last week, making her first public appearance, at a Washington lunch in honor of her husband, who was receiving an award for whistle blowing. The blown spy's one not-so-secret request? No photographs, please.

So Time Magazine printed in Oct. 27, 2003 that her undercover work was over in 1998.  Did they forget what they printed?

A$$ wipe Joe Wilson writes that he and his future wife both returned from overseas assignments in June 1997.  The law against unmasking the identities of U.S. spies says a 'covert agent' must have been on an overseas assignment 'within the last five years.' Remember the assignment also must be long-term, not a short trip or temporary post, two experts on the law say. Wilson's book makes numerous references to the couple's life in Washington over the six years up to July 2003. So unless she was really stationed abroad sometime after their marriage,  she wasn't a covert agent protected by the law, according to Bruce Sanford, an attorney who helped write the 1982 act that protects covert agents' identities as I pointed out above.

Oh and lets remember Joe Wilson Names His Wife in His Own Online Biography!
http://www.cpsag.com...eam/wilson.html

"Valerie had nothing to do with the matter," Wilson wrote in a memoir published this year. "She definitely had not proposed that I make the trip."  You will see that he lied about this when you read the Senate intellience report.  He lied about documents, he lied about what he found in Niger, he's lied about who sent him on the trip.  The guy can't tell the truth about anything.

Heck,  he won't even admit he is a Democrat. Joe Wilson says he's nonpartisan. He's not.  In 1985-1986, he served in the offices of Senator Albert Gore and the House Majority Whip, Representative Thomas Foley, he was an advisor to the Kerry campaign, Chuckie Schumer held his hand for the press conference, now Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich speaking up.

On 7/14/2005 Joe Wilson was on the Today show where he was asked about his party afilliation.

Wilson replied:

I exercise my rights as a citizen of this country to participate in the selection of my leaders and I am proud to do so. I did so in the election in 2000 by contributing not just to Al Gore's campaign, but also to the Bush-Cheney campaign.

But here's the truth:

The District of Columbia voter registration database shows Mr. Wilson as a registered Democrat.

One quick look at publicly available information at   http://www.opensecrets.org/ reveals that Wilson is hardly a non-partisan guy.

In 2002 Wilson contributed $1,000 to Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY). He also contributed a total of $1,750 to three others: two relatively unknown congressmen -- Rep. Ed Royce (R-CA) and Rep. Nick Rahal (D-WV) -- and a Democratic senatorial candidate in Idaho, former Ambassador to Belgium Alan Blinken.

In 2000, while he contributed $1,000 to George Bush's presidential campaign, Wilson also contributed $1,000 to Al Gore's presidential campaign. In addition, he gave $1,000 to Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA) and $500 to Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY) that same election cycle.

Joseph Wilson Has Donated Over $8,000 To Democrats Including $2,000 To John Kerry For President In 2003, In 2004 Wilson contributed $2,000 to Sen. John Kerry (D-MA).$1,000 To Hillary Clinton’s (D-NY) HILLPAC In 2002 And $3,000 To Al Gore In 1999. from OpenSecrets web site.

Wilson Endorsed John Kerry For President In October 2003 And Advised The Kerry Campaign. AP story on 10/23/2003

[Wilson] Admits ‘It Will Be A Cold Day In Hell Before I Vote For A Republican, Even For Dog Catcher. New York Times.

If he'd lie about something as easy to find out as this, what else is he lying about?


The Senate Intelligence Committee report has concluded that it is Wilson himself who has been telling lies.  Read for yourself how he got up in his own lies.

http://intelligence....iraqreport2.pdf

Starts on page 39  

B. Former A$$ Wipe Ambassabor

Pay special attention to pages 44 and 45.

http://www.theleftco...ives/004878.php

Quote

Bob Somerby notes:

And the following morning, Wilson’s juices were clearly flowing when he glad-handed (and semi-misstated) on CNN’s American Morning:

BILL HEMMER (7/7/03): Ambassador Joseph Wilson is back with us here on American Morning live in D.C. Good to have you back! Good morning to you!

HEMMER: It's a wonderful day for us here at American Morning! You went to Niger several years ago. You concluded essentially that Iraq could not buy this uranium from that country. Why not?

WILSON: Well, I went in, actually in February of 2002 was my most recent trip there—at the request, I was told, of the office of the vice president, which had seen a report in intelligence channels about this purported memorandum of agreement on uranium sales from Niger to Iraq.

So, Somerby provides evidence for Wilson having said at least on one occasion that he was told Cheney's office made the request for his trip. Now, this is not the same as Wilson saying that he had personal knowledge that Cheney's office sent him, only that he was told that Cheney's office was involved in some way.

Back to Rove. To Mr. Rove's credit, he had issued a global or blanket release, waiving any confidentiality so that all reporters he had communicated with on the Wilson-Plame matter could step forward and provide Grand Jury testimony. Reportedly, this waiver was signed by Rove about a year and a half ago. Matt Cooper's negotiated release from confidentiality this past week represented pure theatrics. Cooper had that blanket release from Rove, which already applied to him and any other reporter.

So now you have Judith Miller sitting in jail, and Rove said it's a journalist that first told him about all this and he doesn't remember who. And the New York Times has been leading the liberal charge. And now the New York Times  leave their reporter in jail because.... even though there's a waiver that's been granted by Rove, she won't come forward and identify her source. It's got to be because it's too embarrassing to her and to the New York Times. WHO IS HER SOURCE???????

RuReddy

#9 Lin731

Lin731
  • Islander
  • 4,126 posts

Posted 18 July 2005 - 03:05 PM

Quote

RuReddy
"She made no bones about the fact that she was an agency employee and her husband was a diplomat," Fred Rustmann, a covert agent from 1966 to 1990, told The Washington Times.

"Her neighbors knew this, her friends knew this, his friends knew this. A lot of blame could be put on to central cover staff and the agency because they weren't minding the store here. ... The agency never changed her cover status."
    Mr. Rustmann, who spent 20 of his 24 years in the agency under "nonofficial cover" -- also known as a NOC, the same status as the wife of Mr. Wilson -- also said that she worked under extremely light cover.
    In addition, Mrs. Plame hadn't been out as an NOC since 1997, when she returned from her last assignment, married Mr. Wilson and had twins, USA Today reported yesterday.

The distinction matters because a law that forbids disclosing the name of undercover CIA operatives applies to agents that had been on overseas assignment "within the last five years."     

"She was home for such a long time, she went to work every day at Langley, she was in an analytical type job, she was married to a high-profile diplomat with two kids," Mr. Rustmann said. "Most people who knew Valerie and her husband, I think, would have thought that she was an overt CIA employee."

http://en.wikipedia....i/Valerie_Plame

Quote

Former covert CIA agent Fred Rustmann has claimed in the Washington Times on 15 July 2005 that "she made no bones about the fact that she was an agency employee and her husband was a diplomat...Her neighbors knew this, her friends knew this, his friends knew this." It was the position of the CIA, according to Rustmann, that she was a "non-official cover," or NOC, until 1997, and hadn't been out as that type of agent since then, instead having overt status. These statements are contrary to information in an older October 1, 2003 Knight Ridder report entitled "Justice Launches Probe Into CIA Leak," where an anonymous CIA official was quoted as saying, "If she was not undercover, we would have no reason to file a criminal referral," referring to the referral by the CIA to the Justice Department that a crime may have been committed. Further, Rustmann's claims are allegedly contradicted by the Wilsons' actual neighbors, who have stated in several interviews that they had no idea she worked for the CIA. For example, Christopher Wolf wrote in a letter to the Washington Post, "Even I, Ms. Plame's lawyer and neighbor, was unaware of her status until Mr. Novak blew her cover." [16]
Many suggest that the facts that the CIA requested an investigation, that the Justice Department agreed that one was needed, and that Patrick Fitzgerald has been pursuing the matter for two years all perforce indicate that Plame was, in truth, a covert agent. If she had not been then, for unknown reasons, the Bush government has spent the last two years investigating itself for something that was never a crime to begin with.

So much for that part of your arguement
Posted Image
Posted Image

#10 Spectacles

Spectacles
  • Awaiting Authorisation
  • 9,632 posts

Posted 18 July 2005 - 03:08 PM

Quote

RuReddy: It was Wilson who decided to punish Rove, making the false claim that Rove outed his wife as a covert CIA operative when, in fact, she's just a CIA employee, which is common knowledge. But Rove is not the target.....Don't be fooled its Bush they are going after.

Gee, I wonder what the CIA was thinking when they asked for the special prosecutor to investigate. Do you think Tenet (who requested the probe) is Joe Wilson's flunkie? Do you think Tenet would have requested it had it appeared that there was no problem with blowing Plame's cover?

Look, obviously, the CIA thought there was enough of a problem to warrant an investigation. Whether or not Rove was the leaker is for the grand jury to decide.
They'll also have to decide whether or not there was a cover-up, perjury, obstruction of justice. What they'll find, I have no idea. We'll just have to wait and see.
"Facts are stupid things." -Ronald Reagan at the 1988 Republican National Convention, attempting to quote John Adams, who said, "Facts are stubborn things"

"Although health care enrollment is actually going pretty well at this point, thousands and maybe millions of Americans have failed to sign up for coverage because they believe the false horror stories they keep hearing." -- Paul Krugman

#11 Nonprofit

Nonprofit
  • Islander
  • 2,163 posts

Posted 18 July 2005 - 03:36 PM

If the Democrats are so damned certain of Rove's criminal guilt, why are they demanding more investigations? Why are they calling for his clearance to be pulled? Why are they calling for his resignation?

RuReddy

#12 Zwolf

Zwolf
  • Islander
  • 3,683 posts

Posted 18 July 2005 - 03:38 PM

Quote

It was Wilson who decided to punish Rove, making the false claim that Rove outed his wife as a covert CIA operative when, in fact, she's just a CIA employee, which is common knowledge. But Rove is not the target.....Don't be fooled its Bush they are going after.

**** But she was covert.

Quote

As a covert operative who specialized in nonconventional weapons and sometimes worked abroad, she passed herself off as a private energy expert, what the agency calls nonofficial cover.

Quote

Four separate ex-CIA employees are now on the record saying Plame was undercover and ran a network of informants, and a fifth who knew Wilson and had 24 years at the Agency says he didn't know Plame worked there — which means her status was hardly common knowledge.


Quote

Reddy sez: It seems to me there's a substantial question whether she qualifies as the kind of covert agent that was envisioned by the act. There are very tight requirements for that.

***** Rove apparently thought she was when he told the reporter about her.  Otherwise, why would it be "double super secret"?



Quote

This about says it all. There was no crime, no law was broken according to a man who helped draft that law.

****** Except there wree laws broken.  link  linklink link




Quote

So once again, where is the crime, when no law was broken. It has to be proven Karl Rove intentionally gave up a covert agent with the knowledge that she was deep undercover.


******* His lawyer won't deny it, however, which is suspicious.



Quote

Heck, he won't even admit he is a Democrat.


***** An act of treason is an act of treason.  Claims of partisanship are pretty immaterial in this case; it's a non-issue.  Either a CIA agent was outed, or wasn't.   The party affiliation of the one making the claim isn't terribly relevant.  His partisanship has apparently been overexaggerated, too, since he's donated to Bush's campaign and was commended by George Bush Sr.


Quote

If he'd lie about something as easy to find out as this, what else is he lying about?

****** That's pretty poor logic.

Cheers,

Zwolf
"I've moved on and I'm feeling fine
And I'll feel even better
When your life has nothing to do with mine."
-Pittbull, "No Love Lost"

"There are things that I'd like to say
But I'm never talking to you again
There's things I'd like to phrase some way
But I'm never talking to you again

I'm never talking to you again
I'm never talking to you
I'm tired of wasting all my time
Trying to talk to you

I'd put you down where you belong
But I'm never talking to you again
I'd show you everywhere you're wrong
But I'm never talking to you again

I'm never talking to you again
I'm never talking to you
I'm tired of wasting all my time
Trying to talk to you

I'm never talking to you again
I'm never talking to you
I'm tired of wasting all my time
Trying to talk to you."
- Husker Du, "Never Talking To You Again"

#13 Balderdash

Balderdash
  • Islander
  • 5,729 posts

Posted 18 July 2005 - 03:38 PM

Quote

Specs said: Gee, I wonder what the CIA was thinking when they asked for the special prosecutor to investigate. Do you think Tenet (who requested the probe) is Joe Wilson's flunkie? Do you think Tenet would have requested it had it appeared that there was no problem with blowing Plame's cover?

I remember back when Novaks piece first came out that the CIA was furious that Plame was named in the article, named and the fact that she worked at the CIA.  I don't think there'd actually be this big investigation if there wasn't a suspected crime commited.  If she weren't covert than what's the fuss about?

Another Democrat leaning Independent that has to search for truth because it can't be found on Fox News OR MSNBC.



"Being gay is not a Western invention, it is a human reality"  by HRC


#14 Zwolf

Zwolf
  • Islander
  • 3,683 posts

Posted 18 July 2005 - 03:42 PM

Quote

If the Democrats are so damned certain of Rove's criminal guilt, why are they demanding more investigations? Why are they calling for his clearance to be pulled? Why are they calling for his resignation?

******** Wha?  This doesn't make sense.  Their certainty of his guilt would be the reason why they'd want more investigations, his resignation, and his clearance to be pulled.  Why would they not want those things if they thought he wasn't guilty?   Why would you demand those things of anyone if you thought they were innocent? I'm not following the logic there...

Cheers,

Zwolf
"I've moved on and I'm feeling fine
And I'll feel even better
When your life has nothing to do with mine."
-Pittbull, "No Love Lost"

"There are things that I'd like to say
But I'm never talking to you again
There's things I'd like to phrase some way
But I'm never talking to you again

I'm never talking to you again
I'm never talking to you
I'm tired of wasting all my time
Trying to talk to you

I'd put you down where you belong
But I'm never talking to you again
I'd show you everywhere you're wrong
But I'm never talking to you again

I'm never talking to you again
I'm never talking to you
I'm tired of wasting all my time
Trying to talk to you

I'm never talking to you again
I'm never talking to you
I'm tired of wasting all my time
Trying to talk to you."
- Husker Du, "Never Talking To You Again"

#15 Kosh

Kosh

    Criag Ferguson For President!

  • Islander
  • 11,149 posts

Posted 18 July 2005 - 03:52 PM

I can't wait to hear Novak's testimony. It should be enlightning.
Can't Touch This!!

#16 Spectacles

Spectacles
  • Awaiting Authorisation
  • 9,632 posts

Posted 18 July 2005 - 03:53 PM

Quote

Z: His partisanship has apparently been overexaggerated, too, since he's donated to Bush's campaign and was commended by George Bush Sr.

Wilson voted for Bush Sr., too, when he ran against Clinton. Both are on record as thinking highly of each other. Before the Iraq War, Wilson wrote an op-ed piece arguing that there were alternatives to war that had not been pursued. He sent an advance copy to Bush I, who wrote him back and said he agreed with virtually everything Wilson said.

Edited by Spectacles, 18 July 2005 - 03:54 PM.

"Facts are stupid things." -Ronald Reagan at the 1988 Republican National Convention, attempting to quote John Adams, who said, "Facts are stubborn things"

"Although health care enrollment is actually going pretty well at this point, thousands and maybe millions of Americans have failed to sign up for coverage because they believe the false horror stories they keep hearing." -- Paul Krugman

#17 emsparks

emsparks
  • Forever Missed
  • 2,426 posts

Posted 18 July 2005 - 04:08 PM

The fact whether or not Mr. Rove broke the law about outing a CIA agent, does not matter. He by his own admission talked to people who did not have the proper security clearances, and a “Need to Know.” An act, which puts him in violation of at least a few sections of the “Espionage act, which is a felony level crime. Mr. Rove has already admitted his guilt. If you’re a signatory to the Espionage act, which Mr. Rove is by nature of his employment, you don’t talk about anything secret. The thing that the defenders of Mr. Rove refuse to acknowledge is there is more then one major law that covers Mr. Rove’s actions.

What I find most disturbing to this whole thing is the damaged done to the good order and discipline of the clandestine services. If Mr. Rove and the other person identified in the administration get away with this, it says to all American operatives the world over that their cover, or that of a family member, can be blown a the whim of some political hack working for the President, or Vice President. I can see the recruitment poster now, “Join the CIA and have the honor of your cover being blown by the White House.
Sparky::

Think!
Question Authority, Authoritatively.

#18 Call Me Robin

Call Me Robin

    red-haired and proud

  • Islander
  • 970 posts

Posted 18 July 2005 - 04:21 PM

Quote

Heck, he won't even admit he is a Democrat. Joe Wilson says he's nonpartisan. He's not. In 1985-1986, he served in the offices of Senator Albert Gore and the House Majority Whip, Representative Thomas Foley, he was an advisor to the Kerry campaign, Chuckie Schumer held his hand for the press conference, now Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich speaking up.

You speak as if there is something horribly wrong with being a Democrat.

In fact, Wilson was appointed by George H.W. Bush and voted for the man in 1992.  If he is in fact a registered Democrat, then he sounds like a moderate Democrat who votes based on principle, not party line.

Either way, Wilson and his wife are both loyal public servants who have served their country honorably.  They do not deserve to have their work ruined and their names dragged through the mud.  

Let's not forget that the outing of Valerie Plame endangered the work and the lives of her many contacts in the CIA.  It endangered national security, since Plame's expertise was WMDs.  Someone in the administration was willing to jeopardize the security of this country and the work of the CIA.  

IMO, the Bush adminsitration could not care less about the welfare of the American people or the security of the world.
Of all the varieties of virtues, liberalism is the most beloved.
--Aristotle

The fanatic is not really a stickler to principle. He embraces a cause not primarily because of its justness or holiness but because of his desperate need for something to hold onto.
--Eric Hoffer

#19 emsparks

emsparks
  • Forever Missed
  • 2,426 posts

Posted 18 July 2005 - 04:35 PM

Is this why the CIA has been demoted in the new department of national intelligence? AND the DCIA no longer reports directly to the president?

Just a thought….
Sparky::

Think!
Question Authority, Authoritatively.

#20 Nonprofit

Nonprofit
  • Islander
  • 2,163 posts

Posted 18 July 2005 - 05:18 PM

Quote

Spectacles Posted Today, 03:08 PM
Gee, I wonder what the CIA was thinking when they asked for the special prosecutor to investigate. Do you think Tenet (who requested the probe) is Joe Wilson's flunkie? Do you think Tenet would have requested it had it appeared that there was no problem with blowing Plame's cover?

Look, obviously, the CIA thought there was enough of a problem to warrant an investigation. Whether or not Rove was the leaker is for the grand jury to decide.
They'll also have to decide whether or not there was a cover-up, perjury, obstruction of justice. What they'll find, I have no idea. We'll just have to wait and see.

Gee, I wonder what the CIA was thinking when,  Robert Novak called the CIA to tell them he was going disclosed Plame's identity in his column?  They did nothing stop him or did not put any effort into stopping him?  The CIA did nothing to protect her or to continue protecting her identity.  They just allowed her name get printed. I wonder why?

RuReddy



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Top News, Valerie Plame, Rove, Grand Jury testimony, Matthew Cooper, Time Magazine, 2005

0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users