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

#41 Godeskian

Godeskian

    You'll be seein' rainbooms

  • Islander
  • 26,839 posts

Posted 19 July 2005 - 07:17 AM

emsparks, on Jul 19 2005, 12:31 PM, said:

Have either one of you held security clearances; you don’t talk like most of the people I know who have held them. We who have been given the trust of the nation take our oaths very seriously, democrat or republican.

Actually, I think that's a universal trait amongst people who've been given chosen to shoulder that responsibility. I knew someone back in Holland, a friend of my dad's, who worked for the dutch minitry for defense. I have never met a better dissembler in my life.

She could talk to you for hours on end, and you'd come away with the disquieting feeling that you actually talked about nothing, without ever noticing. Not once did she speak of what went on, nor dropped hints, nor in any way allowed the discussion to remain on her job for more than a sentence, before she had skillfully diverted the topic.

When you get to a certain level, in any goverment, or intelligence agency, your oaths have to be ironclad, and have to be unbreakable, because you are operating in a world where your trust and integrity are not just a nice bonus, but an absolute requirement.

I tend to think that Sparky is right on the likely effect of this on the US intelligence community's opinions with regards to mr. Rove

Defy Gravity!


The Doctor: The universe is big. It's vast and complicated and ridiculous and sometimes, very rarely, impossible things just happen and we call them miracles... and that's a theory. Nine hundred years and I've never seen one yet, but this will do me.


#42 Zwolf

Zwolf
  • Islander
  • 3,683 posts

Posted 19 July 2005 - 08:58 AM

Quote

Anyone happen to catch a glance at the official website of the Democratic National Committtee?

http://dnc.org

It's interesting that with our soldiers fighting a global war on terror, this is the most pressing issue for the Democratic party in their quest to return to power. Could it be... politics?

******* This is a very fun tactic that, unfortunately, doesn't hold up very well: decide and declare what issue should be most important, then fault your opposition for not discussing it every second of the day.  Would you like to hold the RNC's website to the same standards?   We're in the middle of a war on terror, and they're just fundraising so they can help their candidates get elected!  How shocking!  Except for the fact that that's what the RNC and the DNC do - that's their purpose.  But, if we wish to fault them for that, then we can, I suppose.  It will help me in my quest to prove that Martha Stewart is one of the greatest monsters of our times!  There's a war on, and she's more concerned with how to best utilize cillantro as a spicy alternative accent for salads, or something.   That bitch!

Quote

I've seen Bush's opponents disappointed so many times since 2000. I wonder what the reaction will be when Karl Rove is not fired, and does not step down, and is not charged with a single crime on anything? The reaction won't be pretty. But it is entirely predictable.

******* Oh, it won't be a surprise.  I was raised during the time of "Teflon Don" John Gotti, y'know.  He did a million things that they just couldn't crack him for, but everybody still knew he was la cosa nostra.   I'm just wondering when Bush's defenders will decide that it's no longer enough to just get away with the wrong things, instead of actually doing the right things.   For me, there'd be little moral satisfaction in just beating the system.  Eventually I'd want my guys to actually find the WMDs they said were there,  not out a CIA agent at all, have Downing Street memos that reinforce one's integrity instead of bringing it into question, accomplish the mission and initiate a plan that worked.  You know... results.  

But I guess getting away with it'll just have to do until the real thing comes along.



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"

#43 Corwin

Corwin

    fortitudo ac honor

  • Islander
  • 1,695 posts

Posted 19 July 2005 - 11:43 AM

Call Me Robin, on Jul 18 2005, 09:37 PM, said:

Funny, I always thought that agents with WMD expertise would naturally be covert.   :lol:

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


I know your answer was somewhat tongue in cheek, and I mean no offense at my reply, but:

Why would you assume that?  Plame is part of the CIA non-proliferation group specializing in WMD's.  It doesn't take a covert agent for that.... I'm willing to bet that they do have some covert agents and/or clandestine activities, but that 95% of the group is very overt, just not advertised.  She was one of the analysts for the group, so yes, she is and should be an expert in WMD's, specifically nuclear, but that doesn't mean that she possessed a covert status at that time, regardless of her past assignments with the CIA.  

There are a LOT of other government and private organizations that emply WMD experts of various types. The DOD, DOE, NRA (Nuclear Regulatory Agency), and the FBI all employ these experts.  Government and private thinktanks do the exact same thing.  So does the news media.  It's all part of getting good information with which to build an analysis, which is the first step to building policy.

That said, there is a far cry from being a covert agent to advertising the fact that you are a CIA employee (even a janitor) to the world.  Regardless if a crime was ever committed knowingly or unknowingly, there are still serious lapses of judgement and major problems with people keeping their damn mouths shut.  And there should be penalties for that, if nothing else.

Corwin
"The Enemy is upon us, so Lock and Load, Brothers.  The Emperor Calls and the Forces of Chaos must be driven back.  Though all of us will fall, none of us shall fail!"

#44 Rhea

Rhea

  • Islander
  • 16,433 posts

Posted 19 July 2005 - 12:15 PM

waterpanther, on Jul 18 2005, 07:30 PM, said:

Quote

There is no doubt she was 'not covert' by the standards required by "The 1982 Intelligence Identities Protection Act ".

Perhaps you will share this information with the CIA, since they seem to be quite firmly under the impression that she was.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


:lol:  :lol:
The future is better than the past. Despite the crepehangers, romanticists, and anti-intellectuals, the world steadily grows better because the human mind, applying itself to environment, makes it better. With hands...with tools...with horse sense and science and engineering.
- Robert A. Heinlein

When I don’t understand, I have an unbearable itch to know why. - RAH


Everything is theoretically impossible, until it is done. One could write a history of science in reverse by assembling the solemn pronouncements of highest authority about what could not be done and could never happen.  - RAH

#45 Ogami

Ogami
  • Islander
  • 2,976 posts

Posted 19 July 2005 - 05:18 PM

Spectacles wrote:

Which is probably why Rush Limbaugh sounds particularly apoplectic these days.

Going strictly by Bush's track record of caving to his opponents, there is the impression that Bush will throw Rove to the wolves. That is what is probably stressing Rush out more than anything else. (He's such a pill.)

-Ogami

#46 Ogami

Ogami
  • Islander
  • 2,976 posts

Posted 19 July 2005 - 05:28 PM

Emsparks wrote:

Have either one of you held security clearances; you don’t talk like most of the people I know who have held them. We who have been given the trust of the nation take our oaths very seriously, democrat or republican.

That's very impressive, Em. Please let us know your position on all things in advance, so we can simply bow to your credentials beforehand and save ourselves the trouble of voicing contrary opinions.

We do not talk to people that do not have clearances, and we do not talk to people that have clearances, but don’t have “the need to know,” about anything secret. If Mr. Rove has not broken the law, he has by his own admission of even hinting of things secret broken the faith of the national security community, and given our enemies actionable intelligence against us.

That's your personal, partisan interpretation, and as will be shown to your possible consternation, Rove is not guilty of anything. (Save assuming Time journalists actually practice journalism.)

But the damage has already been done. We talk about needing intelligence to fight this war on terror, and then a major white house player renders some of the sources of that intelligence useless to the nation.

Did you catch John Kerry doing precisely that, outing the name of a CIA agent during his questioning of UN Nominee John Bolton? What you accuse Rove of doing is still conjecture, Kerry is proven to have committed the crime!

There is not an operator, analyst, or contract employee with a clearance, past or present that will ever trust that man again.

Just like they shouldn't trust Kerry...

There are many legal analysts, which believe that Mr. Rove can be charged under the espionage act.

These would be the same legal analysts who believed Bush and company should be roasted over marshmallows after they saw Farenheit 9/11, probably.

A comparison between “Valerie Plame” and “Deep Throat,” is a complete and total non sequitur. I am somewhat disappointed I would have expected a more cogent argument, then it’s a democratic trick. Especially when it comes to this nation security.

Karl Rove and President Bush have been fighting a war on terror to keep America safe and free. The sole action of the Democratic party for the past several years has been to undermine our troops, the CIA, and anything we have defending us.

Nothing different from this story than the one a few months back on how "heartless" Donald Rumsfeld wouldn't send armor to the troops, or how he used an autosigner pen for letters of condolence. Same old Democrat games, same old Democrat nonsense while Bush and his team do their job right and honestly.

-Ogami

#47 Ogami

Ogami
  • Islander
  • 2,976 posts

Posted 19 July 2005 - 05:39 PM

Zwolf asked:

Would you like to hold the RNC's website to the same standards?

Absolutely! The main headline is Bush meeting with the Prime Minister of India. Below that is an RNC story on DIRECT QUOTES from "Dingy Harry" Reid on the Senate floor, where Reid referred to a SECRET FBI report that he doesn't even have legal access too.

The list goes on, pretty damning record for the Democrats.

Then we've got another article on Joe Wilson admitting:

Quote

"On At Least Two Occasions [Wilson] Admitted [To The Senate Select Committee On Intelligence] That He Had No Direct Knowledge To Support Some Of His Claims And That He Was Drawing On Either Unrelated Past Experiences Or No Information At All." (Matthew Continetti, "'A Little Literary Flair,'" The Weekly Standard, 7/26/04)

Chairman Of The Senate Select Committee On Intelligence Sen. Pat Roberts, (R-KS): "[W]hen Asked How He 'Knew' That The Intelligence Community Had Rejected The Possibility Of A Niger-Iraq Uranium Deal ... [Wilson] Told  Committee Staff That His Assertion [That There Was No Deal] May Have Involved 'A Little Literary Flair.'" (Senate Select Committee On Intelligence, "Report On The U.S. Intelligence Community's Prewar Assessments On Iraq," 7/7/04)

The Democrats thought they had Bush's number with the 2003 State of the Union mention of British intelligence. It's apparent that the Democrats are committed to performing Seppuku on themselves over this. They won't drop it, and I love it.

I'm just wondering when Bush's defenders will decide that it's no longer enough to just get away with the wrong things, instead of actually doing the right things.

Because from the beginning, President Bush embarked on a serious plan to exterminate the Democratic party from existence. While the Democrats called him a dummy and a neocon dupe, Bush smiled to himself and quietly went about his business of plotting the demise of an entire political party. And his opponents in Washington still don't have a clue about what he's done, and doing to them.

Resistance is futile!

-Ogami

#48 Spectacles

Spectacles
  • Awaiting Authorisation
  • 9,632 posts

Posted 19 July 2005 - 06:28 PM

Here's a copy of the Senate Intelligence Committee's Report. It's interesting to browse through it, especially the section on Niger, and then read the "Additional Comments" at the end. In them, different Senators include their own observations, observations that the Committee was unable to consent to including in the report. (By the way, I heard Rush say that the committe unanimously agreed that Wilson was a lying snake. Turns out, that was...a lie. Rush was reading from Roberts' scathing, partisan, Rovian smear of Wilson, a smear that Wilson responded to in detail in a letter of his own. I'll see if I can find the link.)


http://news.findlaw..../documents.html



Here's a link to Wilson's rebuttal of Roberts' addendum to the report:

http://www.yuricarep...trToSenate.html

Edited by Spectacles, 19 July 2005 - 06:32 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

#49 Spectacles

Spectacles
  • Awaiting Authorisation
  • 9,632 posts

Posted 19 July 2005 - 06:38 PM

And here's a great cartoon on the subject by the brilliant Tom Tomorrow ;) :

http://workingforcha...TMW07-20-05.jpg
"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

#50 emsparks

emsparks
  • Forever Missed
  • 2,426 posts

Posted 19 July 2005 - 06:41 PM

Ogami, on Jul 19 2005, 06:28 PM, said:

Emsparks wrote:

Have either one of you held security clearances; you don’t talk like most of the people I know who have held them. We who have been given the trust of the nation take our oaths very seriously, democrat or republican.

That's very impressive, Em. Please let us know your position on all things in advance, so we can simply bow to your credentials beforehand and save ourselves the trouble of voicing contrary opinions.
-Ogami

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


Since you make such light of it, it would seam that service to one’s country has little value to you… Freedom isn’t free, and we each owe a debt to our country and all I have done is tried to repay part of mine. If you have a problem with that I’m sorry… But then when I swore an oath to protect and defend the constitution, I accepted that I, along with the rest of the patriots, would have to carry the left wing, free thinkers, and the extreme right wing, blowhards … You don’t even begin to understand American centrist politics.

Ogami, on Jul 19 2005, 06:28 PM, said:

Emsparks wrote:
We do not talk to people that do not have clearances, and we do not talk to people that have clearances, but don’t have “the need to know,” about anything secret. If Mr. Rove has not broken the law, he has by his own admission of even hinting of things secret broken the faith of the national security community, and given our enemies actionable intelligence against us.

That's your personal, partisan interpretation, and as will be shown to your possible consternation, Rove is not guilty of anything. (Save assuming Time journalists actually practice journalism.)
-Ogami

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


When are you going to understand that in the world of classified information in any country the world over you don’t talk about secret information, no matter the reason. AND you sure as hell don’t divulge secret information to warn off a reporter. Which by the way, both Mr. Rove, and his lawyer have said he did on numerous occasions.

Game set and match, game over and his past good works do not count. Nor does the actions of any other person, including John Kerry, mitigate his crime.

Edited by emsparks, 19 July 2005 - 06:42 PM.

Sparky::

Think!
Question Authority, Authoritatively.

#51 Kevin Street

Kevin Street
  • Islander
  • 6,256 posts

Posted 19 July 2005 - 06:49 PM

Ogami, please stick to discussion of the subject and not other posters in the thread. I know that this is an emotional subject, but please, let's all try to be civil here.

#52 BklnScott

BklnScott

    FKA ScottEVill

  • Islander
  • 18,142 posts

Posted 19 July 2005 - 06:55 PM

Quote

ogami: Because from the beginning, President Bush embarked on a serious plan to exterminate the Democratic party from existence.

Interesting.  I suppose that follows--after all, if their ideas were better, the party of George W Bush might be content to work within the two-party system rather than seek to remake it in his own autocratic, bullying image.  (Incidentally, there's nothing conservative about such an agenda--It's the very definition of radical).    

I appreciate that you at least admit you are an enthusiastic proponent of dismantling our democracy and replacing it with single-party rule.  Saddam would approve.    :whistle:      


Quote

While the Democrats called him a dummy and a neocon dupe, Bush smiled to himself and quietly went about his business of plotting the demise of an entire political party. And his opponents in Washington still don't have a clue about what he's done, and doing to them.

Resistance is futile!

How does this view square with the current poll numbers?  Or does that no longer matter now that there's no alternative to Republican rule?     :rolleyes:

Quote

There isn't enough mommy in the world to further a cause like yours!

#53 Kevin Street

Kevin Street
  • Islander
  • 6,256 posts

Posted 19 July 2005 - 07:00 PM

_ph said:

I appreciate that you at least admit you are an enthusiastic proponent of dismantling our democracy and replacing it with single-party rule.  Saddam would approve.    :whistle:

_ph, this isn't a constructive comment. Like I said in the earlier post, let's keep the discussion on topic. Please, don't try to put words in anyone's mouth. And the same thing goes for everyone else. Can't we just debate things in a civil way?

Edited by Kevin Street, 19 July 2005 - 07:02 PM.


#54 waterpanther

waterpanther
  • Islander
  • 1,944 posts

Posted 19 July 2005 - 07:52 PM

Quote

According to the writers of the "The 1982 Intelligence Identities Protection Act " whom I'm very sure they know what they are talking about since they drafted the law. She does not fall under this law as 'covert'. Just becasue you want to believe it, it's not going to happen.

Do you have some proof that this is the law they will be using when they do draw up charges if they in fact ever get that far? Which I doubt. I would like to see some articles, proof, anything beside your opinion. Do you have any proof that Plame was stationed out of the country in the last five years? Links please.

Mr. Sanford may be an expert in the intent of the law, but unless he was or is Valerie Plame's supervisor or colleague, he's hardly an expert on her assignment in the CIA.  

Tch.  Now, if I knew what was going on in the grand jury, I couldn't tell you.  That's contrary to an oath jurors swear, and against the law to boot.  The same would be true if I shared information on a covert agents' assignments.  Why don't we just sit back and pop the popcorn and see what comes of the investigation?  The 1982 act is only one of many possibilities for bringing charges against Karl the Frog and Lewie the Roach.
Posted Image

#55 Nonny

Nonny

    Scourge of Pretentious Bad Latin

  • Islander
  • 31,142 posts

Posted 19 July 2005 - 07:53 PM

Spectacles, on Jul 19 2005, 03:38 PM, said:

And here's a great cartoon on the subject by the brilliant Tom Tomorrow ;) :

http://workingforcha...TMW07-20-05.jpg

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Brilliant, absolutely brilliant.  :)

Nonny
Posted Image


The once and future Nonny

"Give a man a gun and he can rob a bank, give a man a bank and he can rob the world." Can anyone tell me who I am quoting?  I found this with no attribution.

Fatal miscarriages are forever.

Stupid is stupid, this I believe. And ignorance is the worst kind of stupid, since ignorance is a choice.  Suzanne Brockmann

All things must be examined, debated, investigated without exception and without regard for anyone's feelings. Diderot

#56 Ogami

Ogami
  • Islander
  • 2,976 posts

Posted 19 July 2005 - 07:57 PM

Kevin Street said:

Ogami, I'm not going to get into who said what because it isn't important. The subject of this thread is Matthew Cooper's testimony in regard to the outing of Valerie Plame, and other matters that spin out of that - not petty arguments between the people who've posted in this thread. Let's stick to the subject. like Hibblette did. Great post,Hibblette!

Emsparks wrote:

When are you going to understand that in the world of classified information in any country the world over you don’t talk about secret information, no matter the reason. AND you sure as hell don’t divulge secret information to warn off a reporter. Which by the way, both Mr. Rove, and his lawyer have said he did on numerous occasions.

Again, I don't see Rove behind bars. I don't see Rove charged with any crime. I don't even see Rove out of a job. So your statement is not reflected by reality, at present. Should any of these factors change, that will be of presumed interest to both of us. But until one of these changes, you really don't have any authority to make such a sweeping claim about what Rove did or didn't do.

We'll wait and see. :)

-Ogami

Edited by Ogami, 19 July 2005 - 08:36 PM.


#57 Ogami

Ogami
  • Islander
  • 2,976 posts

Posted 19 July 2005 - 08:01 PM

_Ph wrote:

I appreciate that you at least admit you are an enthusiastic proponent of dismantling our democracy and replacing it with single-party rule. Saddam would approve.

Ph, the Democratic party (and the media, and the left) has been laboring under a false depiction of President Bush for over five years now. This is a phony caricature of Bush the left created, to say he's a dummy, that he's unaware, heck, he can't even pronounce nuclear like decent people!

I would submit to you that the healthiest thing to do would be to sweep all those false presumptions about Bush under the rug, and start over with a new, truthful perception of the man.

Bush has made the Democratic party look like their mascot these past few years. It's not an accident. It's not handling. It's part of a deliberate strategy to weaken and crush the Democratic party.

Sorry to be the only one who has pointed that out to you. Did you think the Democrats were fractioned and supine by accident? We wanted them this way.

-Ogami

#58 Ogami

Ogami
  • Islander
  • 2,976 posts

Posted 19 July 2005 - 08:04 PM

Kevin Street said:

Ogami, I'm not going to get into who said what because it isn't important. The subject of this thread is Matthew Cooper's testimony in regard to the outing of Valerie Plame, and other matters that spin out of that - not petty arguments between the people who've posted in this thread. Let's stick to the subject. like Hibblette did. Great post,Hibblette!

Edited by Ogami, 19 July 2005 - 08:37 PM.


#59 Hibblette

Hibblette
  • Islander
  • 4,228 posts

Posted 19 July 2005 - 08:23 PM

Okay the word covert is being abused here a little bit and slung around like a rag doll

Quote

cov·ert 
adj
secret: not intended to be known, seen, or found out 

Microsoft® Encarta® Reference Library 2003. © 1993-2002 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

Now The CIA are the ones who called for the investigation-is this not the fact?

They are the ones she, Wilson's Wife, works for.  They are the ones that consider her covert.

Here is the actual Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982

Quote

         TITLE 50--WAR AND NATIONAL DEFENSE
         
                  CHAPTER 15--NATIONAL SECURITY
         
   SUBCHAPTER IV--PROTECTION OF CERTAIN NATIONAL SECURITY INFORMATION
Sec. 421. Protection of identities of certain United States
         undercover intelligence officers, agents, informants, and
         sources
(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.
© 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.
(July 26, 1947, ch. 343, title VI, Sec. 601, as added June 23, 1982,         
Pub. L. 97-200, Sec. 2(a), 96 Stat. 122.)

Now the thing to realize here is that not all covert agents are field workers.  Not all covert agents are necessarily with the CIA or FBI.  

You guys do realize that Covert Agents can even be like Scientists, or Engineers who design certain weapons or military vehicles, they also can fall under the Covert Agent.  Agents are not necessarily Spies for the government-that's one definition.  For example-you have people who are working on say a certain kind of weapon-It's just a super duper weapon and the government doesn't won't this leaked-the people who are involved in just the wiring are working covertly.

The CIA believed their employee was covert.  No matter how much the Rove supporters want to color it-she was covert because her employers say she was.

Even if she sat behind a desk and gathered the information-that information that she was looking at would be so secret that they would not want the enemy to know this about her.  Because she would become a target.  And also OUR national security would be in danger.

To have been working on the WMD's was a major thing for our country back in 2003.  That's why went to war.  The CIA was trying to find out as MUCH as they could and where these things were.  In a situation such as the gathering of such intelligence you do not want the identities of the gatherers, the researchers, and the interpreters of such info to be outed.

This is bad.

And the really sad thing is that Roves defenders are turning it partisan and ... what about our country?

I just watched the Daily Show repeat from last night that Woodward and  Bernstein were on.  Dang I love Carl Bernstein.  The things he said was so true.

It is very dangerous for the freedoms of this country that the press is in jeopardy.  But then again maybe the press has put theirselves in that position.  :unsure:  :pout:  

He said Novak truly missed the great story.  The story being "Why is Karl Rove telling me this?" :whistle:

Edited by Hibblette, 19 July 2005 - 08:25 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

#60 waterpanther

waterpanther
  • Islander
  • 1,944 posts

Posted 19 July 2005 - 08:24 PM

Quote

I would submit to you that the healthiest thing to do would be to sweep all those false presumptions about Bush under the rug, and start over with a new, truthful perception of the man.

Amen.

Go here:A new, truthful perception of Bush

Edited by waterpanther, 19 July 2005 - 08:45 PM.

Posted Image



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