Apology Thread...

[The Ressurrected One]

Just want to start a thread to give the Left-leaners in this forum an opportunity to be the first to state they were wrong about Karl Rove leaking the identity of a covert CIA operative to the media.

So, go ahead...

[Bandit2981]

I, for one, will not comment on an investigation that is still ongoing. I have answered all questions at this time. :spin

[Cant_Be_Faded]

i know they havent proved he didnt say it, how would something like this become so big if there wasnt some truth to go on

[The Ressurrected One]

"...how would something like this become so big if there wasnt some truth to go on"
Because the Left and the Press wanted it to be so big. And, they depend on people like you, Nbadan, and Chucky Schumer to carry their water.

It's really that simple.

[Vashner]

They better worry more about Howard Dean than Rove.. Rove's job to get Dubya back in 04 is done.. Dean is going to ruin ANY chance of Demorats picking up a SINGLE right wing or centrist VOTE for 08..

[duncan_21]

Liberal media, that's funny. Listen to too much limbaugh lately?

[Cant_Be_Faded]

Because the Left and the Press wanted it to be so big. And, they depend on people like you, Nbadan, and Chucky Schumer to carry their water.

It's really that simple.


How about starting an entire WAR based on 100% conservative bull shit, and getting chickenhawks to spread the word?

Its that simple indeed.

[foodie2]

Just want to start a thread to give the Left-leaners in this forum an opportunity to be the first to state they were wrong about Karl Rove leaking the identity of a covert CIA operative to the media.

So, go ahead...

Wait, apologize?

Has there been some Rove-exoneration going on that I haven't heard about?

[The Ressurrected One]

Wait, apologize?

Has there been some Rove-exoneration going on that I haven't heard about?
Yeah, you don't pay attention. Joe Wilson is a liar and Valerie Plame isn't a covert CIA agent.

[Cant_Be_Faded]

you should apologize over hearting gitmo

[Vashner]

1. Major fighting was mostly over. What we have now are a bunch of idiots blowing themself up. That's not really fighting that's walking pussies with 2 legs.

2. The big ass banner MISSION ACCOMPLISHED was for the Lincoln battle group, which just finished the longest deployment of any carrier since WWII.

[Johnny Tightlips]

i read alotta stupid shit before....

[The Ressurrected One]

Have you heard that the CIA is actually the source responsible for exposing Plame's covert status? Not Karl Rove, not Bob Novak, not the sinister administration cabal du jour of Fourth Estate fantasy, but the CIA itself?

Had you heard that Plame's cover has actually been blown for a decade — i.e., since about seven years before Novak ever wrote a syllable about her?

Had you heard not only that no crime was committed in the communication of information between Bush administration officials and Novak, but that no crime could have been committed because the governing law gives a person a complete defense if an agent's status has already been compromised by the government?

No, you say, you hadn't heard any of that. You heard that this was the crime of the century. A sort of Robert-Hanssen-meets-Watergate in which Rove is already cooked and we're all just waiting for the other shoe — or shoes — to drop on the den of corruption we know as the Bush administration. That, after all, is the inescapable impression from all the media coverage. So who is saying different?

The organized media, that's who. How come you haven't heard? Because they've decided not to tell you. Because they say one thing — one dark, transparently partisan thing — when they're talking to you in their news coverage, but they say something completely different when they think you're not listening.

You see, if you really want to know what the media think of the Plame case — if you want to discover what a comparative trifle they actually believe it to be — you need to close the paper and turn off the TV. You need, instead, to have a peek at what they write when they're talking to a court. It's a mind-bendingly different tale.

Valerie Wilson, nee Plame, was allegedly identified as a covert CIA agent by the columnist Robert Novak, to whom she was allegedly compromised by an administration official. In fact, it appears Plame was first outed to the general public as a result of a consciously loaded and slyly hypothetical piece (http://www.thenation.com/blogs/capitalgames?bid=3&pid=823) by the journalist David Corn. Corn's source appears to have been none other than Plame's own husband, former ambassador and current Democratic-party operative Joseph Wilson — that same pillar of national security rectitude whose notion of discretion, upon being dispatched by the CIA for a sensitive mission to Niger, was to write a highly public op-ed about his trip in the New York Times. This isn't news to the media; they have simply chosen not to report it.

The hypocrisy, though, only starts there. It turns out that the media believe Plame was outed long before either Novak or Corn took pen to paper. And not by an ambiguous confirmation from Rove or a nod-and-a-wink from Ambassador Hubby. No, the media think Plame was previously compromised by a disclosure from the intelligence community itself — although it may be questionable whether there was anything of her covert status left to salvage at that point, for reasons that will become clear momentarily.

This CIA disclosure, moreover, is said to have been made not to Americans at large but to Fidel Castro's anti-American regime in Cuba, whose palpable incentive would have been to "compromise[] every operation, every relationship, every network with which [Plame] had been associated in her entire career" — to borrow from the diatribe in which Wilson risibly compared his wife's straits to the national security catastrophes wrought by Aldrich Ames and Kim Philby.

Just four months ago, 36 news organizations confederated to file a friend-of-the-court brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington. At the time, Bush-bashing was (no doubt reluctantly) confined to an unusual backseat. The press had no choice — it was time to close ranks around two of its own, namely, the Times's Judith Miller and Time's Matthew Cooper, who were threatened with jail for defying grand jury subpoenas from the special prosecutor.

The media's brief, fairly short and extremely illuminating, is available here (http://www.bakerlaw.com/files/tbl_s10News/FileUpload44/10159/Amici%20Brief%20032305%20(Final).PDF). The Times, which is currently spearheading the campaign against Rove and the Bush administration, encouraged its submission. It was joined by a "who's who" of the current Plame stokers, including ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, AP, Newsweek, Reuters America, the Washington Post, the Tribune Company (which publishes the Los Angeles Times and the Baltimore Sun, among other papers), and the White House Correspondents (the organization which represents the White House press corps in its dealings with the executive branch).

The thrust of the brief was that reporters should not be held in contempt or forced to reveal their sources in the Plame investigation. Why? Because, the media organizations confidently asserted, no crime had been committed. Now, that is stunning enough given the baleful shroud the press has consciously cast over this story. Even more remarkable, though, were the key details these self-styled guardians of the public's right to know stressed as being of the utmost importance for the court to grasp — details those same guardians have assiduously suppressed from the coverage actually presented to the public.

Though you would not know it from watching the news, you learn from reading the news agencies' brief that the 1982 law prohibiting disclosure of undercover agents' identities explicitly sets forth a complete defense to this crime. It is contained in Section 422 (of Title 50, U.S. Code), and it provides that an accused leaker is in the clear if, sometime before the leak, "the United States ha[s] publicly acknowledged or revealed" the covert agent's "intelligence relationship to the United States[.]"

As it happens, the media organizations informed the court that long before the Novak revelation (which, as noted above, did not disclose Plame's classified relationship with the CIA), Plame's cover was blown not once but twice. The media based this contention on reporting by the indefatigable Bill Gertz — an old-school, "let's find out what really happened" kind of journalist. Gertz's relevant article, published a year ago in the Washington Times, can be found here (http://washingtontimes.com/national/20040722-115439-4033r.htm).

As the media alleged to the judges (in Footnote 7, page 8, of their brief), Plame's identity as an undercover CIA officer was first disclosed to Russia in the mid-1990s by a spy in Moscow. Of course, the press and its attorneys were smart enough not to argue that such a disclosure would trigger the defense prescribed in Section 422 because it was evidently made by a foreign-intelligence operative, not by a U.S. agency as the statute literally requires.

But neither did they mention the incident idly. For if, as he has famously suggested, President Bush has peered into the soul of Vladimir Putin, what he has no doubt seen is the thriving spirit of the KGB, of which the Russian president was a hardcore agent. The Kremlin still spies on the United States. It remains in the business of compromising U.S. intelligence operations.

Thus, the media's purpose in highlighting this incident is blatant: If Plame was outed to the former Soviet Union a decade ago, there can have been little, if anything, left of actual intelligence value in her "every operation, every relationship, every network" by the time anyone spoke with Novak (or, of course, Corn).

Of greater moment to the criminal investigation is the second disclosure urged by the media organizations on the court. They don't place a precise date on this one, but inform the judges that it was "more recent" than the Russian outing but "prior to Novak's publication."

And it is priceless. The press informs the judges that the CIA itself "inadvertently" compromised Plame by not taking appropriate measures to safeguard classified documents that the Agency routed to the Swiss embassy in Havana. In the Washington Times article — you remember, the one the press hypes when it reports to the federal court but not when it reports to consumers of its news coverage — Gertz elaborates that "[t]he documents were supposed to be sealed from the Cuban government, but [unidentified U.S.] intelligence officials said the Cubans read the classified material and learned the secrets contained in them."

Thus, the same media now stampeding on Rove has told a federal court that, to the contrary, they believe the CIA itself blew Plame's cover before Rove or anyone else in the Bush administration ever spoke to Novak about her. Of course, they don't contend the CIA did it on purpose or with malice. But neither did Rove — who, unlike the CIA, appears neither to have known about nor disclosed Plame's classified status. Yet, although the Times and its cohort have a bull's eye on Rove's back, they are breathtakingly silent about an apparent CIA embarrassment — one that seems to be just the type of juicy story they routinely covet.

The defense in Section 422 requires that the revelation by the United States have been done "publicly." At least one U.S. official who spoke to Gertz speculated that because the Havana snafu was not "publicized" — i.e., because the classified information about Plame was mistakenly communicated to Cuba rather than broadcast to the general public — it would not available as a defense to whomever spoke with Novak. But that seems clearly wrong.

First, the theory under which the media have gleefully pursued Rove, among other Bush officials, holds that if a disclosure offense was committed here it was complete at the moment the leak was made to Novak. Whether Novak then proceeded to report the leak to the general public is beside the point — the violation supposedly lies in identifying Plame to Novak. (Indeed, it has frequently been observed that Judy Miller of the Times is in contempt for protecting one or more sources even though she never wrote an article about Plame.)

Perhaps more significantly, the whole point of discouraging public disclosure of covert agents is to prevent America's enemies from degrading our national security. It is not, after all, the public we are worried about. Rather, it is the likes of Fidel Castro and his regime who pose a threat to Valerie Plame and her network of U.S. intelligence relationships. The government must still be said to have "publicized" the classified relationship — i.e., to have blown the cover of an intelligence agent — if it leaves out the middleman by communicating directly with an enemy government rather than indirectly through a media outlet.

All this raises several readily apparent questions. We know that at the time of the Novak and Corn articles, Plame was not serving as an intelligence agent outside the United States. Instead, she had for years been working, for all to see, at CIA headquarters in Langley. Did her assignment to headquarters have anything to do with her effectiveness as a covert agent having already been nullified by disclosure to the Russians and the Cubans — and to whomever else the Russians and Cubans could be expected to tell if they thought it harmful to American interests or advantageous to their own?

If Plame's cover was blown, as Gertz reports, how much did Plame know about that? It's likely that she would have been fully apprised — after all, as we have been told repeatedly in recent weeks, the personal security of a covert agent and her family can be a major concern when secrecy is pierced. Assuming she knew, did her husband, Wilson, also know? At the time he was ludicrously comparing the Novak article to the Ames and Philby debacles, did he actually have reason to believe his wife had been compromised years earlier?

And could the possibility that Plame's cover has long been blown explain why the CIA was unconcerned about assigning a one-time covert agent to a job that had her walking in and out of CIA headquarters every day? Could it explain why the Wilsons were sufficiently indiscrete to pose in Vanity Fair, and, indeed, to permit Joseph Wilson to pen a highly public op-ed regarding a sensitive mission to which his wife — the covert agent — energetically advocated his assignment? Did they fail to take commonsense precautions because they knew there really was nothing left to protect?

We'd probably know the answers to these and other questions by now if the media had given a tenth of the effort spent manufacturing a scandal to reporting professionally on the underlying facts. And if they deigned to share with their readers and viewers all the news that's fit to print ... in a brief to a federal court.

[The Ressurrected One]

i'm sorry for reading anything you've ever written theressurrectedone
Nah, you're just sorry.

[foodie2]

Yeah, you don't pay attention. Joe Wilson is a liar and Valerie Plame isn't a covert CIA agent.

Oh, okay, Genuine Certified Bushco Talking Points 1 and 1a.

Yeah, I've heard that.

[jochhejaam]

you should apologize over hearting gitmo

Any chance of translating this post to english?
Thanks :rolleyes

[Johnny Tightlips]

who says i been heartin' gitmo?

[Cant_Be_Faded]

Any chance of translating this post to english?
Thanks :rolleyes


open your conservative eyes

his signature says he hearts gitmo

[Guru of Nothing]

I think I learned too much in kindergarten.

[Vashner]

Is it me or does Wilson's agent wife look like the lady on the Croc Dundee movies?

In that picture spread..

[AFE7FATMAN]

Yoni

You have a link for the stuff you posted?

[The Ressurrected One]

Yoni

You have a link for the stuff you posted?
The Corn article and the Amicus Brief are linked in the post.

[The Ressurrected One]

So...where'd the Rove story go?

http://boortz.com/images/funny/071805_angry_left.gif

I wonder who's next.

[Cant_Be_Faded]

Just keep making extremely long winded posts, that'll show 'em.

[The Ressurrected One]

Just keep making extremely long winded posts, that'll show 'em.
I can't help that attention spans in this forum won't allow for a comprehensive treatment of any topic.

I could have said, "The media doesn't even believe Rove did anything wrong and besides, Novak wasn't the first to 'out' Plame...he wasn't even the third."

But, then, the Lefties in here would have demanded links and stories and support and explanation.

Then, when I provided it they would have said something like, "Just keep making extremely long winded posts, that'll show 'em," or some such nonsense.

So, I just decided to cut straight to the chase...cut out the concise truth and go for the supported assertion all in one post. That way, you can ignore it faster.

You're welcome.

[mookie2001]

Rove did come up with running in 2004 on September 11th only and it worked
what a genius

[The Ressurrected One]

Rove did come up with running in 2004 on September 11th only and it worked
what a genius
You must be going for "King of the Non Sequitur"

[mookie2001]

he ran on it
you know it
he won
he benefited from sep 11th, bottom line

[Cant_Be_Faded]

I can't help that attention spans in this forum won't allow for a comprehensive treatment of any topic.

I could have said, "The media doesn't even believe Rove did anything wrong and besides, Novak wasn't the first to 'out' Plame...he wasn't even the third."

But, then, the Lefties in here would have demanded links and stories and support and explanation.

Then, when I provided it they would have said something like, "Just keep making extremely long winded posts, that'll show 'em," or some such nonsense.

So, I just decided to cut straight to the chase...cut out the concise truth and go for the supported assertion all in one post. That way, you can ignore it faster.

You're welcome.

Ok i'll give you that. But Im like the only one who complains about your long posts though. The thing about this whole rove shit is that all these scandals are intentionally so complicated and convoluted that no mere mortal can really hope to comprehend them.

Yeah its one thing to have an attention span of an 8 year old but its another thing to have the attention span of someone who is determined to read every political article every day for the rest of his life.

[The Ressurrected One]

Ok i'll give you that. But Im like the only one who complains about your long posts though. The thing about this whole rove shit is that all these scandals are intentionally so complicated and convoluted that no mere mortal can really hope to comprehend them.

Yeah its one thing to have an attention span of an 8 year old but its another thing to have the attention span of someone who is determined to read every political article every day for the rest of his life.
Okay, then just satisfy yourself of this fact:

If Valerie Plame was a covert agent then her cover was blown to the Russians and the Cubans over 8 years ago. That's a recorded fact to which the media attested (in the amicus brief) in court in order to get this Judith Miller reporter out of jail and to thwart any future contempt charges against other reporters.

This is the same media that keeps harping that Rove broke the same law in 2003, still over 6 years after she was "outed" to the Russians and Cubans.

Trust me...it's a non-story.

[Cant_Be_Faded]

2.5 more years folks

only 2.5 more years.....


http://ak.imgfarm.com/images/ap/BUSH_US_AUSTRALIA.sff_WHCD106_20050719131022.jpg

then we have like 2 or 3 terms until we have to deal with another from Clan Bush.

side question: why does he look so stupid in this picture?

[The Ressurrected One]

2.5 more years folks

only 2.5 more years.....


http://ak.imgfarm.com/images/ap/BUSH_US_AUSTRALIA.sff_WHCD106_20050719131022.jpg

then we have like 2 or 3 terms until we have to deal with another from Clan Bush.

side question: why does he look so stupid in this picture?
You're not going to see another Democrat in the White House for at least another 10 years.

[mookie2001]

answer
the leadership is so strong is works against him as far as looking smart in photos

[Cant_Be_Faded]

You're not going to see another Democrat in the White House for at least another 10 years.

come on TRO... master of attention spans....i never implied that


i only said 2.5 more years of this buffoon sitting on the throne

by Clan Bush i meant another reject from this long lived blue blood family of royalty known as the Bush's

[Cant_Be_Faded]

hey bush looks incredibly stupid in your avatar as well

well like they say...as long as he was our leader during 9/11 and the war in iraq

[Ocotillo]

Yeah, you don't pay attention. Joe Wilson is a liar and Valerie Plame isn't a covert CIA agent.

Call Fitzgerald and tell him rather than posting some bs in a thread.

[The Ressurrected One]

Call Fitzgerald and tell him rather than posting some bs in a thread.
Fitzgerald knows he's a liar. That's why he's repeatedly stated that Rove isn't the object of the investigation.

Wouldn't it be a kicker if Wilson, Plame and some, as yet unnamed, CIA employees were the subject of the investigation?

[jochhejaam]

The thing about this whole rove shit is that all these scandals are intentionally so complicated and convoluted that no mere mortal can really hope to comprehend them.


So it's crystal clear that Rove's guilty until proven innocent and should be fired immediately when you think you have the goods on him but when the truthful facts come in that show the anti-USA, liberal, leftwing Dems. have propogated another lie it becomes "complicated, convoluted" and incomprehensible?

"Your hypocrisy knows no bounds"
-Doc Holiday- Tombstone

[The Ressurrected One]

Notice how fast the Valerie Plame controversy evaporated from the mainstream media? Where is the Democratic outrage now? Apparently they've moved on to more important things. Which just goes to show you how unimportant and manufactured the Rove-bashing was.

By the way, does anyone know why Judith Miller is still in jail?

[mookie2001]

people get fired from burger king everyday for being suspected of stealing
theres no "have to keep working until proven guilty"
fuck that

rove wont get fired
bush said he would
imagine that

[Nbadan]

Valerie Wilson, nee Plame, was allegedly identified as a covert CIA agent by the columnist Robert Novak, to whom she was allegedly compromised by an administration official. In fact, it appears Plame was first outed to the general public as a result of a consciously loaded and slyly hypothetical piece by the journalist David Corn. Corn's source appears to have been none other than Plame's own husband, former ambassador and current Democratic-party operative Joseph Wilson — that same pillar of national security rectitude whose notion of discretion, upon being dispatched by the CIA for a sensitive mission to Niger, was to write a highly public op-ed about his trip in the New York Times. This isn't news to the media; they have simply chosen not to report it.

Did you even bother to read the David Corn article that you claim exposed Valarie Plame? Keep in mind it came out on 7-16-03


In a recent column on Nigergate, Novak examined the role of former Ambassador Joseph Wilson IV in the affair. Two weeks ago, Wilson went public, writing in The New York Times and telling The Washington Post about the trip he took to Niger in February 2002--at the request of the CIA--to check out allegations that Saddam Hussein had tried to purchase uranium for a nuclear weapons program from Niger. Wilson was a good pick for the job. He had been a State Department officer there in the mid-1970s. He was ambassador to Gabon in the early 1990s. And in 1997 and 1998, he was the senior director for Africa at the National Security Council and in that capacity spent a lot of time dealing with the Niger government. Wilson was also the last acting US ambassador in Iraq before the Gulf War, a military action he supported. In that post, he helped evacuate thousands of foreigners from Kuwait, worked to get over 120 American hostages out Iraq, and sheltered about 800 Americans in the embassy compound. At the time, Novak's then-partner, Rowland Evans, wrote that Wilson displayed "the stuff of heroism." And President George H. W. Bush commended Wilson: "Your courageous leadership during this period of great danger for American interests and American citizens has my admiration and respect. I salute, too, your skillful conduct of our tense dealings with the government of Iraq....The courage and tenacity you have exhibited throughout this ordeal prove that you are the right person for the job."

The current Bush administration has not been so appreciative of Wilson's more recent efforts. In Niger, he met with past and present government officials and persons involved in the uranium business and concluded that it was "highly doubtful" that Hussein had been able to purchase uranium from that nation. On June 12, The Washington Post revealed that an unnamed ambassador had traveled to Niger and had reported back that the Niger caper probably never happened. This article revved up the controversy over Bush's claim--which he made in the state of the union speech--that Iraq had attempted to buy uranium in Africa for a nuclear weapons program.

Critics were charging that this allegation had been part of a Bush effort to mislead the country to war, and the administration was maintaining that at the time of the speech the White House had no reason to suspect this particular sentence was based on faulty intelligence. "Maybe someone knew down in the bowels of the agency," national security adviser Condoleezza Rice said days before the Post article ran. "But no one in our circles knew that there were doubts and suspicions." Wilson's mission to Niger provided more reason to wonder if the administration's denials were on the level. And once Wilson went public, he prompted a new round of inconvenient and troubling questions for the White House. (Wilson, who opposed the latest war in Iraq, had not revealed his trip to Niger during the prewar months, when he was a key participant in the media debate over whether the country should go to war.)

Soon after Wilson disclosed his trip in the media and made the White House look bad. the payback came. Novak's July 14, 2003, column presented the back-story on Wilson's mission and contained the following sentences: "Wilson never worked for the CIA, but his wife, Valerie Plame, is an Agency operative on weapons of mass destruction. Two senior administration officials told me Wilson's wife suggested sending him to Niger to investigate" the allegation.

So, Corn's article came out two days after Novak wrote his article claiming that 'Wilson never worked for the CIA, but his wife, Valerie Plame, is an Agency operative on weapons of mass destruction'.

[Nbadan]

Notice how fast the Valerie Plame controversy evaporated from the mainstream media? Where is the Democratic outrage now? Apparently they've moved on to more important things. Which just goes to show you how unimportant and manufactured the Rove-bashing was.

By the way, does anyone know why Judith Miller is still in jail?

Wait a minute, wasn't it the right-wing echo chamber, the Limbaugh-FOX News crowd that was calling the Fitzgerald investigation over four days before W announces Roberts as his choice? Hasn't it been the Corporate Media who has really moved onto Hurricane Emily, the heat-wave, and the Roberts nomination, while the blogsphere continues to disprove the daily barrage of right-wing propaganda being put out by Melmahn and Co?

[The Ressurrected One]

Did you even bother to read the David Corn article that you claim exposed Valarie Plame? Keep in mind it came out on 7-16-03



So, Corn's article came out two days after Novak wrote his article claiming that 'Wilson never worked for the CIA, but his wife, Valerie Plame, is an Agency operative on weapons of mass destruction'.
You have trouble with nuance...

Corn actually revealed Plames "covert" status. Novak merely called her an agency operative on WMD.

Corn, went into details. Novak mentioned her in passing, as part of a story about Wilson.

[Johnny Tightlips]

i ain't sayin' nothin' and neither should any of those folks

[Extra Stout]

This investigation actually is pretty hot right now, as it has been revealed that the State Dept. released a top-secret memo to the NSC in July 2003 detailing the Wilson trip to Niger, and the role of his wife.

It's still unclear whether her identity as a CIA employee was meant to be included as top-secret.

People are missing something in all of this hysteria to chase Rove. Bush has said repeatedly that he would fire the leaker WHOEVER he was. He would have known within days who the leaker was.

Were there any high-profile departures from the Administration in July 2003?

[Marcus Bryant]

Instead of the Left being able to defeat the GOP's top strategist in an election, revenge is sought ex post facto. Instead of developing a vision for the future and remaking a political message that is woefully out of date, the Demos are all about playing petty political games right now while they get their ass handed to them electorally.

Reminds me a lot of how the GOP viewed Clinton back in the nineties. They went after him hard personally when they couldn't beat him in an election. Bitterness and personal hate is not a winning message. Has the Left learned their lesson after the 2004 election or are they going to continue to fuck up?

Perhaps Rove will take on a candidate in 2008, though from what I recall he is going to take a break.

[The Ressurrected One]

This investigation actually is pretty hot right now, as it has been revealed that the State Dept. released a top-secret memo to the NSC in July 2003 detailing the Wilson trip to Niger, and the role of his wife.

It's still unclear whether her identity as a CIA employee was meant to be included as top-secret.

People are missing something in all of this hysteria to chase Rove. Bush has said repeatedly that he would fire the leaker WHOEVER he was. He would have known within days who the leaker was.

Were there any high-profile departures from the Administration in July 2003?
First of all it was marked "Secret," not "Top Secret." An important distinction in Classification;

Second, there's been no clarification of whether the "secret" information was the identity of Plame or other content in the memo;

Third, Rove denies seeing the memo; and

Fourth, it used her married name Wilson, not Plame...so, why would Rove be expected to make the connection?

[Extra Stout]

First of all it was marked "Secret," not "Top Secret." An important distinction in Classification;

Second, there's been no clarification of whether the "secret" information was the identity of Plame or other content in the memo;

Third, Rove denies seeing the memo; and

Fourth, it used her married name Wilson, not Plame...so, why would Rove be expected to make the connection?Adjust your posting settings off "Rove Auto-Defend," and read again what I wrote.

Who left the Administration in July 2003? Hint: He announced his resignation two months prior.

[The Ressurrected One]

Adjust your posting settings off "Rove Auto-Defend," and read again what I wrote.

Who left the Administration in July 2003? Hint: He announced his resignation two months prior.
Granted.

I was just making the point that it is highly improbable that Rove is the focus of the investigation and, indeed, the "outing" of Valerie Plame may not even been the impetus for the Fitzgerald investigation.

So, why drag Tom Ridge into all this?

[Extra Stout]

Granted.

I was just making the point that it is highly improbable that Rove is the focus of the investigation and, indeed, the "outing" of Valerie Plame may not even been the impetus for the Fitzgerald investigation.

So, why drag Tom Ridge into all this?Let's just say there's some testimony about a certain bespectacled former press secretary perusing the State Department memo in question while riding along on Air Force One, and then making a few phone calls.

[JoeChalupa]

I, for one, will not comment on an investigation that is still ongoing. I have answered all questions at this time. :spin

:lol I for one said this would probably be much about nothing since Rove knows how to CYA with the best of them. Say just enough to get it out there but not enough to nail him. The guy is one smart mofo.

[The Ressurrected One]

:lol I for one said this would probably be much about nothing since Rove knows how to CYA with the best of them. Say just enough to get it out there but not enough to nail him. The guy is one smart mofo.
Or, it could be that he's not a law-breaker and that he's innocent?

[foodie2]

Or, it could be that he's not a law-breaker and that he's innocent?

If it quacks like a duck and it walks like a duck, it probably is a duck. But that said, I do believe in due process, and Karl deserves his day in court.

Unlike, unfortunately, the innocent Brazilian man in London, who was shot because he quacked like a duck and walked like a duck. But you have no problem with that, right?

The punishment for treason is death. Maybe we should just knock Karl to the ground, sit on him, and pump 5 shots in his head. Save ourselves a lot of trouble.

[Looter]

good topic