The American Media - DOA
Posted by dag at July 14, 2005 09:22 AMThere were meetings?? On how to smear Wilson?? Isn't that, like, a conspiracy?
Posted by iamcoyote at July 14, 2005 09:39 AMIt's interesting that Wolf even asked this question, which indicates that he was tipped off and someone is feeding this.
Posted by Steve Soto at July 14, 2005 09:45 AMSteve, as the Germans say, "Auch ein blindes Huhn findet mal ein Korn." Even a blind hen sometimes finds a grain of corn...
Posted by PeterLee at July 14, 2005 10:00 AMIt's the conspiracy that's going to break this thing open. See, the beauty of a conspiracy charge--if you're a prosecutor--is that you can ask a witness "did Mr. Rove say what he planned to do next?" In cases where there's no charge of conspiracy, you can't ask that question--it's inadmissible hearsay. But because conspiracy is about intent and planning to commit crimes, you're allowed to ask questions that address that intent and planning, even though they clearly bear directly on the core crimes that the conspiracy later committed.
Posted by Matt Davis at July 14, 2005 10:16 AMLet's not forget WHY? Why did they feel such an urgency to hold these meeting and why such a need to discredit & smear Wilson in the first place. It's a bigger story than just Rove, it's as Joe Wilson said, He began to reveal how the justification for the Iraq War was all fabricated by this WH.
Posted by emal at July 14, 2005 10:26 AMI wonder whether Fitzgerald knows how we came to get those forgeries?
Posted by Matt Davis at July 14, 2005 10:35 AMsaw it on drudge so do't know if it's true but there are reports that at 3pm today chuck shumer and joe wilson are holding a press conference in the capital calling for the revoking of roves security clearance pending the investigation...don't forget saw it on drudge
Posted by dennis at July 14, 2005 10:44 AMThis Plame/Rove issue is the gateway to impeachment. Crack this nut open and you will find many "prizes".
Posted by roamer at July 14, 2005 11:43 AMI would remind Larre and the commenters as well that you're obviously speaking to facts regarding an ongoing criminal investigation and your pursuit of this could serve prejudicial to the efforts of the Federal prosecutor.
Posted by obelus at July 14, 2005 11:43 AMyour pursuit of this could serve prejudicial to the efforts of the Federal prosecutor.
Nah. Anybody who reads this stuff would get kicked out of a jury pool.
Posted by Matt Davis at July 14, 2005 11:49 AMAnybody who reads this stuff would get kicked out of a jury pool.
That's been my best defense in advoiding jury duty in lengthy criminal cases.
Posted by idiosynchronic at July 14, 2005 12:41 PMYes, the media is DOA. The hard-core, long-term credentialed WH press corps proved it when they lay down and whimpered when Guckert's masquerade was exposed. "What's a journalist? Heck, we don't know. Besides, he was just rewriting press releases like most of us."
I predict the most incisive question asked by a talking head of a Rove defender will be, "Where did you get that lovely tie?" Hey, if they thought it was going to be a tough case, do you think the Rovians would have picked that beacon of mediocrity Norm Coleman to lead it?! They're not worried about the press. Journalism is dead. Long live the blog.
Posted by Radio Head at July 14, 2005 01:10 PMThe Bush Administration is like trying to shoot ducks with a rifle. The targets are so plentiful that you can't really zero in on one. Lost in the Rove mess is the Iraq mess, and the fact that his approval rating failed to rally after his "stay the disaster" Iraq speech and the London attacks. Social Security, Bolton??? where did they go? His miserably failed administration of crooks and liars is flipping like frogs on a pole.
Posted by T2 at July 14, 2005 01:48 PMWhen compiling a list of questions for White House staff, will any reporter ask the President the following question: When did you first become aware of the fact that Rove was a source of information relating to the outing of Plame?
Posted by davidg at July 14, 2005 02:25 PMI think Rove will go down in Plames. The numbers indicat coordination (conspiracy)>
Cooper's e-mail to his boss was just a boiled down summary of what Rove actually said, no matter how much Fox tries to make it seem as though it was the total substance. And then they conveniently forget to remember there were at least 5 more contacts and 3 confirmations, facts which suggest there will be one or more indictments for Rove and at least one more for another "high administration official," resulting to a loss of Republican credibility of being the party or morals and personal responsibility.
We know there were 6 calls because 6 contacts were made (Miller, Cooper, Novak among them). We know 3 contacts confirmed their stories with another "high administration official."
Therefore
1.) 1 man (named Rove by Cooper) made all 6 calls (which reduces the contention of "unknowingly" providing Plame's identity laughable). But he would have had to make sure that there were a few other "high administration officials" ready and willing to confirm his story, which strongly suggests coordination. Did Rove mastermind this portion before "unknowingly" releasing Plame's identity 6 times? Was this coordination "unknowing" as well? What does "knowing" mean? Repeated deliberate acts and coordinating with others for future support suggest a strong and clear intentions. It has knowledgeable design written all over it.
or,
2.) more than 1 person (Rove and at least one other) made the 6 calls. (The fact that one source released Cooper from his agreement of confidentiality but one source did not release Miller suggest at least 2 sources.) Rove would have more to coordinate! To establish guidelines like: No source should call another's contact, Pitch the information off hand, not as the main subject, Make the contact think the source is trying to do him or her a favor ("Don't go too far out on this Wilson thing, I don't want you burnt."), etc. AND Rove would have had to field a group of officials to support the sources stories.
I say Rove coordinated because it is obvious he did so since anyone in the administration in possession of the Plame-Wilson-CIA link would have gone straight to the world master of deceitful politics, and now we know Rove was at least one of the leakers.
So, in the first case we have at least 2 indictments for Rove (exposing and conspiring to expose) and (perhaps) 1 or more indictments for others (confirming and condoning the exposure while furthering it).
But in the second case we have at least 2 for Rove (same as above, but more evidence of conspiracy) and 1 or more clearcut indictments for others (both leakers and confirmers for exposure).
And then we haven't even begun to ask the question of how Rove got the information. (Doesn't leaking the information to him also constitute a crime?) Did Plame give information to officials as one report suggested? Why did Ashbery recluse himself? Did Rove have the proper clearance prior to becoming Deputy Chief of Staff to have seen the material? Or were other federal laws broken to the effect that classified information was used for political purposes? Etc.
I think the great thing we have going for us on this case is Patrick Fitzgerald. By all accounts a fine prosecutor.
How in the world is the White House obstructing justice when they appointed this (very aggressive) special prosecutor?
Also, the journalist asked a question that was designed to put Mehlman in exactly this position. It's pretty standard to have meetings on how to control political fallout - no matter what the situation. It's another to get together an plot how to obstruct justice.
I think you are cofusing the two.
.
Why is it that our media is not beating this drum?
Rove was caught for leaking to Novak in '92 and was fired by Bush Sr.
here
I also find this site.
Here is the all article by Ron suskind. An inside of karl Rive influence in the White House.
……..Inside, Rove was talking to an aide about some political stratagem in some state that had gone awry and a political operative who had displeased him. I paid it no mind and reviewed a jotted list of questions I hoped to ask. But after a moment, it was like ignoring a tornado flinging parked cars. "We will fuck him. Do you hear me? We will fuck him. We will ruin him. Like no one has ever fucked him!" As a reporter, you get around—curse words, anger, passionate intensity are not notable events—but the ferocity, the bellicosity, the violent imputations were, well, shocking. This went on without a break for a minute or two. Then the aide slipped out looking a bit ashen, and Rove, his face ruddy from the exertions of the past few moments, looked at me and smiled a gentle, Clarence-the-Angel smile. "Come on in." And I did…………
….I believe Karl is Bush……
Why Are These Men Laughing? By Ron suskind
Why is it that our media is not beating this drum?
Rove was caught for leaking to Novak in '92 and was fired by Bush Sr.
here
I also find this site.
Here is the article by Ron suskind. An inside of karl Rive influence in the White House.
……..Inside, Rove was talking to an aide about some political stratagem in some state that had gone awry and a political operative who had displeased him. I paid it no mind and reviewed a jotted list of questions I hoped to ask. But after a moment, it was like ignoring a tornado flinging parked cars. "We will fuck him. Do you hear me? We will fuck him. We will ruin him. Like no one has ever fucked him!" As a reporter, you get around—curse words, anger, passionate intensity are not notable events—but the ferocity, the bellicosity, the violent imputations were, well, shocking. This went on without a break for a minute or two. Then the aide slipped out looking a bit ashen, and Rove, his face ruddy from the exertions of the past few moments, looked at me and smiled a gentle, Clarence-the-Angel smile. "Come on in." And I did…………
….I believe Karl is Bush……
Why Are These Men Laughing? By Ron suskind
If this does not redirect you here is the site.
http://www.ronsuskind.com/newsite/articles/archives/000032.html
After the ABC news segment on Rove,which was heavy on the "He didn't commit a CRIME" theme, I came to realize that we are dealing with a conspiracy. A typical Rove conspiracy. And it goes like this. As Wilson's report surfaced, a plan was hatched to discredit both he and his wife - a two for one. The language to be used, the words to be parsed, the setting to be set was all discussed in the WH. What Rove could/couldn't say, what Scotty could/couldn't say, what Bush could/couldn't say, all of it to build the end game of "no Crime was committed". That's it with these guys....no provable crime and all else is "fair game". If they slipped up and Fitz can and will catch them, well, game on. But I guarantee this entire episode was scripted down to the last "is" to ensure that no crime was committed and Bush's language on it reinforces it.
Posted by T2 at July 14, 2005 04:09 PMroamer said:
This Plame/Rove issue is the gateway to impeachment. Crack this nut open and you will find many "prizes".
There is danger here. Let me walk through it, for full effect.
The "best case" scenario, on the surface, is:
1. Prosecution indicts Rove, who resigns, and is eventually jailed.
2. In the process, both Cheney and Bush are revealed to have committed various crimes.
3. Cheney and Bush resign, in disgrace, before impeachment can take place.
But... then what?
4. According to the rules of succession, the Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives succeeds the Pres. and V.P.
5. 3+ years of U.S. President Tom Delay
------------
Ok, now here's the real best case, in my view:
1. The prosecution never quite indicts Rove, but he is clearly guilty in the public's mind. Bush refuses to fire him, since he can't function without Rove's help.
2. Bush and Cheney are also clearly implicated, and are highly suspected in the public's mind. But they remain in office.
3. With the "damaged goods" Rove, Bush, and Cheney still in place as targets, Democrats etc. steadly chip away at the idea that the Bush Admin. has been making progress in the War on Terror. Ideally, the truth that they have in fact made negative progress takes hold in the public's mind. All of Bush's numbers need to be in the 30's or below by Nov. 2006.
4. The Republican Party suffers a humiliating defeat in the 2006 elections. The Democratic Party attains a comfortable majority.
5. With the full support of the majority of the public, Congress then proceeds to impeach both Bush and Cheney on the grounds that: (1) they lied to the American People to get us into the war in Iraq, among other offenses, and (2) are too dangerous to be allowed to remain in office, as demonstrated by their shockingly conterproductive approach to the War on Terror. Note that, according to constitutional scholars, there need not be a technical violation of a legally-defined crime; congress simply must make its own determination that there was a crime, and that allowing the Pres. to remain in office is dangerous to the country.
6. Bush/Cheney are impeached, or resign before the vote, by mid-2007
7. The Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives succeeds the Pres. and V.P.
8. 1.5 years of U.S. President Nanci Pelosi (assuming the Dem. leadership in the House remains the same)
So, our priorities are clear: first, concentrate on taking back the House and Senate. Discrediting Bush/Cheney/Delay/Frist is one tool to use. Then, if we've laid the groundwork properly, we can take the Presidency right afterwards, and start to finally clean up the mess.
Posted by Doug at July 14, 2005 06:36 PMHey not stupid,
My roomy told me a few days ago that Rove had been fired twice from bush campaigns/admins (can't remmber exactly). I let it go because he's not the most reliable type when it comes to tidbits of info but you have inspired me to keep looking for evidence of Rove's dirty work.
Thanks for the link.
Posted by michilines at July 14, 2005 06:46 PM4. According to the rules of succession, the Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives succeeds the Pres. and V.P.
5. 3+ years of U.S. President Tom Delay
Well, if Tom were the Speaker of the House, that would definitely be keeping me up nights. But he ain't. He's the House Majority Leader. Denny Hastert is the Speaker.
Now, Hastert's kind of a pain in the ass, too. But he doesn't seem to be a hogwild fascist on his own. I get the sense that if he were running the show, he'd be significantly more moderate than these lunatics, if for no other reason than he just wouldn't have the overweaning hubris.
Posted by Matt Davis at July 14, 2005 06:49 PMMy roomy told me a few days ago that Rove had been fired twice from bush campaigns/admins (can't remmber exactly).
He was fired from GHWB's 1992 campaign, but I hadn't heard of another.
Posted by Matt Davis at July 14, 2005 06:56 PMRon suskind site is all about the first 2 years Karl Rove in the White house, how he has try to take the president further to the right.
How very few WH staffs would speak about him. His rise after Karen Hughes left. It is all there. How little was really done on domestic policies, more on the politics and control.
…….."It’s an amazing moment," said one senior White House official early on the morning after. "Karl just went from prime minister to king. Amazing . . . and a little scary. Now no one will speak candidly about him or take him on or contradict him. Pure power, no real accountability. It’s just ‘listen to Karl and everything will work out.’. . . That may go for the president, too."…………..( that was in January, 2003)
It does show one with a lot of power.
With the second election behind them, he must be the emperor.
You only can get the real article by putting it in Google. I am unable to get it any other way
http://www.ronsuskind.com/newsite/articles/archives/000032.html
Wilson said he was told by MSNBC’s Chris Matthews that “I just got off the phone with Karl Rove. He says and I quote, ‘Wilson’s wife is fair game.’ I will confirm that if asked.”
Now what do you suppose Rove meant by that statement?
Reconstructing the leak
“the raw story” has an interview with Ambassador Wilson.
From Hullabaloo:
It's just a good thing Rovegate isn't about the vitally important issue of consensual sex between two adults because Goober and his Mayberry Machiavelli crew would be forced to talk about it in numbing detail for months on end before the facts are in.
Luckily, instead of it being a case about a woman blowing the president, this is only about the white house blowing a CIA agent's cover for political purposes in a time of war. We really should have more respect for the reputation of the person who the facts clearly show right now to be either an ignoramus or a thug. How rude.
Bumper sticker par excellence
WHO DO YOU HAVE TO BLOW TO GET A
PRESIDENT IMPEACHED AROUND HERE?!