Nah, probably that was not what he meant, why I bet the White House white-o[sup]TM[/sup] troops will get to the press soon to correct what he really meant to say. 
Yep. And as I said in one of these threads earlier, the talking heads seem to think the angle is going to be perjury, if anything, not leaking secrets. Thats where my money is right now. But we don’t even know if Rove is the target of that angle. There’s the mysterious “other source”, too. And it could be more than one person.
I’m also keeping a side bet on obstruction of justice. The intel law is just too convoluted for anyone but Fitzgerald to know how things’ll really come down.
It’s all very sad. It would appear that Rove had this defense ('They told me, I didn’t tell them") in mind all along. Why else would he have given Cooper the OK to talk, if he didn’t know he had an out? And I’m sure his supporters will hew to this line and turn a blind eye to all the other issues his behaviour raises, which is the truly sad part.
To all Rove supporters, I would like to ask a some simple questions:
-
Does your support actually reflect and admiration and respect for the man and his actions, or (as I suspect) is it more a case of “the enemy of my enemy is my friend?”
That is, are you “Pro-Rove,” or simply “anti-anti-Rove”? -
Regardless of whether he is charged with a crime (which is looking less and less likely), what good has resulted as a result of his behavior in this matter? If he is an innocent party who has been wrongly accused, why didn’t he bring this matter to a head 2 years ago? What benefit is there in turning this into the present cluster-fuck it is rapidly turning into?
Face it, this is all just a big fucking game to him. He has strung us all along in a calculated move merely to count coup against the dreaded liberals and score points for his team. (well, and to discredit someone who dared speak the truth). The administration and its staff should be doing their utmost to secure the best for their country, not their party. Unfortunately, this administration is merely one large fraternity, and Rove’s most recent ploy is nothing so much as a stupid frat-boy stunt.
So enjoy your moment, jfarrell but let me warn you, you’re getting screwed along with us “Libs”.
If any charges at all are filed, either for the leak or for perjury, who is right now the most likely “suspect” in “you guys” opinions?
Rove, Fleischman, Cheney, Libby, Bolton, Novak? Someone else?
This board is a funny place.
Yesterday I basically highlighted the same point Dean makes here, which is that Rove’s contact with Time’s Matt Cooper is where he’s f*cked.
No one found this interesting enough to add any thoughts to, though several Dopers did take the time, as usual, to let their exchanges degenerate into a useless spewing match of *You liberals are whiny assholes./You Pubs are lying * assholes.
I know I feel stimulated.
Not everyone went that route, so what’s the beef?
Beef? No beef. Just forgot what a dick-waving corral this place is.
It’s not all that sad when you consider that friday’s leaks all came from the side that assured us for two years that Rove had nothing to do with the Plame outing. Now that that line’s shot to hell, you have to take what they’re saying now with the appropriate sized grain of salt, especially since they’re leaking in direct defiance of Fitzgerald’s wishes.
SteveG1, Libby’s still at the top of many lists for the second source:
It’s the worst dick-waving corral except for most every other dick-waving corral I’ve been to.
Well, just to get us back on track, I still think it is Rove. His claim that the news leaked info to him (instead of the other way around) sounds way too flimsy. The use of misstatements, leaks, outright lies, and accusations for diversion are the tools he likes best. Turning it around to try and make Wilson and Plame the supposed leakers is pure Rove. After sorting through the contradictory bullshit that passes for news in this country, I have to go with gut feeling and the past history of this administration.
Lie, tell bigger lies to cover up the first lie, completely change the story, and then accuse someone else. Occasionally “leak” something that beneifits you, even if it is just another lie. The methods fit too well.
[QUOTE=SteveG1]
Lie, tell bigger lies to cover up the first lie, completely change the story, and then accuse someone else. QUOTE]
Sounds like you’re describing Joe Wilson. He’s been caught in so many lies it’s not even funny. Hell, even the bi-partisan Senate Intelligence Committee said that Wilson’s own Niger report actually lent credibility to the British claims that Saddam was seeking to purchase yellowcake there. Wilson also tried to tell everyone his wife had nothing to do with his being sent to Niger. Oops! Total lie!
He’s been caught in so many lies it’s not even funny.
Cite please.
From the Washington Post: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A39834-2004Jul9.html
"Former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, dispatched by the CIA in February 2002 to investigate reports that Iraq sought to reconstitute its nuclear weapons program with uranium from Africa, was specifically recommended for the mission by his wife, a CIA employee, contrary to what he has said publicly. "
And…
" Wilson’s assertions – both about what he found in Niger and what the Bush administration did with the information – were undermined yesterday in a bipartisan Senate intelligence committee report."
Ouch. Damn, this article is great ! Get this:
“Committee staff asked how the former ambassador could have come to the conclusion that the ‘dates were wrong and the names were wrong’ when he had never seen the CIA reports and had no knowledge of what names and dates were in the reports,” the Senate panel said. Wilson told the panel he may have been confused and may have “misspoken” to reporters. The documents – purported sales agreements between Niger and Iraq – were not in U.S. hands until eight months after Wilson made his trip to Niger."
Wow, he’s not even a good liar!
Same article as above: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A39834-2004Jul9.html
“The panel found that Wilson’s report , rather than debunking intelligence about purported uranium sales to Iraq, as he has said, bolstered the case for most intelligence analysts And contrary to Wilson’s assertions s and even the government’s previous statements, the CIA did not tell the White House it had qualms about the reliability of the Africa intelligence that made its way into 16 fateful words in President Bush’s January 2003 State of the Union address.”
Yeah, you drooling, irrational Rove haters sure picked a real peach to lead your charge, huh? Good luck storming the castle!
Listen very carefully, Stephey, dear, as we try one more time to clarify.
If Joe Wilson is a liar, that doesn’t mean you can steal a car. The laws concerning car theft are not altered, in any way whatsoever, by Joe Wilson’s lies, or lack thereof.
Maybe you should read that first part again, just to be sure, before we move on to more complex issues…
Ready? That’s nice, dear. OK, here goes…
That nice Mr. Rove cannot claim that his actions, whatever they may have been, have been legitimized or legalized because Joe Wilson is a poopypants liar. And you can’t either. If you would like to start your own special thread about how Joe Wilson is a poopypants liar, that would be swell.
But since we are talking about that nice Mr. Rove here, and his boss, The Leader, your insistence on talking about Mr. Wilson is the teensiest bit tiresome. So maybe you could stop now?
Wilson’s report was the truth. It wasn’t what the gubmint wanted to hear. There was no yellow cake uraniom. It was a false claim, and it was pushed during the state of the union message again after it had been debunked. Also, Wilson’s wife may have (maybe) recommended Wilson for the trip to Niger, but she sure didn’t make the decision to send him. She didn’t have the authority. Now to the big question… what would WIlson have to gain by lying? Absolutely nothing. On the other hand, the administration was still trying to convince us that Saddam was a threat (he wasn’t). They were the ones with something to lose. So, they did what they always do - attack and discredit. It didn’t quite work this time. So, Rove decided to tell his buddy Novak, that Plame was “fair game”. Novak ran with it.
If ?!?!
Forgive me if I take the Washington Post and the bi-partisan Senate Intelligence Committee’s word over that of an irrational Rove hater, OK? No offense.
What is this obsession with Karl Rove?
No offense taken, at all. As to what it is about Rove, I honestly can’t stand him. It’s that simple For far too long he has used the same cheap bag of tricks and gotten away with it. He sabotaged former a governor of Texas to put Bush in place as governor, he started whisper campaigns and push polls against McCain, accusing him (without having the gonads to actualy say it) of being a ni–er lover (used McCain’s adopted daughter to pander to national bigotry), he and his Swifty cronies all but accused Kerry of treason and cowardice, the list keeps growing. Just once I want to see him get caught at it, and for it to stick to him. That’s why I say the current situation smells of pure Rove tactics. If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it might be a duck.