Rove outed Wilson's wife. Hardball talks up possible impeachment

[ScreamingEagle]

apparently denial isn't just a river in egypt.

let me ask you this people:

if it is true that rove leaked the identity of a CIA operative because he/she made public that the claims by the administration were totally false, and hyped up around policy for revenge, would you consider this treason? if you don't consider it treason, what would you call it? and if it is treason by your own definition, what would you suggest as action on rove?

please take some time to be non-partisan and honest with yourselves about it. thank you.

Why do you liberals always jump immediately into your dream scenarios before proof of anything is provided? There is no way we need to answer a hypothetical question that has no basis in fact. You'd probably take any answer as proof of your contention.

 

[freeandfun1]

you really don't consider it treason? at least you think he should be fired IF he was at fault. however, i think it would be going easy on the guy to just be fired over it.

Put it this way, let the courts decide.

Don't you find it funny that the NYT's reporter admits he was told by his source that he could release the name yet he hasn't? If it is Rove, why hasn't he? Maybe because it wasn't Rove??

IF the courts find that he did something illegal, then yes, something more than a firing should occur. Treason? Well, that's a reach. I will agree to try him for treason if you will agree Durbin should be tried for treason!

We don't have any information. The reporters aren't saying anything. Only the media is and I DO NOT trust the media. They have proved time and time again they cannot be trusted.

 

[theim]

This is just more liberals whining and bitching and moaning.

FACT: Plame was working a DESK JOB AT LANGLEY FOR 9 YEARS prior to the story. A DESK JOB AT LANGLEY IS NOT UNDERCOVER.

FACT: The lawyers who helped to WRITE THE LAW say that Rove commited no crime.

 

[archangel]

Put it this way, let the courts decide.

Don't you find it funny that the NYT's reporter admits he was told by his source that he could release the name yet he hasn't? If it is Rove, why hasn't he? Maybe because it wasn't Rove??

IF the courts find that he did something illegal, then yes, something more than a firing should occur. Treason? Well, that's a reach. I will agree to try him for treason if you will agree Durbin should be tried for treason!

We don't have any information. The reporters aren't saying anything. Only the media is and I DO NOT trust the media. They have proved time and time again they cannot be trusted.

I really don't see what anyone can add to this discussion now...you summed up your case in just three paragraphs.........

 

[dilloduck]

Put it this way, let the courts decide.

Don't you find it funny that the NYT's reporter admits he was told by his source that he could release the name yet he hasn't? If it is Rove, why hasn't he? Maybe because it wasn't Rove??

IF the courts find that he did something illegal, then yes, something more than a firing should occur. Treason? Well, that's a reach. I will agree to try him for treason if you will agree Durbin should be tried for treason!

We don't have any information. The reporters aren't saying anything. Only the media is and I DO NOT trust the media. They have proved time and time again they cannot be trusted.

Amen--Is there a rush to judgement here or just a problem with due process?

 

[no1tovote4]

it was common knowledge that she was a spook before rove alegedly said anything....this is so not a story

If this is true then it would be impossible to "out" her at all. I will wait for more evidence of this as well before making a judgement.

 

[Gunny]

i'm sorry, i just don't see the logic of someone parading around about how great of a cause there is in iraq, when they don't want to go and personally contribute to the cause.

Your statement itself is illogical. Who are YOU to have an opinion on how bad the cause there in Iraq is when YOU aren't there?

 

[Max Power]

This is just more liberals whining and bitching and moaning.

FACT: Plame was working a DESK JOB AT LANGLEY FOR 9 YEARS prior to the story. A DESK JOB AT LANGLEY IS NOT UNDERCOVER.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A40012-2003Oct3?language=printer

The leak of a CIA operative's name has also exposed the identity of a CIA front company, potentially expanding the damage caused by the original disclosure, Bush administration officials said yesterday.

FACT, THE CIA DOESN'T MAKE UP FRONT COMPANIES FOR PEOPLE WHO AREN'T WORKING UNDERCOVER.



Owned!

 

[theim]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A40012-2003Oct3?language=printer


FACT, THE CIA DOESN'T MAKE UP FRONT COMPANIES FOR PEOPLE WHO AREN'T WORKING UNDERCOVER.



Owned!

Gee...which position should I take?

You? Or the poeple who wrote the law?

Hmmm....you....or the people....who wrote the law....gimme a minute this is a toughie...hmm....I'm gonna have to go with the people who wrote the law.

Owned!

 

[bock2911]

OK, I have a few questions for those who are supporting Rove. First, some have claimed that Plume was a well known operative before the leak. Where did you here this? And please, I don't want to hear Fox news.

2nd, how can you defend and trust a man blindly that worked on 'Watergate'? He wasn't involved with the actual break in, but from what I have read and heard, he was a part of that very dirty re-election campaign by Nixon.

And I would like to hear a more articulate reply than someone just chastising me for being a liberal (and it is NOT a disease). I agree, in the end, the courts are those that are responsible for the criminal charges, but I think Bush should think long and hard about keeping a man on the staff while this cloud is over Rove's head.

 

[freeandfun1]

...I think Bush should think long and hard about keeping a man on the staff while this cloud is over Rove's head.

The cloud so far is just a creation of the media and DNC. So Bush shouldn't cave until the facts are in. Otherwise, he has no backbone.

The information on Plume has come from various sources. Including at one point, Newsweek. I will try to find the piece. As far as saying don't use FOX as a source, why not? You are showing your bias. FOX does just as good as, if not a better job, of presenting ALL points of view as any network. Every time there is somebody on supporting the admin, there is somebody on bashing the admin. So you are disingenuous in your comments.

The Grand Jury will decide... as it should. That is why they were convened... Now let them do their job.

 

[Bonnie]

OK, I have a few questions for those who are supporting Rove. First, some have claimed that Plume was a well known operative before the leak. Where did you here this? And please, I don't want to hear Fox news.

2nd, how can you defend and trust a man blindly that worked on 'Watergate'? He wasn't involved with the actual break in, but from what I have read and heard, he was a part of that very dirty re-election campaign by Nixon.

And I would like to hear a more articulate reply than someone just chastising me for being a liberal (and it is NOT a disease). I agree, in the end, the courts are those that are responsible for the criminal charges, but I think Bush should think long and hard about keeping a man on the staff while this cloud is over Rove's head.

Lets hear the undisputed proof first then let the punishment fit the crime if any.. And by proof Im not talking about phoney memos.

 

[Jimmyeatworld]

I've had too many irons in the fire the last few days and haven't been able to keep up with this very closely. IF what I have caught wind of is true, and it's hard to tell, it sounds like Plame came up in a casual converation about Joseph Wilson, and was mentioned as "his wife", not literally by name. Yeah, that's just a technicality.

If this is all true, it doesn't sound like something that was done to "out" anyone. Who knows, maybe it was that way by design. Still, we have to know when it was said, what her status was, and if Rove is the actual leak to begin with. If he is the leak they are talking about, I can't imagine him calling that reporter and telling him it would be okay to give his name if he didn't think all would be clear. Whatever you think of Karl Rove, he is no amateur.

One thing about all this that I haven't seen brought up (I will admit to not reading every single thing in the thread), is if this was originally leaked on Bob Novak's show, why isn't he in court?

**Just to add... As far as impeachment goes, I am to the point of just rolling my eyes when the word is brought up.

Bush picks his nose. Impeachment!
Bush fans a fart. Impeachment!
Bush tells a bad joke. Impeachment!

There are people that have been desperately looking for reasons to bring up the word impeachment from the second President Bush took the oath of office in 2001. It's to the point that the word doesn't mean much to me anymore.

 

[bock2911]

The cloud so far is just a creation of the media and DNC. So Bush shouldn't cave until the facts are in. Otherwise, he has no backbone.

The information on Plume has come from various sources. Including at one point, Newsweek. I will try to find the piece. As far as saying don't use FOX as a source, why not? You are showing your bias. FOX does just as good as, if not a better job, of presenting ALL points of view as any network. Every time there is somebody on supporting the admin, there is somebody on bashing the admin. So you are disingenuous in your comments.

The Grand Jury will decide... as it should. That is why they were convened... Now let them do their job.

Well, if there are other sources than FOX, then okey. Before, all I have heard was from FOX news, and I am sorry, but their bias is horrible. First off, I did searches on the entire leak issue, and they didn't even mention the emails from Rove until tues night, when all other sources had it last fri. How is that a fair and unbiased news network? I admit, there is no such thing as an unbiased news network, but FOX is perhaps the most biased one I have ever watched. Just ignoring such a large story is ridiculous.

One more fine example, during a news report, not a talk show on the network mind you, at least 1 reporter stated their disgust on him being found innocent. How can a news network allow such a thing on their reports!

BTW, how can the cloud be an invention of the news networks and DNC when it was Rove's email that is creating all of the debate right now?

 

[tim_duncan2000]

I admit, there is no such thing as an unbiased news network, but FOX is perhaps the most biased one I have ever watched. Just ignoring such a large story is ridiculous.

FOX is the most biased? CBS had the fake TANG documents and they aren't more biased?

Go here to find some recent examples of liberal bias. I know this site's purpose is to expose liberal bias, but they didn't make up any of the quotes.

It also pisses me off how people focus on this Rove/Plame thing and ignore times like this where the media irresponsibly reported sensitive information:

This is in the New York Times. Plain as day for the world to read. I’m all for investigative journalism. I’m all for exposing the truth. But let’s ponder, for a minute, what the press has done to undermine our war against the radical fundamentalists that are trying to smite us from the face of the earth in the name of Allah.

During the war in Afghanistan, while Osama was still making calls with his satellite phone and the CIA was tracking him, our illustrious press printed numerous stories about how Osama’s own cell phone use was going to mean his demise because the CIA was onto him. Shortly thereafter, all communications stopped and Osama was gone.

When Air Marshalls were increasingly being added to planes, they were being done so undercover. The impression created was that there would be Air Marshalls on every plane. The idea that you would be on a plane with a guy with a gun looking after you seemed like a great idea, and a great deterrent. Enter the mainstream media to point out to every terrorist reading that there would only be a limited number of Air Marshalls on certain flights to certain destinations. Got that? If the plan was to leave them guessing, the media stopped that dead in its tracks and proved to the terrorists that, while our defenses are being fortified, they have good odds of not being on a plane with an Air Marshall.

Now, a CIA operation has been exposed. One that was shuttling people in and out of hot zones under the guise of being a charter airline. The NY Times has blown the doors off the story and has now eliminated this as an area of attack, undermining, yet again, our efforts to stop those trying to kill us.

http://insignificantthoughts.com/?p=1448

 

[freeandfun1]

BTW, how can the cloud be an invention of the news networks and DNC when it was Rove's email that is creating all of the debate right now?

There was NO email from Rove. Rove had talked to the reporter, the reporter then sent an email to her bosses... the email is from HER to HER bosses. There is NO EMAIL from Karl Rove. Maybe that is why FOX never mentioned an email FROM Karl Rove. You seem to be watching news sources that are either not telling the truth or leaving it foggy on purpose hoping you will come to the conclusions you just admitted having. Please show me ONE article where it says that KARL ROVE SENT an email...

Frankly, I don't think he would be that stupid..

The email everybody is talking about is from COOPER to her bosses....

 

[Avatar4321]

Your statement itself is illogical. Who are YOU to have an opinion on how bad the cause there in Iraq is when YOU aren't there?

Don't confuse Spilly with real logic. It will just make his head and ego hurt.

I still haven't seen a good response to my point on the other thread. The Media knows who the leak is. They have known for well over a year who the leak is. Do they honestly think we are so stupid that they want us to believe that Karl Rove was the leak and they didnt mention this during the Campaign? I mean they went to the point of manufacturing documents to try to prove the President was AWOL. Yet we are supposed to believe that the media decided to sit on this story and to protect Rove? Come on media people. We aren't just going to believe something is true because you say it. We aren't as stupid as you seem to think.

 

[archangel]

Being a true conservative Independent(Registered American Independent) why don't y'all give this a rest and let the investigation complete itself....I for one do not buy into the mantra of the left or right...this issue has become a we against they...DNC vs GOP...
Carl is a big boy...let him fight his own battle..I for one am familiar with Carl as he came from Nevada...He is self serving and I disagree with the direction he took GW...that being said...let the investigators sort this out!

 

[GotZoom]

WASHINGTON — Journalist Matt Cooper on Wednesday confirmed to a grand jury that White House aide Karl Rove was his source for a story about a CIA operative that has investigators deciding whether any laws were broken by the leak of the agent's identity.

Cooper told reporters he would give them details of his grand jury testimony — in a future article for Time magazine.

"I'm not going to scoop myself today," Cooper, a White House correspondent for the news weekly, said outside the U.S. District Court Wednesday afternoon.

Cooper spoke after a two-and-a-half hour appearance before the grand jury investigating the leak of CIA officer Valerie Plame's identity. He was one of several journalists to whom Plame's identity was leaked following the publication of an editorial written by her husband, former ambassador Joseph Wilson, in which Wilson criticized the Bush administration.

One of those journalists, Judith Miller of The New York Times, is in jail for her refusal to name the person who revealed Plame's identity to her. Last week, Cooper escaped a similar citation for contempt of court when he told the judge his source had waived confidentiality, freeing him to testify before the grand jury.

"Today I testified and agreed to testify solely because of a waiver I received from my source," Cooper said outside the courthouse. "Once a journalist makes a commitment of confidentiality to a source, only the source can end that commitment."

The grand jury is tasked with finding out if whoever leaked her identity to the press two years ago did so with the intent of burning her cover, possibly in retaliation for Wilson's criticisms of the administration's claims that Iraq's nuclear program.

Cooper also said he hoped his testimony would speed up the grand jury's investigation, which would allow Miller to be released from jail. When he announced last week that he planned to testify and would thus be spared from having to go to jail, he proclaimed his solidarity with Miller.

"We should all remember this is Judith Miller's eighth day in jail. The sooner this grand jury recesses, the sooner she can get home," he said Wednesday.

Cooper confirmed that his source on the leak was Deputy Chief of Staff Rove, one of President Bush's most trusted advisers and the man credited with Bush's four consecutive campaign victories.

The waiver that freed Cooper to cooperate with the grand jury was signed by Rove's attorney, Robert Luskin. Cooper's attorney, Richard Sauber, was on hand Wednesday to pass out photocopies of the waiver to reporters.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,162406,00.html

 

[dilloduck]

Being a true conservative Independent(Reistered American Independent) why don't y'all give this a rest and let the investigation complete itself....I for one do not buy into the mantra of the left or right...this issue has become a we against they...DNC vs GOP...
Carl is a big boy...let him fight his own battle..I for one am familiar with Carl as he came from Nevada...He is self serving and I disagree with the direction he took GW...that being said...let the investigators sort this out!

I'm with ya---hell we havent even got past the Delay debacle. ALL those baboons up there need to get down to work and try (at least try) to do something positive.