Karl Rove: Traitor?

Consider this exchange from today's WH press briefing between Scott McLellan and NBC's David Gregory: It's about damn time!

---

"I think younger workers first of all, younger workers have been promised benefits the government promises that have been promised, benefits that we can't keep. That's just the way it is." George W. Bush, May 4, 2005

Y'know, there are times when I feel really sorry for Scott. That's a hell of of a job he's landed himself...

The time has come to ask:

• what did the President know?
• when did he know it?
• was there a conspiricy to cover up the crime?
• were high level Administration officials involved in a coverup?
  

In case you miss the conection, the items listed above were not not related to the Plame affair but rather to some other break-in by low level members of CREEP.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

wouldn't it be interesting if they ran out of people willing to do that job?

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

Good point, jar. Maybe the chimp will start looking for someone to fire the special prosecutor.

---

"I think younger workers first of all, younger workers have been promised benefits the government promises that have been promised, benefits that we can't keep. That's just the way it is." George W. Bush, May 4, 2005

which do you think is more heroic:expose a criminal?protect a criminal?

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

FYI, they have a WMV and QT file of it over at michaelmoore.com.I think the email contents recently revealed by Cooper are pretty damning in and of themselves. I am glad to see the heat for anything is finally starting to hit the White House.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

Exposing a criminal illegally and protecting a criminal illegally are both...well, illegal.

---

I helped scare an old person-I stopped someone from keeping more of their money-So what if people want to have say in the places they live and the cars that they drive-I gave money to an environmental group that helped keep us dependant on foreign oil-I help the enemies of democracy get stronger by telling them laws don’t matter-What if one day I need an abortion-Sex with an intern, everybody does it-I help teach kids around America that America is always wrongDo you know what your DNC stands for?

What did Deep Throat do which was inherently illegal, and especially that which is not currently understood to be acceptable given our current protections for whistle blowers?Protecting a criminal illegally is an additional crime, called conspiracy, obstructing justice and aiding and abetting a crime.I notice you never responded to my concrete hypothetical parallel between moore giving info on troop position, and rumsfeld leaking info on graft by senators... which is worse and would either be protected?BTW, is the evidence starting to become clearer for you regarding Rove's culpability?This message has been edited by holmes, 07-12-2005 08:35 AM

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

I’m not very clear on this. Rove didn't name Plame to Cooper but does appear to be the source for the Cooper article. Is Rove the source for the Novak article? After all, it was the Novak article that outed Plame. Has it been shown that Plame is a covert CIA agent or was she a CIA analyst whose employer and job description was widely known inside the beltway? Wouldn’t that make a difference as to whether there was a crime?

quote:

---

What did Deep Throat do which was inherently illegal, and especially that which is not currently understood to be acceptable given our current protections for whistle blowers?

---

He ordered the break-in of Vietnam protesters' offices, Weather Underground. He was convicted, later pardoned for this. He could have resigned from the FBI and gone to the US Attourney's office (who by the way was already investigating all of that) with his evidence instead of leaking secret information to the press.

---

I helped scare an old person-I stopped someone from keeping more of their money-So what if people want to have say in the places they live and the cars that they drive-I gave money to an environmental group that helped keep us dependant on foreign oil-I help the enemies of democracy get stronger by telling them laws don’t matter-What if one day I need an abortion-Sex with an intern, everybody does it-I help teach kids around America that America is always wrongDo you know what your DNC stands for?

I'm not suggesting any air tight case has been revealed to the media yet, or exactly what did happen. My question was a response to Tal's apparent dismissal that there was any evidence beyond his name being on the list. I explained that it was his position and motive which moved him to the top of the supsect list given that he was on the sources list.Now I am asking if it is any clearer for him why he would be suspected of culpability.As for your questions:We do not know if he explicitly gave the name "Plame" to Cooper, but that seems a bit besides the point when he identified exactly who she was. Wilson had only one wife. That is an interesting question, though it is also a bit irrelevant to the issue. She was outed as soon as her identity as a CIA operative was revealed. It was only more publically revealed by Novak. I am curious as to what Novak has done to get a special deal with the prosecutor. It could very well turn out that Novak has already revealed Rove to be the perp, but the other journalists are being investigated to gather evidence Rove was spreading such info throughout the media. It is freely admitted that she was a covert CIA agent. The question is whether she was both a covert operative and an overt CIA employee and he was only making reference to the overt position she held.That might make a difference, if it could be shown that he had no knowledge that she was covert, or that the "signoff" he claims she gave on a mission was not in her role as covert agent. Either sound like complete BS to me. They wouldn't be aware of the only CIA agent on a mission, or running a mission, to uncover whether certain evidence that would make or break one of the top issues they were facing?That is especially true once Wilson went public and they were then moving forward to try and discredit the story. They did no reference checks on who his wife was, besides the person who "wrote off" his mission?All this would suggest is a move from intentional misconduct to gross criminal negligence.And I am still a bit confused for all those seeking to support Rove and Bush and Co in this whole affair. Let's say for a second Rove is innocent of intentionally revealing a covert operative. What exactly did he do?He is now on record as having stated that wilson's info should be dismissed as biased because the white house did not order an investigation to corroborate a key piece of evidence, wilson's wife (a lower operative) did. Isn't that an explicit indictment of the white house? That means they were not looking into evidence, and were trying to prevent any evidence from being properly investigated.It seems to me everyone from Rove on up is in deep trouble at this point. Of course the Reps have to care about that for anything to happen. But we'll see.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

I meant what did he do that was illegal by leaking the info he had to the press. That is the comparison under discussion. You mean "secret information" of a crime, which is why it was "secret". It was not legitimately "classified information".Yes he could have, and should have done the above. What does that matter when we are discussing what he did do. Is what he did illegal in the same way that leaking the identity of a covert agent not engaging in criminal activity is?I do want to get this on record then... If it turns out Rove is guilty, then you would want anyone else who knew what he had done and kept silent brought to justice?I might add that this means you believe Novak, Cooper, and the other journalist should have come forward to identify their sources within the administration to authorities because that action was a crime? So your contention is that friends of democracy are in support of more and stricter laws? What exactly does the RNC stand for these days?

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

And the Watergate break in was a minor B&E by low level folk done without the foreknowledge of the President.If the President knew the source of the leak and covered it up, should he be impeached?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

I agree with your assessment, although it seems doubtful that Rove will be prosecuted according to Lanny Davis. Lanny was a special counsel that helped Clnton through his debacles. He said Monday that to violate the law, Rove would have had to know Plame was a covert officer; intentionally disclose that fact; and know that the CIA wanted her covert status kept secret. It's extremely difficult to violate that law and to prove a violation, Davis said. Source Still, there will be mounting pressure to do something about this and given Bush's repeated comments over the last two years about seeing to it that the perp(s) will be dealt with. He may have to serve up Rove on a platter and fire him. (Actually if it came to that, Rove would resign). This would prompt as much celebration among Dems as a Hilary victory in '08.As far as McClellan, well, the little guy seems to be in a tight spot. His "no comment at this time because of the ongoing investigation" is lame.