Karl Rove possibly tried for perjury?

[Moonsabie]

i am sure your probably getting most of you info form CNN ABC NBC and all them. But the funny thing is the media has got all the facts wrong all they can taste is another scalp that?s there single minded goal ever since they made Nixon resign. Rove has not commit any crime. Let the investigation be complete and then will know facts like Janet Reno always said "I am sorry i can not comment on a on going investigation".

Sean Hannity it the nail on the head on his show today.
http://www.hannity.com/

don't be scard to see a diffrent side.! he don't bite

 

[RightIsWrong]

Originally posted by: Moonsabie
i am sure your probably getting most of you info form CNN ABC NBC and all them. But the funny thing is the media has got all the facts wrong all they can taste is another scalp that?s there single minded goal ever since they made Nixon resign. Rove has not commit any crime. Let the investigation be complete and then will know facts like Janet Reno always said "I am sorry i can not comment on a on going investigation".

Sean Hannity it the nail on the head on his show today.
http://www.hannity.com/

don't be scard to see a diffrent side.! he don't bite

Can you explain to me, and I am sure that I speak for others here as well, why the administration has no problems whatsoever in commenting about an ongoing investigation when there was nothing at the time that indicated that one of their own might have been caught with his hand in the proverbial cookie jar?

Why the double standard now? Maybe it is because they haven't been able to get the word out to the supporters as to what the strategy to divert will be yet? Maybe the initial strategies aren't taking hold? Regardless, they have commented before on this very same ongoing investigation with their catagorical denials that Karl had anything to do with it and now their hypocrisy is coming back to bite them in the ass and they don't like it one bit.

Hannity is a tool, both metaphorically and physically, that is used by the right to convince those that are either too lazy, too stupid or just too damned party loyal to actually take the time to do research to see what he says is nothing but half truths, misleading information or straight out lies. I have listened to him many times and then gone to google afterwards and found this to be the case more often than not.

 

[totalcommand]

Originally posted by: Crimson

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: Crimson
In your 2nd post in the thread, the 3rd page.. you posted:

If you don't have facts to disprove any of the above, and the best you can come up with is petty name calling, you don't know your ass from a hole in the ground, and you should STFU until you have something to contribute to the planet better than TasetslikeChickensh8.

This was after TLC made _2_ posts, NONE of them directed at you. Yet you ATTACK him, telling him he doesn't know his ass from a whole in the ground, tell him to STFU, and change his name to "TasetslikeChickensh8.".. I guess thats the contribution you are referring to.

So, instead of asking me if my foot is in my mouth.. maybe you should pull your head out of your ASS. You are a bitter angry troll Harvey... Re-read the first 3 pages of this thread and you will see that YOU were the one who started the attacks.. you routinely cross the line and nothing is ever done.. why is that? I think you need a break from P&N. You are going delusional.

Cute piece of selective editing while conveniently forgetting to include the fact that my post was directly responsive to TLC's post and included specific facts supported by links that refuted his blather. Since you're short on memory, here's the whole post, including TLC's wonderful first of many references to the "loonie left" and other distractive, irrelevancies in this thread.

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Threads like this one demonstrate precisely how the loonie left is marginalizing itself and why the commom-sense left is distancing itself from them.

Replies like this demonstrate precisely how loonie some self-deluded radical neocons can is, marginalizing themselves from reality, regardless of the facts.

FACTS:

• Robert Novak first disclosed Plame's identity as a CIA covert operative in a column on July 14, 2003:

  ---Snip

  At that point, Rove had not been confirmed as Novak's source, and my post acknowledged that.
  
  Did I go after the accuracy of what TLC said? Yep.
  
  Did I call him for the troll his post made him out to be. Yep again.
  
  Was it responsive to the level of his BS, on topic and supported by facts and sources? Same answer.
  
  Got another problem? If not, try discussing the topic instead of my posts. :laugh:

• 
  
  Well, TLC tried to respond to the topic, and you crossed the line and began personally attacking him..

• 
  
  ROFLMAO!
  
  This is TLC "trying to respond", his first post in this thread!:

  Threads like this one demonstrate precisely how the loonie left is marginalizing itself and why the commom-sense left is distancing itself from them.
  
  Keep up the kindergarten commentary, young-uns.

  
  Now, lets contrast that with Harvey's first post in this thread:

  Originally posted by: Harvey
  

  Originally posted by: shurato
  edit: Isn't this sort of thing considered treason and once grounds for capital punishment?

  History shows that the CIA has not always been the good guys and always doing their best to do the right and honorable thing for our country, but if we start with that most ultra "conservative" assumption, anyone who willingly and intentionally blows the cover of a top CIA covert operative is disclosing classified information of vital concern to the security and safety of the nation and should be tried for treason.
  
  Valerie Plame travelled worldwide undercover. She is not in much physical danger as long as she remains in the U.S. However, any street vendor she visitied in any small side street marketplace in any small foriegn country just became a target, regardless of whether they were a CIA contact. The cover for any real contacts she had have probably been blown, and our entire information network has been compromised.
  
  IF (and it's a big IF) Karl Rove is the source of that information, that should apply to him. It should apply to anyone else in the administration who knew about it, as well, and they should be and removed from office and tried for their crimes.
  
  If Bush or Cheney knew about it, they should be impeached and removed from office because they cannot be tried until they are.
  
  If anyone in the administration is involved, it's a new low in American politics when political expediency becomes a motive to sell out the security interests of the nation. :|

  
  I report, you decide. Who started this namecalling and this mess?
  
  

  His opinion, whether right or wrong, should be able to be expressed in this forum without being attacked and belittled by other forum members.

  
  I and others will exercise our ability to express without attacking people when people like TLC post facts and not attacks as their opening posts. TLC has the same expressive abilities as we do.
  
  

  There was absolutely NO reason for you to respond in the way you did insulting him. Show a little class for a person in your position, he did nothing to provoke that level of response from you.

  
  TLC plays dirty, he deserves every bit of this. I have no sympathy whatsoever for him.
  
  When people here play fair, we will play fair also.
  
  

  Like I said, I think you need some time away from P&N, you've turned into a raving lunatic who is attacking other members for absolutely no reason. Seriously, your response was WAY overboard, but you no longer see what you are doing is wrong.

  
  Eliminate the double standard, and take them both out. His response was no different in spirit than TLCs.

 

[shurato]

You play dirty, you get dirty.

 

[Hacp]

I bet the administration would be more open if democrats didn't frequently jump at every single little mishap the administration makes.It was the same way with clinton. The minority party always likes to jab at the party in power. All this partisanship by democrats AND republicans, makes me want to puke. Why can't we all get along.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Hacp
I bet the administration would be more open if democrats didn't frequently jump at every single little mishap the administration makes.It was the same way with clinton. The minority party always likes to jab at the party in power. All this partisanship by democrats AND republicans, makes me want to puke. Why can't we all get along.

The question to ask is:

Why don't politicians stop being power-hungry morons?

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Moonsabie
i [sic] am sure your [sic] probably getting most of you [sic] info form [sic] CNN [sic] ABC [sic] NBC and all [of] them. But the funny thing is [sic] the media has got all the facts wrong [sic] all [sic] they can taste is another scalp [sic] that?s [sic] there [sic] single minded [sic] goal ever since they made Nixon resign. Rove has not commit [sic] any crime. Let the investigation be complete and then will [sic] know facts like Janet Reno always said "I am sorry [sic] i [sic] can not [sic] comment on a [sic] on going [sic] investigation".

Sean Hannity it the nail on the head on his show today.
http://www.hannity.com/

don't be scard to see a diffrent side.! he don't bite

Sean Insanity?!??! BWA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!

BWA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!

BWA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!

BWA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!

BWA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!



No wonder Hannity appeals to you.

 

[MonkeyK]

As we can already see, investigating Cooper is a diversion. Why persue sources that may or may not have revealed anything?

Novak has *operative* in print, so his sources would be much more useful.

 

[Thump553]

Originally posted by: Hacp
I bet the administration would be more open if democrats didn't frequently jump at every single little mishap the administration makes.It was the same way with clinton. The minority party always likes to jab at the party in power. All this partisanship by democrats AND republicans, makes me want to puke. Why can't we all get along.

There is a quantum difference between this conduct and a "little mishap." I'm registered as an independent voter and haven't been registered with a political party in at least thirty years. I won't mince words-I'd like to see the SOB that pulls this sort of stunt run of town and prosecuted to the full extent of the law, no matter which party they are from. If this leak came from some Democratic Congressional staffer I'd be just as outraged. It is especially galling to have come from those who frequently wrap themselves in the flag.

 

[piasabird]

I think if the Liberal Press had the goods on Karl Rove they would have come forward by now and revealed their sources.

 

[Xenoterranos]

http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/world/archives/2005/07/13/2003263355

New article from the Taipei Times.

 

[daveymark]

Originally posted by: Xenoterranos
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/world/archives/2005/07/13/2003263355

New article from the Taipei Times.

I thought Bush said he would fire anyone who comitted a crime? Why are Dems so quick to have somebody fired when no one has been convicted of anything?

EDIT: thanks to Aegeon in the post below, I was right. Thanks, Aegeon!

Originally posted by: daveymark

Originally posted by: Aegeon
http://mediamatters.org/items/200507120004

And if the person has violated law, the person will be taken care of.

looks like Bush DID say something about committing a crime. thanks for the link.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: daveymark

Originally posted by: Xenoterranos
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/world/archives/2005/07/13/2003263355

New article from the Taipei Times.

I thought Bush said he would fire anyone who comitted a crime? Why are Dems so quick to have somebody fired when no one has been convicted of anything?

bETTER CHECK AGAIN ON WHAT bUSH SAID.

 

[Aegeon]

Originally posted by: daveymark
I thought Bush said he would fire anyone who comitted a crime? Why are Dems so quick to have somebody fired when no one has been convicted of anything?

This is because he said nothing about commiting a crime in his promise to fire anyone involved.

Q: Given recent developments in the CIA leak case, particularly Vice President [Dick] Cheney's discussions with the investigators, do you still stand by what you said several months ago, a suggestion that it might be difficult to identify anybody who leaked the agent's name?

BUSH: That's up to --

Q: And, and, do you stand by your pledge to fire anyone found to have done so?

BUSH: Yes. And that's up to the U.S. attorney to find the facts.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200507120004

Nothing was said about commiting a crime in that promise.

Here's some of what McClellan has said in the past on this issue.

McClellan at a September 29, 2003, press briefing:

McCLELLAN: The president has set high standards, the highest of standards for people in his administration. He's made it very clear to people in his administration that he expects them to adhere to the highest standards of conduct. If anyone in this administration was involved in it [the leaking of Plame's identity], they would no longer be in this administration.

[...]

Q: You continue to talk about the severity of this and if anyone has any information they should go forward to the Justice Department. But can you tell us, since it's so severe, would someone or a group of persons, lose their job in the White House?

McCLELLAN: At a minimum.

Q: At a minimum?

McCLELLAN: At a minimum.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200507120004

They said rather clearly that if anyone in the adminstration was involved in the leaking of Plame's name, they would fire that individual.

 

[Queasy]

Does anyone here truly believe that NY Times reporter Judith Miller is sitting in jail right now and the NY Times is stonewalling the special prosecutor to protect Karl Rove when Karl Rove signed papers back in Dec2003/Jan2004 allowing anybody who spoke with him about the Plame kerfuffle to talk with the special investigator? Anyone?

I don't think so. I think it is obvious that someone else is the source of the leak and not Rove. The irony of a NY Times reporter sitting in jail for disobeying the special prosecutor that her employer was beating the drums for is great though.

The context of Rove's conversation appears to be that Time reporter Cooper called Rove to ask him about something else and then asked Rove about Wilson's allegations against Bush. Rove warned Cooper that Wilson's story was full of crap (which it was). Cooper asks Rove why was Wilson sent then? Rove says that Wilson's wife recommended him for the job.

Hardly the crime of the century type stuff here folks. Especially since Plame was a known CIA operative in DC social circles (Andrea Mitchell confirmed as much). This is a tempest in the teapot and much ado about nothing at the same time.

 

[Aegeon]

Originally posted by: Queasy
Does anyone here truly believe that NY Times reporter Judith Miller is sitting in jail right now and the NY Times is stonewalling the special prosecutor to protect Karl Rove when Karl Rove signed papers back in Dec2003/Jan2004 allowing anybody who spoke with him about the Plame kerfuffle to talk with the special investigator? Anyone?

The New York Times, who certainly knows, is very strongly suggesting that Judith Miller's source signed those exact same papers!!!!

Until this week, the administration had deflected attention onto journalists by producing documents that officials had been compelled to sign to supposedly waive any promise of confidentiality. Our colleague Judith Miller, unjustly jailed for protecting the identity of confidential sources, was right to view these so-called waivers as meaningless.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/13/opinion/13wed1.html

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: piasabird
I think if the Liberal Press had the goods on Karl Rove they would have come forward by now and revealed their sources.

If only there were a "Liberal" press.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: Queasy
Does anyone here truly believe that NY Times reporter Judith Miller is sitting in jail right now and the NY Times is stonewalling the special prosecutor to protect Karl Rove when Karl Rove signed papers back in Dec2003/Jan2004 allowing anybody who spoke with him about the Plame kerfuffle to talk with the special investigator? Anyone?

Yes, absolutely. It's not hard to understand at all if one recognizes there are still a few principled people in the world.

Miller's rationale was discussed in one of the articles about this case. She considers the waivers to have been signed under duress, i.e., the White House subjects were all required to sign them. Therefore, they are invalid, and do NOT relieve her of her obligation to protect her sources.

I don't think so. I think it is obvious that someone else is the source of the leak and not Rove. The irony of a NY Times reporter sitting in jail for disobeying the special prosecutor that her employer was beating the drums for is great though.

The context of Rove's conversation appears to be that Time reporter Cooper called Rove to ask him about something else and then asked Rove about Wilson's allegations against Bush. Rove warned Cooper that Wilson's story was full of crap (which it was). Cooper asks Rove why was Wilson sent then? Rove says that Wilson's wife recommended him for the job.

Hardly the crime of the century type stuff here folks. Especially since Plame was a known CIA operative in DC social circles (Andrea Mitchell confirmed as much). This is a tempest in the teapot and much ado about nothing at the same time.

There's those BushCo talking points, right off the script. Just as the Bush faithful smeared Scott Ritter for suggesting Iraq had no significant remaining WMD capabilities, they now smear Wilson for refuting Iraq/Niger uranium claims. But there's a problem. In spite of your attacks, they were right and you were wrong. Wilson did what the CIA asked him to do, accurately reported his findings, and was crucified by the Bush thugs for having the temerity to speak the truth. That's just not allowed in BushWorld.

As far as the claims Plame's identity was already well known, and specifically that Andrea Mitchell acknowledged she knew it, I'm still waiting for links to a credible sources. While this story is widely parroted among the BushCo faithful, the only links I could find were on the right-wing blogs and similar sources. In short, as far as I've been able to tell so far, it's just another dishonest talking point.

Finally, even if BushCo disinformation was true, you have to be morally bankrupt to rationalize that attacking an opponent's family or risking national security to settle a political score is anything less that totally repugnant. The Republicans tout themselves as the party of values. More and more, I see those values being hatred, blame, revenge, reckless disregard for others, and most of all, dishonesty.

 

[conjur]

The Big Lie About Valerie Plame
http://www.tpmcafe.com/story/2005/7/13/04720/9340

The misinformation being spread in the media about the Plame affair is alarming and damaging to the longterm security interests of the United States. Republicans' talking points are trying to savage Joe Wilson and, by implication, his wife, Valerie Plame as liars. That is the truly big lie.

For starters, Valerie Plame was an undercover operations officer until outed in the press by Robert Novak. Novak's column was not an isolated attack. It was in fact part of a coordinated, orchestrated smear that we now know includes at least Karl Rove.

Valerie Plame was a classmate of mine from the day she started with the CIA. I entered on duty at the CIA in September 1985. All of my classmates were undercover--in other words, we told our family and friends that we were working for other overt U.S. Government agencies. We had official cover. That means we had a black passport--i.e., a diplomatic passport. If we were caught overseas engaged in espionage activity the black passport was a get out of jail free card.

A few of my classmates, and Valerie was one of these, became a non-official cover officer. That meant she agreed to operate overseas without the protection of a diplomatic passport. If caught in that status she would have been executed.

The lies by people like Victoria Toensing, Representative Peter King, and P. J. O'Rourke insist that Valerie was nothing, just a desk jockey. Yet, until Robert Novak betrayed her she was still undercover and the company that was her front was still a secret to the world. When Novak outed Valerie he also compromised her company and every individual overseas who had been in contact with that company and with her.

The Republicans now want to hide behind the legalism that "no laws were broken". I don't know if a man made law was broken but an ethical and moral code was breached. For the first time a group of partisan political operatives publically identified a CIA NOC. They have set a precendent that the next group of political hacks may feel free to violate.

They try to hide behind the specious claim that Joe Wilson "lied". Although Joe did not lie let's follow that reasoning to the logical conclusion. Let's use the same standard for the Bush Administration. Here are the facts. Bush's lies have resulted in the deaths of almost 1800 American soldiers and the mutilation of 12,000. Joe Wilson has not killed anyone. He tried to prevent the needless death of Americans and the loss of American prestige in the world.

But don't take my word for it, read the biased Senate intelligence committee report. Even though it was slanted to try to portray Joe in the worst possible light this fact emerges on page 52 of the report: According to the US Ambassador to Niger (who was commenting on Joe's visit in February 2002), "Ambassador Wilson reached the same conclusion that the Embassy has reached that it was highly unlikely that anything between Iraq and Niger was going on." Joe's findings were consistent with those of the Deputy Commander of the European Command, Major General Fulford.

The Republicans insist on the lie that Val got her husband the job. She did not. She was not a division director, instead she was the equivalent of an Army major. Yes it is true she recommended her husband to do the job that needed to be done but the decision to send Joe Wilson on this mission was made by her bosses.

At the end of the day, Joe Wilson was right. There were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. It was the Bush Administration that pushed that lie and because of that lie Americans are dying. Shame on those who continue to slander Joe Wilson while giving Bush and his pack of liars a pass. That's the true outrage.

 

[Genx87]

Black passports?

That is interesting stuff right there. Get caught spying on another country and all you need to do is produce this black passport and they let you go? You dont have no stinkin black passport it is off with your head.

Who knew!

 

[daveymark]

Originally posted by: Aegeon
http://mediamatters.org/items/200507120004

And if the person has violated law, the person will be taken care of.

looks like Bush DID say something about committing a crime. thanks for the link, Aegeon!

note in all the other resources, the reports ask if he stands by his original pledge. The original pledge being the one I just quoted. So of course he is still standing by his original pledge as no one has been convicted of anything.

Nice try, boys. I love it when libs prove themselves wrong.

 

[outriding]

Originally posted by: Genx87
Black passports?

That is interesting stuff right there. Get caught spying on another country and all you need to do is produce this black passport and they let you go? You dont have no stinkin black passport it is off with your head.

Who knew!

Wow nice reading and thinking skills you have there.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: outriding

Originally posted by: Genx87
Black passports?

That is interesting stuff right there. Get caught spying on another country and all you need to do is produce this black passport and they let you go? You dont have no stinkin black passport it is off with your head.

Who knew!

Wow nice reading and thinking skills you have there.

Maybe you can offer us a different explanation for these lines?

If we were caught overseas engaged in espionage activity the black passport was a get out of jail free card.


That meant she agreed to operate overseas without the protection of a diplomatic passport. If caught in that status she would have been executed.

 

[Queasy]

Archive of Joseph Wilson's bio from Feb 8 2003:

He is married to the former Valerie Plame and has two sons and two daughters.

WaPo article about the findings that Wilson lied about his findings in Nigeria

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.

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 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.

It goes on to saying that the Senate Intelligence Committee scolded the CIA for it's mishandling of the Nigeria investigation.

PDF of Wilson's report

And the NY Times protecting Karl Rove as a source? heh. hehe. bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha! That's pure comedic genius right there.

Hate to break it to you but Rove has already testified before a grand jury and the special prosecutor does not consider him a target of the investigation. He can still be your bogeyman though.

 

[outriding]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: outriding

Originally posted by: Genx87
Black passports?

That is interesting stuff right there. Get caught spying on another country and all you need to do is produce this black passport and they let you go? You dont have no stinkin black passport it is off with your head.

Who knew!

Wow nice reading and thinking skills you have there.

Maybe you can offer us a different explanation for these lines?

If we were caught overseas engaged in espionage activity the black passport was a get out of jail free card.


That meant she agreed to operate overseas without the protection of a diplomatic passport. If caught in that status she would have been executed.

If that was the case then why would not every spy just carry one ?

If you are caught doing spy work and just whip out a black passport do you not think that will cause alot of tension between the two countries.

Why don't you do a google and look up captured spies. And see how many of them carry those black passports. I will give you a hint it is less than one.