| Welcome to The New Coffee Room. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| That depends on what the definition of 'leak' is; says Bush (in effect) | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jul 18 2005, 09:24 AM (1,156 Views) | |
| JBryan | Jul 18 2005, 06:54 PM Post #26 |
![]()
I am the grey one
|
Reaching. How do you "leak" something that is known by so many. The longer this goes on the more we see that the fact that this woman worked for the CIA was no secret. |
|
"Any man who would make an X rated movie should be forced to take his daughter to see it". - John Wayne There is a line we cross when we go from "I will believe it when I see it" to "I will see it when I believe it". Henry II: I marvel at you after all these years. Still like a democratic drawbridge: going down for everybody. Eleanor: At my age there's not much traffic anymore. From The Lion in Winter. | |
![]() |
|
| QuirtEvans | Jul 18 2005, 07:01 PM Post #27 |
|
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
|
Ah, but that's not what McClellan said. He didn't say, come on, folks, everyone knew it already. He said that anyone involved in the leak would no longer be part of the Administration. And, nearly a year later, Bush reiterated that. If it was so well known, don't you think someone might have mentioned it to the President in the many months after McClellan's statement? If it was so well known, how come nobody's mentioned it for almost two years, until it became clear that Rove was the leaker? You're grasping at straws to try to excuse Rove's ethical lapse here. |
| It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010. | |
![]() |
|
| JBryan | Jul 18 2005, 07:11 PM Post #28 |
![]()
I am the grey one
|
I don't think I am the one grasping at straws here. Face it. This is a manufactured scandal. However, you all might get lucky and see Rove indicted for perjury or something but revealing the fact that Valerie Plame worked for the CIA is no revelation. As to why Bush or McClellan never said this in the last two years? Well, with an investigation in progress you don't run off at the mouth about what the special prosecutor is supposedly investigating. |
|
"Any man who would make an X rated movie should be forced to take his daughter to see it". - John Wayne There is a line we cross when we go from "I will believe it when I see it" to "I will see it when I believe it". Henry II: I marvel at you after all these years. Still like a democratic drawbridge: going down for everybody. Eleanor: At my age there's not much traffic anymore. From The Lion in Winter. | |
![]() |
|
| QuirtEvans | Jul 18 2005, 07:19 PM Post #29 |
|
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
|
They both seemed perfectly willing to run off at the mouth until it became public that Rove was the source of the leak. |
| It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010. | |
![]() |
|
| JBryan | Jul 18 2005, 07:28 PM Post #30 |
![]()
I am the grey one
|
Did they? How so. |
|
"Any man who would make an X rated movie should be forced to take his daughter to see it". - John Wayne There is a line we cross when we go from "I will believe it when I see it" to "I will see it when I believe it". Henry II: I marvel at you after all these years. Still like a democratic drawbridge: going down for everybody. Eleanor: At my age there's not much traffic anymore. From The Lion in Winter. | |
![]() |
|
| Rick Zimmer | Jul 18 2005, 09:01 PM Post #31 |
|
Fulla-Carp
|
::snicker:: JBryan, this is really fun watching you. Keep at it. It just gets better and better. |
| [size=4]Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul -- Benedict XVI[/size] | |
![]() |
|
| JBryan | Jul 18 2005, 09:11 PM Post #32 |
![]()
I am the grey one
|
Perhaps you have something substantive to add other than snarky cheap shots? |
|
"Any man who would make an X rated movie should be forced to take his daughter to see it". - John Wayne There is a line we cross when we go from "I will believe it when I see it" to "I will see it when I believe it". Henry II: I marvel at you after all these years. Still like a democratic drawbridge: going down for everybody. Eleanor: At my age there's not much traffic anymore. From The Lion in Winter. | |
![]() |
|
| Rick Zimmer | Jul 18 2005, 09:22 PM Post #33 |
|
Fulla-Carp
|
Nope. You are doing just fine making my point, JBryan. I couldn't do any better if I tried. |
| [size=4]Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul -- Benedict XVI[/size] | |
![]() |
|
| garrett | Jul 18 2005, 09:28 PM Post #34 |
|
Middle Aged Carp
|
I haven't seen you make a point in this thread. |
![]() |
|
| Rick Zimmer | Jul 18 2005, 09:53 PM Post #35 |
|
Fulla-Carp
|
Oh yes, I made a point about my enjoyment of the reaction of the right to this whole sordid affair. I said:
And good ol' JBryan is doing his damnedest to split hairs, analyse semantics, back peddle and wax Clintonian. It is truly entertaining to watch. |
| [size=4]Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul -- Benedict XVI[/size] | |
![]() |
|
| garrett | Jul 18 2005, 10:06 PM Post #36 |
|
Middle Aged Carp
|
okay, it just seemed more like cheerleading to me. |
![]() |
|
| JBryan | Jul 19 2005, 02:28 AM Post #37 |
![]()
I am the grey one
|
As I said in another thread: Those who can argue the facts will do so. Those who cannot will take cheap shots at the source instead. |
|
"Any man who would make an X rated movie should be forced to take his daughter to see it". - John Wayne There is a line we cross when we go from "I will believe it when I see it" to "I will see it when I believe it". Henry II: I marvel at you after all these years. Still like a democratic drawbridge: going down for everybody. Eleanor: At my age there's not much traffic anymore. From The Lion in Winter. | |
![]() |
|
| QuirtEvans | Jul 19 2005, 04:41 AM Post #38 |
|
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
|
I've argued facts. McClellan was happy to proclaim that anyone who leaked Plame's identity would be gone. Bush was happy to reaffirm it, all the while the investigation was going on. There was no talk of "crimes", even though the prosecutor was investigating. There was no talk of how inappropriate it would be to discuss something while an investigation was ongoing. There was no mention of not knowing all the facts ... just a blanket statement, Rove didn't do it, by McClellan. Except that he did do it. And now that everyone knows that he did do it, the backpedalling is furious. We'll fire someone if he's guilty of a crime. It wouldn't be appropriate to talk about it during the investigation. We don't know all the facts. Everything changes once it's clear that Rove actually did it. |
| It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010. | |
![]() |
|
| JBryan | Jul 19 2005, 05:16 AM Post #39 |
![]()
I am the grey one
|
Yes, you have argued the facts and I commend you for that. McClellan clearly misspoke when he stated that Rove did not reveal Valerie Plame as working for the CIA even though it was not really a secret. Whatever he may have said about Bush's position I look to statements by Bush himself before those of his spokesmen. His initial words were to the effect that anyone who committed a crime would be fired. Later, a reporter recast that statement downward to seem to include revealing her identity. Bush affirmed that for some reason. His latest statements have been a reaffirmation of his original stance. Yes, I see a shift there but when I look at what Karl Rove actually did in light of what is known about Valerie Plame and Joe Wilson I cannot come to the conclusion that Rove should be fired no matter what Bush may have been led into saying on a previous occasion. You may call that breaking a pledge or "Clintonian" if you wish. Frankly, the comparison falls flat when you compare Clinton and Bush objectively. This whole thing is a manufactured scandal and firing Rove out of some strange sense of principle would hand a victory to those who manufactured it. |
|
"Any man who would make an X rated movie should be forced to take his daughter to see it". - John Wayne There is a line we cross when we go from "I will believe it when I see it" to "I will see it when I believe it". Henry II: I marvel at you after all these years. Still like a democratic drawbridge: going down for everybody. Eleanor: At my age there's not much traffic anymore. From The Lion in Winter. | |
![]() |
|
| jon-nyc | Jul 19 2005, 05:22 AM Post #40 |
|
Cheers
|
How would firing Rove be a victory to Rove? |
| In my defense, I was left unsupervised. | |
![]() |
|
| QuirtEvans | Jul 19 2005, 05:26 AM Post #41 |
|
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
|
It's not a manufactured scandal. First of all, either McClellan speaks for Bush, or he doesn't. If he says that anyone involved in the leak will not stay in the Administration, either he's speaking for the White House, or he isn't. If he isn't, someone should say so, because every other spokesperson for every other President, including Ari Fleischer, has always spoken for the President. Second, no one corrected him. If McClellan misspoke, either about what Bush might fire someone for doing, or about what Rove might have done, he's had ample opportunities from the podium to fix it. He's never done it. No one else has ever done it. Therefore, what he has said is presumptively the Administration's position. Moreover, he said early on that he'd spoken to Rove, and Rove denied it. So Rove lied to McClellan, too. Or else McClellan is lying to us. Third, you've ignored my point that McClellan and Bush both didn't seem to feel encumbered about talking during an ongoing investigation ... until it became clear that Rove was the source of the leak. Neither one was saying we don't know all the facts until it became clear that one of the facts was that Rove was Cooper's source. All of that makes this far more than a manufactured scandal. Finally, I'm a bit surprised at everyone saying that her identity was well-known. Even Scott McClellan hasn't been so brazen as to say that. |
| It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010. | |
![]() |
|
| JBryan | Jul 19 2005, 05:40 AM Post #42 |
![]()
I am the grey one
|
I am not going to plow through the press conference rope-a-dope that is going on in the White House press room. I don't know that the Administration was any more forthcoming before Karl Rove was discovered to be the source or not. You have provided no specific examples to back up this assertion. I am not here to defend what Scott McClellan did or did not say. I have heard what Bush has said and it seems fairly unambiguous even if it is not consistent with what he was invited to agree with at some earlier point. I cannot explain that and I can see it as inconsistent but his original statement was both unambiguous and consistent with waht he is saying now. As to Valerie Plame, undercover CIA agents do not drive in and out of CIA HQ at Langley every day. I do hope you can see why. |
|
"Any man who would make an X rated movie should be forced to take his daughter to see it". - John Wayne There is a line we cross when we go from "I will believe it when I see it" to "I will see it when I believe it". Henry II: I marvel at you after all these years. Still like a democratic drawbridge: going down for everybody. Eleanor: At my age there's not much traffic anymore. From The Lion in Winter. | |
![]() |
|
| Jolly | Jul 19 2005, 05:57 AM Post #43 |
![]()
Geaux Tigers!
|
On one hand, you have the videotape of the President speaking, on the other, the words of Mr. McClellan. Now, last time I looked, Mr. McClellan was not the POTUS. Mr. McClellan does speak for the administration, but I think every Press Secreatry who ever held the job would be delighted and amazed at the recent discovery of the powers of the position. Gentleman, there simply is no "there" there. This story is manufacturered, and nothing more than politics as usual in the Beltway. I'm sorry, but there are no stained blue dresses in this story... |
| The main obstacle to a stable and just world order is the United States.- George Soros | |
![]() |
|
| QuirtEvans | Jul 19 2005, 06:10 AM Post #44 |
|
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
|
To the contrary, I think that every press secretary who ever stepped up to the podium knew that he was speaking for the President, and that the President would be saddled with whatever he said. I'm not sure you realize exactly how carefully vetted the precise words that the press secretary uses are in certain situations. Moreover, as I have said, if McClellan overstepped his authority, or misspoke, or went farther than he was authorized, why wasn't it ever corrected? McClellan announces that Bush will fire anyone who was involved in the leak ... if Bush didn't mean it, why didn't someone, even McClellan himself, correct it? When the press secretary misspeaks, it's common practice for him to correct himself at the next briefing. But that never happened here. As for being more forthcoming previously, JB, just read the transcripts, if you are interested. McClellan said explicitly that Rove wasn't the leak. Now he says it's inappropriate to talk about it while the investigation is ongoing. If you can't see the difference between those two statements, I'm sorry, I can't help you any further. Finally, let's get back to the guts of the story here. Rove told a reporter about a CIA operative's identity. For what was obviously political retribution. Put aside for the moment whether the President promised to fire Rove, put aside whether Rove broke the law (I still don't think he did), put aside the President's waffling on his language. It just isn't right ... ethically right ... for a White House Deputy Chief of Staff to out an operative. If there is any doubt at all as to whether her identity is secret or not ... and clearly, there's doubt, because we have a prosecutor investigating and no one at the White House or the CIA saying she was publicly known ... the White House should just keep its damn mouth shut. This isn't rocket science, and you all know it. It isn't Rove's job to out CIA operatives. He should have kept his damn mouth shut. It was a mistake, and, because it was done for political purposes, it was a major ethical breach. And, if the situation were reversed and this had happened in the Clinton White House, you all would be howling at the top of your lungs about it. You wouldn't be calling it a manufactured scandal, and you wouldn't be saying that there is no there there. |
| It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010. | |
![]() |
|
| QuirtEvans | Jul 19 2005, 06:35 AM Post #45 |
|
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
|
In an ABC News poll, only 25 percent of those surveyed believe that the White House is fully cooperating with the leak investigation. In case you think the question was slanted, the same question was asked last September, and 47 percent thought the White House was fully cooperating then. So this scandal has some legs. I can only imagine the pressure on the prosecutor to wrap it up and make it go away. |
| It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010. | |
![]() |
|
| Jolly | Jul 19 2005, 11:30 AM Post #46 |
![]()
Geaux Tigers!
|
Excuse me, but when the Agency begins to delve into things political, I would expect any Adminstration, be it Republican, Democrat, or Wig for that matter, to fight the battle on political grounds. And politics ain't beanbag. |
| The main obstacle to a stable and just world order is the United States.- George Soros | |
![]() |
|
| JBryan | Jul 19 2005, 11:49 AM Post #47 |
![]()
I am the grey one
|
That is far from obvious. He did tell a reporter she worked for the CIA but it makes far less sense as political retribution than an attempt to refute the lies being told by Wilson. |
|
"Any man who would make an X rated movie should be forced to take his daughter to see it". - John Wayne There is a line we cross when we go from "I will believe it when I see it" to "I will see it when I believe it". Henry II: I marvel at you after all these years. Still like a democratic drawbridge: going down for everybody. Eleanor: At my age there's not much traffic anymore. From The Lion in Winter. | |
![]() |
|
| JBryan | Jul 19 2005, 11:52 AM Post #48 |
![]()
I am the grey one
|
Some thoughts on that "poll": http://www.redstate.org/story/2005/7/18/234226/572 |
|
"Any man who would make an X rated movie should be forced to take his daughter to see it". - John Wayne There is a line we cross when we go from "I will believe it when I see it" to "I will see it when I believe it". Henry II: I marvel at you after all these years. Still like a democratic drawbridge: going down for everybody. Eleanor: At my age there's not much traffic anymore. From The Lion in Winter. | |
![]() |
|
| QuirtEvans | Jul 19 2005, 12:11 PM Post #49 |
|
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
|
That's a nice little fantasy, but it isn't what happened. JOE WILSON began to delve into things political. Joe Wilson's wife works for the agency. Rove torched Wilson's wife in his effort to smear Wilson. The absolute worst that anyone has said that Wilson's wife did was that she recommended Wilson for the trip to Niger in the first place. That does not merit saying that the agency was delving into things political. |
| It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010. | |
![]() |
|
| QuirtEvans | Jul 19 2005, 12:13 PM Post #50 |
|
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
|
You can put it in quotes if you like, but it's still a poll. Edit -- I looked at the link, and while it criticizes the methodology, it does not address the September-to-July changes, which are still highly significant. In other words, the size and direction of the change is valid and meaningful, even if you think there is a methodology problem with the way the poll is constructed. |
| It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010. | |
![]() |
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic » |









4:14 PM Jul 10