| 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 (1,154 Views) | |
| QuirtEvans | Jul 21 2005, 06:14 AM Post #76 |
|
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
|
I've agreed with that too. But that doesn't mean it wasn't highly unethical. Or is "ethics" a word that isn't in vogue with Republicans these days? |
| 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 21 2005, 06:21 AM Post #77 |
![]()
Geaux Tigers!
|
I mentioned worst case scenario. As far as I know, and as far as you know, no ethical breach has been made. IMO, this is nothing more than everyday politics. And if folks can't handle that, make 'em a sugar teat and tell 'em to go suck it quietly, over in the corner. |
| The main obstacle to a stable and just world order is the United States.- George Soros | |
![]() |
|
| QuirtEvans | Jul 21 2005, 06:28 AM Post #78 |
|
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
|
I call BS. Outing a CIA agent, even potentially outing a CIA agent, should never be everyday politics. If this had happened under the Clinton Administration, you would have been screaming your head off. |
| 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 21 2005, 06:35 AM Post #79 |
![]()
Geaux Tigers!
|
1. There is plenty of talk to refute that Ms. Plame-Wilson was a covert CIA agent. "Outing" her is no more of an ethical offense than "outing" the checker at the local Safeway. 2. Joe Wilson most certainly made his wife a political target. There had to be some reason that lyin' pup was sent to Niger. If you have a political agenda, don't be surprised when the other side of the aisle exposes it. 3. I sense frustration on the Left side of the aisle. Even Clinton, in his Today show interview this morning, had to acknowledge how Rove has beat the Dems like a red-headed stepchild. Personally, I don't understand the Rove fixation, but I guess after you've been run over by a Mack truck, it's a little hard to focus on the number of the license plate, isn't it? |
| The main obstacle to a stable and just world order is the United States.- George Soros | |
![]() |
|
| Jolly | Jul 21 2005, 06:38 AM Post #80 |
![]()
Geaux Tigers!
|
The latest Dick Morris column: Media and Democratic hunters have open season on Karl Rove Commentary by DICK MORRIS The "gotcha" game is in full swing in Washington as the vultures circle slowly over the White House, hoping for Karl Rove's scalp. The ritualized homicide/suicide is well-programmed. A White House insider is accused of doing something, the news media hype the story and, finally, without proof or presumption of innocence, the staffer resigns so as not to become a "distraction" from the president's agenda. But maybe this time the cycle can be stopped before it runs its bloody course. Karl Rove did nothing wrong. The statute he allegedly violated has a number of very specific triggers. The person who reveals the identity of a covert CIA operative has to intend to uncover her identity, know she is a covert operative and know that he is blowing her cover. The law is designed to stop the likes of Philip Agee, whose 1975 book "Inside the Company" revealed secret CIA information to sell books. Rove's actions are a far stretch from those the statute was designed to cover. Rove did not call Time magazine's Matt Cooper. Cooper called him. He did not mention Valerie Plame's name. He may not have even known it. He had no intent to reveal her identity. The context of the conversation was that Rove was trying to disabuse Cooper of the impression that CIA Director George Tenet had been the moving force in choosing former Ambassador Joe Wilson to investigate the nuclear dealings reported to be going on in Niger. Rove said that it was not Tenet who pushed the appointment but that it likely stemmed from the fact that Wilson's wife "apparently works" at the CIA. To call that conversation a deliberate revelation of an agent's identity designed to blow her cover is a far, far stretch of the statute's wording and intent. But just as Rove did not intend to blow Plame's cover, so the Democrats demanding his head are not very interested in upholding the statute in question. Their motives are totally political. They want revenge against Rove for his successful role in piloting the Bush election and reelection campaigns, and they want to be sure that Bush does not have access to Karl's advice in the remaining years of his second term. Washington is a mean town where human sacrifice has been raised to an art form. But Karl Rove does not deserve this fate. He has served loyally and well, resisting enormous opportunities to leave midway and reap a bonanza of income in the private sector. He has shown himself to be a man of uncommon integrity and selflessness in serving this administration and this country. He should not be tossed to the partisan wolves. Bush, having appointed a special prosecutor and pledged to fire anyone who was responsible for revealing Plame's identity, cannot just sweep the matter under the rug. But he should allow Rove to clear his name through the normal process of investigation and testimony. He should keep Karl onboard, stipulating only that he fully answer all questions from a grand jury -- as he has done already? -- should the prosecutor need him to appear again. If Rove is indicted or even named as a target, Bush will have to let him go. But that's not going to happen based on the current fact pattern, and Bush should not let himself be pushed ahead of the process by firing Rove. Indeed, there is some question that the reporters who took Rove's lead, looked up Plame's name and published it may themselves be more likely to have violated the statute than is Rove himself. Whoever took the information Rove provided and ousted Plame was, in fact, deliberately outing a CIA operative and may be a better fit for the statute's intent than Karl Rove. Bush should not fire Rove. He should stick by him until or unless the criminal investigation makes it evident that he may have violated the statute. Otherwise, he should stay on the job. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| The main obstacle to a stable and just world order is the United States.- George Soros | |
![]() |
|
| QuirtEvans | Jul 21 2005, 06:44 AM Post #81 |
|
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
|
Even your beloved Dick Morris describes it as an outing, albeit with a typo.
I guess Morris sees it a little differently than a Safeway grocery checker, huh? |
| 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 21 2005, 06:55 AM Post #82 |
![]()
Geaux Tigers!
|
Unlike Democrats, the other side of the aisle does not walk in lock-step. Morris has his opinion, much of which I agree with. However, that statement I do not. |
| The main obstacle to a stable and just world order is the United States.- George Soros | |
![]() |
|
| QuirtEvans | Jul 21 2005, 07:17 AM Post #83 |
|
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
|
Excuse me, I have to clean a snortful of coffee off the computer screen. You really should go into stand-up comedy. |
| 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 21 2005, 07:52 AM Post #84 |
![]()
Geaux Tigers!
|
A waste of good coffee. It was once said that controlling Democrats was like herding cats. It was also said, that unlike Republicans, you could at least herd them... |
| The main obstacle to a stable and just world order is the United States.- George Soros | |
![]() |
|
| ivorythumper | Jul 21 2005, 09:34 AM Post #85 |
|
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
|
I don't think it was a typo. There is a difference that you are ignoring. The argument is that Cooper's intention was to deliberately out a CIA operative -- whether or not he actually outed her is not germane, and whether or not she had a protected status in not germane. Rove did not deliberately do anything other than to attempt to clear up a misperception regarding Wilson's being sent to Niger (so the story goes). It is a matter of intentionality. It would have been more clear if he had written "was, in fact, deliberately intent on outing a a CIA operative", but that seems to be the crux of his argument. |
| The dogma lives loudly within me. | |
![]() |
|
| QuirtEvans | Jul 21 2005, 10:08 AM Post #86 |
|
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
|
That's an interesting theory, Thumperino, but it requires mind-reading. Since I don't know Morris, I have to go by what he wrote. And that isn't what he wrote. |
| It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010. | |
![]() |
|
| ivorythumper | Jul 21 2005, 10:40 AM Post #87 |
|
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
|
You seem to be able to read Rove's mind and know that he was trying to burn Plame to get back at Wilson, with much less context than the entire article that Morris wrote.... ![]() BTW, knowing the editorial process of having to fit so many words into allotted column inches, this might have even been a slip -- they simply were not thinking about the Quirtus factor in their editing. |
| The dogma lives loudly within me. | |
![]() |
|
| QuirtEvans | Jul 21 2005, 11:35 AM Post #88 |
|
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
|
Let's see, on the scale of likelihood ... Dick Morris and his editors shorthanded the intention to commit an act into the act itself ... because everyone knows that it takes a razor-sharp eye for irrelevant detail to discern the difference between "deliberately intent on outing" and "deliberately outing" Or Dick Morris actually meant what he said ... Gee, I wonder which is more likely?
Because statutes are often written to make intent an element of a crime, and because no one can read minds, we have to look for indicia of intent. There were plenty in Rove's situation, but none in Morris' article to suggest the reading you are straining to reach. The typo, by the way, was "ousted" instead of "outed". Since no one "ousted" Plame, I'm assuming that was a typo. I hadn't thought it was necessary to explain that, but I guess it was. If you're claiming that "ousted" is the correct word and that I'm missing some difference of meaning, please explain. |
| 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 21 2005, 11:47 AM Post #89 |
![]()
I am the grey one
|
I can discern no substantive difference at all. The fact is, Matt Cooper clearly deliberately outed Valerie Plame. He included her name and occupation with the intent to inform readers of those facts. It is not at all clear that Rove intended for him to do that. In fact, according to Matt Cooper himself (saying, as he did, that it was on super duper tippy top secret background), it was quite the opposite. I still do not see why an assumption that Karl Rove was trying to out Valerie Plame to exact political revenge shoould hold sway over the quite plausible explanation that he was trying to disabuse Matt Cooper of a lie (Joe Wilson saying he was sent to Niger by Dick Cheney's office) before he went to print with 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. | |
![]() |
|
| QuirtEvans | Jul 21 2005, 12:00 PM Post #90 |
|
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
|
Because, if he wasn't intending to out Plame, he could simply have said, it wasn't Cheney's office who suggested Wilson, it was someone at the CIA, and I cannot tell you whom. By saying it was Wilson's wife, he effectively outed her, which wasn't necessary in order to disabuse Cooper of the allegedly incorrect information. It was extraneous detail ... unless you were looking to punish Wilson by getting his wife's identity published. And please don't say that giving up her identity was necessary to get Cooper to believe him. Just not true, under the circumstances, it added nothing to the credibility of what Rove was saying. |
| 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 21 2005, 12:07 PM Post #91 |
![]()
I am the grey one
|
Yes it did. Why should anyone believe that the CIA would send a guy like Wilson who had no expertise in WMD, no prior connection with the CIA or intelligence gathering in general and nothing to even bring him to the attention of the CIA except that his wife worked for them? Why should Matt Cooper find the bare assertion, "Someone at the CIA sent him" preferable to Joe Wilson's story that Dick Cheney's office sent him? The fact that Valerie Plame is his wife gave it credibility. |
|
"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. | |
![]() |
|
| ivorythumper | Jul 21 2005, 12:08 PM Post #92 |
|
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
|
You are right that "ousted" was a typo or a bad choice. You might have indicia -- you can get rash cream or penicillin for that. But you've done quite a bit more than surmised that was the case -- you have already decided that was the case.
Now give us the proof that turns indicium into fact. |
| The dogma lives loudly within me. | |
![]() |
|
| QuirtEvans | Jul 22 2005, 04:25 PM Post #93 |
|
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
|
As is typical in Washington, you get in more trouble from the cover-up than you do from the original act. From the Washington Post. Conflicting Stories By Dan Froomkin Special to washingtonpost.com Friday, July 22, 2005; 1:22 PM New reports today indicate that special prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald is zeroing in on conflicting stories officials and reporters have provided his grand jury, lending credence to the theory that he may be considering obstruction of justice or perjury charges against top White House officials. Bloomberg and the New York Times move the ball forward today, courtesy of what appear to be a growing number of leakers. And here, culled from those and other reports, are what would seem to be some of the harder-to-reconcile contradictions in the case, which started out as an investigation into who leaked a CIA agent's identity -- but which now could be turning into another testament to the Washington maxim that the cover-up is always worse than the crime. · White House chief political strategist Karl Rove reportedly told the grand jury that he first learned of Valerie Plame's identity from columnist Robert Novak -- but Novak's version of the story is that Rove already knew about her when the two spoke. · Rove didn't mention his conversation with Time magazine reporter Matthew Cooper to investigators at first and then said it was primarily about welfare reform. But Cooper has testified that the topic of welfare reform didn't came up. · Vice President Cheney's chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby apparently told prosecutors he first heard about Plame from NBC's Tim Russert, but Russert has testified that he neither offered nor received information about Plame in his conversation with Libby. · And former White House spokesman Ari Fleischer apparently told prosecutors that he never saw a classified State Department memo that disclosed Plame's identity, but another former official reportedly saw him perusing it on Air Force One. Here's the Latest Richard Keil writes for Bloomberg news service: "Two top White House aides have given accounts to a special prosecutor about how reporters first told them the identity of a CIA agent that are at odds with what the reporters have said, according to people familiar with the case. "Lewis 'Scooter' Libby, Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff, told special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald that he first learned from NBC News reporter Tim Russert of the identity of Central Intelligence Agency operative Valerie Plame, the wife of former ambassador and Bush administration critic Joseph Wilson, one person said. Russert has testified before a federal grand jury that he didn't tell Libby of Plame's identity, the person said. "White House Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove told Fitzgerald that he first learned the identity of the CIA agent from syndicated columnist Robert Novak, according a person familiar with the matter. Novak, who was first to report Plame's name and connection to Wilson, has given a somewhat different version to the special prosecutor, the person said. . . . "There also is a discrepancy between accounts given by Rove and Time magazine reporter Matt Cooper. The White House aide mentioned Wilson's wife -- though not by name -- in a July 11, 2003, conversation with Cooper, the reporter said. Rove, 55, says that Cooper called him to talk about welfare reform and the Wilson connection was mentioned later, in passing. "Cooper wrote in Time magazine last week that he told the grand jury he never discussed welfare reform with Rove in that call." David Johnston writes in the New York Times about how Rove and Libby, at the time of the leaks, were "working closely together on a related underlying issue: whether President Bush was correct in suggesting earlier that year that Iraq had been trying to acquire nuclear materials from Africa." Johnston, attributing the information to "people who have been briefed on the case," describes how Rove and Libby were deeply involved, for instance, in drafting a key statement by CIA director George J. Tenet. The leakers of this new tidbit, Johnston writes, believe it shows that Rove and Libby "were not involved in an orchestrated scheme to discredit Mr. Wilson or disclose the undercover status of his wife" -- but that, in essence, the disclosure of her identity was just collateral damage in the orchestrated scheme to defend against charges that the administration had exaggerated the nuclear threat posed by Iraq. That might tend to exculpate them from a criminal leaking charge. But it demonstrates, as Johnston writes, "the unusual degree" to which political and national security operations were intertwined. And Johnston adds this new report to the mix, regarding the classified State Department memo and the former press secretary: "Mr. Fleischer told the grand jury that he never saw the document, a person familiar with the testimony said, speaking on the condition of anonymity because of the prosecutor's admonitions about not disclosing what is said to the grand jury." But wait! Richard Keil and William Roberts wrote for Bloomberg on Monday: "On the flight to Africa, Fleischer was seen perusing the State Department memo on Wilson and his wife, according to a former administration official who was also on the trip." |
| It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010. | |
![]() |
|
| Rick Zimmer | Jul 22 2005, 04:39 PM Post #94 |
|
Fulla-Carp
|
It is just a matter of time before serious and credible people ask "What did Bush and Cheney knew and when did they know it?" The answer may not be pretty. |
| [size=4]Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul -- Benedict XVI[/size] | |
![]() |
|
| ivorythumper | Jul 22 2005, 04:57 PM Post #95 |
|
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
|
And what, now it just folks like you and Quirt asking the question? ![]() --- joking! you know I love both you guys! (and the more literate ones will ask "What did Bush and Cheney know ..." )
|
| The dogma lives loudly within me. | |
![]() |
|
| JBryan | Jul 22 2005, 06:30 PM Post #96 |
![]()
I am the grey one
|
More fanning of the embers of this non-scandal by our friends in the MSM. Russert said he didn't name Valerie Plame. Well, maybe he didn't but he may have identified her some other way. Novak's and Rove's stories are not quite the same but how is not elucidated. At any rate, Fitzgerald better have a lot more than this if he is going after perjury charges because all this is is two different accounts of the same conversations with no independent corroboration to indicate who is not telling the truth. Impossible to prove on that basis. |
|
"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. | |
![]() |
|
| Wyatt Derp | Jul 22 2005, 06:58 PM Post #97 |
![]()
Advanced Member
|
You lefties are like sheep. If the DNC didn't tell you what to think you'd have no clue. "Bush LIED" "Cheney LIED" "Rove LIED" Everybody "LIED" Except Clinton... they told you not to believe that one. Take your pick as to which one I'm talking about..... "What did ______________ know and when did he/she know it" (insert whatever Republican's name is the current target) "This nominee is not in the mainstream so we're going to filibuster" (no name need be inserted, because it doesn't matter. It's a stock response) "We're going to block/fight/obstruct/hinder/filibuster/delay/_____________ (insert whatever involves a Republican) How sad you can't think for yourself. |
![]() |
|
| QuirtEvans | Jul 23 2005, 03:10 AM Post #98 |
|
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
|
I can think for myself just fine, thanks. I can talk for myself, too, and don't need a sockpuppet to do it. |
| It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010. | |
![]() |
|
| Larry | Jul 23 2005, 04:28 AM Post #99 |
![]()
Mmmmmmm, pie!
|
What - are you the only one who doesn't know who he is? No wonder you can't keep up. Besides, he probably knew you'd need something to divert attention away from the fact that he's right. That's how you lefties do it isn't it - ignore the substance and attack the messenger? |
|
Of the Pokatwat Tribe | |
![]() |
|
| Amanda | Jul 23 2005, 04:54 AM Post #100 |
![]()
Senior Carp
|
Larry:
Well, I'm not embarrassed not to have been following your complex cast of sockie characters. So, WHO IS "OPIE"? And what IS the point of obfuscating so many identities? MAkes it very hard to know wth whom one is speaking. Wasn't that supposed to be a good thing? (It's SO hard to keep up!) Or is the idea that we're not supposed to know? ? (Perhaps you all need a "key" for your members roster, e.g., "so and so, also known as Tom, Dick and Harry..." etc. ) And PLEASE don't again raise the issue of my supposed deceptiveness in having changed my nom-de-net from Ariel to Amanda. I think everyone who's known me from the Old Country, knows very well who I am and was by now. |
|
[size=5] We should tolerate eccentricity in others, almost to the point of lunacy, provided no one else is harmed.[/size] "Daily Telegraph", London July 27 2005 | |
![]() |
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic » |













in having changed my nom-de-net from Ariel to Amanda. I think everyone who's known me from the Old Country, knows very well who I am and was by now. 
4:14 PM Jul 10