Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

I'm sorry Karl Rove . . ."Plame For Dummies"

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
kpete Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-14-06 11:12 AM
Original message
I'm sorry Karl Rove . . ."Plame For Dummies"
Bottom Line:

The White House lied about this.
Rove still works in the White House.
All this is a terrible disgrace.


I'm sorry Karl Rove . . .
By Eric Mink
ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH
09/13/2006

I did not want to write this column.
After reviewing all this material, I feel obliged to say: I'm sorry Karl Rove . . . still has a job.


...........................

Among those involved in figuring out how to counter Ambassador Wilson's criticisms of the administration were Rove, Libby, Stephen Hadley (then deputy National Security Adviser, now National Security Adviser) and Cheney. Among those who talked directly to reporters about Mrs. Wilson's employment at the CIA were Libby and Rove -- despite categorical denials by White House press secretary Scott McClellan in 2003 on Sept. 29, Oct. 4, Oct. 7 and Oct. 10.

— Was Mrs. Wilson's CIA status classified information? In a Feb. 15, 2005, concurring opinion written in a case involving Judith Miller's efforts to avoid the grand jury, U.S. Court of Appeals Judge David S. Tatel noted the following: "The special counsel refers to Plame as 'a person whose identity the CIA was making specific efforts to conceal and who had carried out covert work overseas within the last five years.' "

— Abuse of power and foot-dragging? Fitzgerald was appointed special counsel on Dec. 30, 2003. By that time, three of the five felonies with which Libby has been charged already had been committed, his Oct. 28, 2005, indictment alleges. Fitzgerald's authority to investigate criminal cover-up acts such as perjury, obstruction of justice and lying to investigators was affirmed explicitly by Acting Attorney General James Comey in a letter dated Feb. 6, 2004.

Those who dismiss such acts as trifles or technicalities might refer back to Tatel's concurring opinion. The exposure of Wilson's identity, he wrote, "harmed national security" and ". . . perjury in this context is itself a crime with national security implications."

details at:
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/columnists.nsf/ericmink/story/79BED3F49C8E0E01862571E80001C928?OpenDocument
via:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/9/14/115518/714
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
lumberjack_jeff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-14-06 11:27 AM
Response to Original message
1. The article misses an important point
Novak wasn't the first journalist that Amitage "accidentally" talked about Plame to, a week prior, he told Woodward. It wasn't until it was apparent that Woodward wasn't going to publish the information that he accidentally told Novak.

Q) How did this guy become an Admiral being such a gossip?
A) He's not a gossip, he's good at taking orders.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
peacetalksforall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-14-06 12:07 PM
Response to Original message
2. Where's the timeline? Didn't some of the planning take place on
Edited on Thu Sep-14-06 12:10 PM by higher class
that flight to Africa - Powell was on board. Powell & Armitage = same thing. The files carried on that flight were assembled before the flight - by Cheney? Then, passed to Rove to coach George?

Anyone have the link?

In the simplest of terms - were Powell and Amritage used to deliver the stuff? Why would the State Dept have to be invovled in this level of espionage? Though Powell delivered his lie of a speech, he and Armitage weren't in the first line of operatives who deal with the press Are they?

This is all orchestrated - look at the players. Isikoff and the immediate descent of right wing Congress and pundits demanding that Libby be released and that Fitzgerald close his case.

Corn. Who knows. Disappointed with and bewildered about him.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Garbo 2004 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-14-06 01:31 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. The planning was before the trip to Africa. Libby was leaking to Miller
on June 23, before Wilson wrote his July 6 op ed and before Armitage spoke with Novak on July 8.

Libby had the info from State Dept INR memo in late May. Cheney and Libby were briefed by CIA in early June. During the July trip to Africa WH staff, Fleischer and Bartlett, were telling journalists to look into the origin of Wilson's trip to Niger (wink, wink, nudge, nudge). Meanwhile Libby and Rover were chatting to Miller (Libby for the second time), Cooper, Novak. Orchestrated, coordinated.

That Libby/Rove gang try to pin it on the State Dept is significant. A misdirection which some fall for.

And if you look at what Corn and Isikoff wrote, their sources (likely speaking with Armitage's knowledge since they defend him) take pains to say that Armitage was not a part of the White House smear and that he inadvertantly stepped in it. Corn says Armitage may have had his own reasons to dog Wilson but that in no way changes the fact that the WH was coordinating an anti-Wilson campaign and then tried to cover it up. And unlike WH staff, Armitage came forward to the DOJ investigators early on in the investigation. Libby and Rove on the other hand lied and tried to cover up their involvement.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-14-06 01:46 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. "The files carried on that flight ...."
This is important -- the files were not carried on that flight. I've been saying this for over a year on DU. The information was faxed.

Along with other sources that I have quoted since July '05, we can find, on page 259 of Corn & Isikoff's book: "After Bush and his entourage had left for Africa, according to Ford, the memo was faxed to Powell on the presidential jet. It was a significant moment."

It is indeed significant.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
peacetalksforall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-14-06 03:30 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. Garbo and H20 Man, good points. Thanks. 'Stepping' into it seems
rational.

Yes, they (Cheney, et al) were planning before that flight. Then the faxed documents? for what purpose? more planning? or to bring more people into the circle - for blame or cover-up or obfuscation?

A person never knows how far they can project when planning their dirty tricks before they run up against possible walls and backfires. They are so darn arrogant and confident in their crimes, that planning how to pass the blame may or may not be included in their daily manipulations.

The issue that clouds the planning theme is the copy of the Sunday article that Cheney wrote notes on. It could throw people off when it's obvious that Cheney had to know who it was that was going to Niger as soon as Wilson knew.

I would like to fast forward - I believe they are caving on each other. Seems Washington means 100% employment for lawyers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dogday Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-14-06 12:55 PM
Response to Original message
3. You asked for it kpete.............. see below
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 08:58 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC