Will Rove be punished for being a proven "traitor"?

I doubt it. Too much corruption has been cultivated by the Republicans. With Congress, Senate and the White House (and the voting machines) in control under the Republican Party more abuse of power is evident.

PLEASE stop referring to Karl Rove as "smart" or a "genius," evil or otherwise. He is a liar, thief and cheat. He believes he is smarter than anyone else because he will not scruple to lie, cheat or steal, and he thinks the rest of us are stupid because we won't. I've known a hundred men like him, in business, academics or in politics. They are so used to believing how smart they are that they become arrogant, and they think they are invulnerable so they do something audacious, so blatant they get caught. I was fascinated at how Rove had no qualms about "outing" himself as the confidential source. He must believe that nobody can touch him. After pride comes the fall.

Hi, Bando Bling - Six months' ago I would have agreed with you. But now that we know Comcast et al were interfering with Americans gathering together to oppose the evil Bush regime (did they also prevent Conyers from receiving e-mail?), and that has been "stopped", the uprising will grow stronger. The evil regime is comprised of ignorant, lying, cowardly individuals who are going to turn tail and run when it becomes clear that the American people have their number, and their number is up. I can't wait for the Bush administration to "crash and burn". There will be dancing in the streets all over the world. I hope CNN and Al-jazeera show the world the millions of Americans dancing in the streets at the demise of the evil Bush administration. That will mean a lot to many!

From a group of Republicans:

Clearly some in the Bush Administration do not understand the requirement to protect and shield national security assets. Based on published information we can only conclude that partisan politics by people in the Bush Administration overrode the moral and legal obligations to protect clandestine officers and security assets…You have set a sickening precedent…

#2: The media have a need to create a “genius” in every administration. Remember Dick Morris. HR Haldeman, the genius for Nixon, was refuted to be an “electronics expert.” I guess this makes them look smarter when they topple him, or less stupid for believing him.

Sorry to disappoint, Cyteria. But I'll stand by my "evil genius" phrase. No matter how unhappy it may make you (or me). Rove's tacticts have, in fact, been pure genius. Unfortunately, they've also been pure evil.

But yes, I'd also classify Hitler as an evil genius as well if that makes you feel any better.

"Once bread becomes toast there's no turning back"

If only.........

Now boys boys boys. Stop your gloating and look at some facts.
It is coming out in varied news media that it is not a clear situation here.
Wilson was NOT sent there in any official capacity - in fact at one time he claimed the VP sent him - no one other than his WIFE - who, despite his assertions to the contrary - recommended in a memo for him to go to Niger in the first place - and it is also becoming clear that while Rove certainly should be careful of the way he expresses his opinions - was merely warning a reporter against taking this man too seriously. I believe the comment credited to him was simply (and paraphrased here) "his wife sent him".
The wife was never revealed as a covert operative, nor in fact was her name given (though it would be the simplest thing in the world for this to be discovered) until Wilson himself started disclosing the situation.
Wilson in his zeal to be official, was neither paid for this trip, nor has even GIVEN US A WRITTEN REPORT - he is too busy bragging about the supposed credentials behind it and how important he is.
So relax your attack boys, and enjoy the information coming in.
I was recommended to this website because of my love of reading ridiculous political rhetoric - thank you for not dissapointing me.

John your RNC talking points are not going to cut any ice here and you should know it by now.

If by RNC talking points you mean - "Listen to the news" then you are correct. I speak for no one but myself, and my own assertions based on facts.
It seems that most of the "bloggers" on this website speak from an agenda. Mine is simply to not let you get away with it.
Thank you

Out a NOC ,who cares who pays for the trip.
It's the law ,stupid.

Hi, John - yours is the whimpiest explanation I have heard to date...no one believes anything from the lying Bush administrations' mouths any more...but keep trying if it makes you feel good...

Gee, that made perfect sense. Now you know why I love to read these blogs - because of comments like that.
1) The law states that it is illegal to out a covert operative AS a covert operative. It does not mean that you can NEVER even say the person's name, or even say something like "his wife". So, before you make assertions - look towards facts, not just your local network affiliate.
Love the fact that the best you can do so far is call this valid opinion stupid or RNC talking points. Once a person allows opinions other than their OWN or SIMILIAR ONES into their sphere, then they are truly thinking. It seems you have no wish to do that.

The information is not from the RNC but from varied news sources that corroborates the information from the wires/sources/etc. - What a shame that you are more interested in pushing your agenda rather than looking for truths. It is so funny that I would be getting attempted political commentary from the same Peggy who earlier was looking forward to "Dancing in the streets" once Bush came "Crashing down" - that seems to be objective non biased intelligent rhetoric. Thank you for taking the high road.

Please feel free to back up any assertions you would like with facts, not just wishes.

It seems Rove has stopped by for a visit. WOW, I feel honored.

Now this is becoming fun. Four commentaries that have no substance or foundation other than using an ad hominem attack.
Good for you. Go to speech class.

Poor John, . . . Sorry John, you are having to work so very hard, cutting and pasting and researching popular bloggers lists on which to insert your GOP attack-dog drivel against Joe Wilson! That should've been last years garbage-wrap anyway. You may go now! No need to waste your time, ... No rhetoric spoken here. We are originals!

Oh, by the way, I saw your Chairman Mehlman get really flattened and steam-rolled by John King who hosted the "Late Edition" on CNN today when Ken tried that same old number off the talking points song book. Any one else catch that today?

I may start watching CNN more often, if I can see more of that good upper-cut reporting to the jowls of Bush administration PR folk instead of "moof moof" reponsing as is the norm!

Poor John, . . . Sorry John, you are having to work so very hard, cutting and pasting and researching popular bloggers lists on which to insert your GOP attack-dog drivel against Joe Wilson! That should've been last years garbage-wrap anyway. You may go now! No need to waste your time, ... No rhetoric spoken here. We are originals!

Oh, by the way, I saw your Chairman Mehlman get really flattened and steam-rolled by John King who hosted the "Late Edition" on CNN today when Ken tried that same old number off the talking points song book. Any one else catch that today?

I may start watching CNN more often, if I can see more of that good upper-cut reporting to the jowls of Bush administration PR folk instead of "moof moof" reponsing as is the norm!

Great writing Brad. You know it's dead-nut when the republicans stop by to lie.

Sorry John, our agenda is the truth and the truth only. Wrap your brain cells around that concept.

Poor John, . . . Sorry John, you are having to work so very hard, cutting and pasting and researching popular bloggers lists on which to insert your GOP attack-dog drivel against Joe Wilson! That should've been last years garbage-wrap anyway. You may go now! No need to waste your time, ... No rhetoric spoken here. We are originals!

Oh, by the way, I saw your Chairman Mehlman get really flattened and steam-rolled by John King who hosted the "Late Edition" on CNN today when Ken tried that same old number off the talking points song book. Any one else catch that today?

I may start watching CNN more often, if I can see more of that good upper-cut reporting to the jowls of Bush administration PR folk instead of "moof moof" reponsing as is the norm!

Hey Guys, is John good ol" Jimmo with another name, or is he just a clone? Either way, it is easy to see that he has swallowed the full RNC spin, and is now trying to regurgitate it to the masses. He is correct in one sense, we should wait and see what actually transpires, before we begin celebrating, but just maybe for once, someone will put a stop to some of the corruption in this administration. John evidently is merely a member of the Bush flock, so why even pay attention to him. Remember - don't feed the Trolls!

So far no substance. Keep trying kiddies - and that ended up being a game of 6 on one and yet no substantive arguments from any of you. As I stated earlier, I was sent here (actually by a friend of Brad's!) because he knew I would get a good laugh - you have not dissapointed me once. Daddy has to go home now. Keep playing in your own little sand pit and don't allow any other thoughts in to intrude on your self imposed single mindedness.
The thoughts you saw above were mine and mine alone, I do not play the game of this blog as you all seem to do so well. Enjoy simply cheerleading each other's agendas and keeping yourselves mired in the misery of a Democrat Circle Jerk.

Yust enyoying my own writing here! So Sorry!

Night night john.

To me the big question is whether Rove will take the fall that must come. He has a huge ego, and I would not be surprised if he considered this administration to be "his" (and he may be right). If that is the case I would not expect him to go down easy. It will be interesting to see who he drags along with him. What Haldeman had (I think that was the one) was a twisted sense of honor that I suspect Rove lacks.

Sorry, John - But your Republican methods are old news...no one's interested (or listening)...better go back to your bosses and tell them to start abandonning ship...it's sinking fast...all the way to jail...hurray!!!

Does it appear to anyone that an investigation would continue all this time if there was no crime committed?

Here's a tidbit for anyone to review.

http://www4.law.cornell....0000421----000-.html

It is a crime to reveal the identity of a C.I.A. operative, or to confirm the same. That is a fact. It is also a fact that Rove confirmed the identity of "Wilson's wife." Wilson only has one wife, and that is Valerie Plame.

Who sent Wilson to Niger is irrelevant. A crime was committed, and it's a crime even if Wilson had never gone there. It's a crime if someone named Judith Miller didn't exist. It's a crime, and that's a fact.

Rove's only route is to resign, but stay and play on the Bush team as normal, and hire thirty expensive lawyers to try and keep him out of court and out of jail, at least until 2009.

Brad,

I love your "Yellowcake Road"--hope you'll find someplace to use this as a headline.

Keep your ears open. Speculation is rife that Fitzgerald - IF he is really doing his job - is Rove's next target for a slime-throwing campaign. I'd expected that myself, so I was pleased to see that several others (sorry, no links for the moment - go to Smirking Chimp for one) have the same expectation.

John,

Here is the only fact you need:

Novak outed Plame sourced from the White House.

Just a little OT. I am so f**cking happy that this bag of shit group of neo-cons from the dregs of hell are being exposed. I just hope it may keep my son's National Guard unit out of harm's way. He's in rotation for January.

O yeah. YAAAAAAAAYYYY!!!!!

Brad (and the 6 or 7 of you),

I have visited this site for many months now, since the beginning of the Clint Curtis story and have hesitated (I am sad to say) to get involved. I suppose I was hoping that our country would come to its senses and a regime change would occur in November.

John, however, has shown me that my faith in my fellow Americans was somewhat unrealistic.

My check to help support you will be in the mail tomorrow.

Keep fighting the good fight.

The Bush administration has angered and insulted the intelligence community--the CIA and FBI in particular. Now he's even subordinated them to the national intelligence czar, who reports directly to the White House.

It seems unlikely the intelligence community will take such humiliation lying down. Already you've seen the release of the Downing Street memos (you can bet that was British intelligence), and the request for this Plame investigation. Best not to mess with the spies. They know plenty of secrets. It's my prediction that you'll see another Bushco scandal revealed, very soon...

Behind the scenes, there's a war going on in Washington DC. The Plame investigation is just a skirmish.

I have read on DU that there are many links to Cheney as the ultimate potential loser in this scandal.
V Plame may have been close to discovering and/or proving his involvement with profiting from and selling WMD to axis of evil types.
More information is still needed on this.
We all know he is a war profiteer through Haliburton.

Cyteria, I like your point about genius, that ruthlessness can look like genius, but it certainly doesn't smell like genius.

Boy, I can barely stand MSM anymore. Sickening. For example the way they seem to be taking seriously the idea that if Rove got his info from reporters first, which strikes me as blatantly not credible, but even if he did, so what? It might affect the legal aspects of the situation, but I don't think it even lets Rove off the hook legally and it certainly doesn't let him off the hook morally. Not only did he apparently make little or no effort to prevent reporters from publishing the information about Plame, he spread the information.

So at best, he's the fence, rather than the thief. Either way, he looks like a traitor to me.

Colleen, I share with you in your hopes.

This crew in the administration has done enough damage to this country. If we got rid of them now, it would take all we have as a country, in my opinion, to recover. But we'd have a fighting chance to get on track, at least somewhat.

It's scary that people like Peggy here want Al-jazeer to cover the fall of an American president. Makes you kind of wonder whose side she's on, doesn't it? Why doesn't it bother democrats that Wilson's wife put him up to making an errant report? Why doesn't it bother democrats that her role as a "covert" CIA agent is a mute point under the law? In case you haven't searched your hearts I'll tell you why: losing smarts, and with no clear agenda it's easier to tear down others than build up the country. I won't deny that Rove probably has done some things to hurt other people's chances of winning an election against Bush and others. But don't be naive and think it's only the evil Republicans doing this. Don't forget Dick Morris and the Clinton's selling out America to the Chinese in order to win the 1996 presidential election. If you want to get mad, get mad at all corruption and stop being a one-party liner.

Thanks, Phil

David spend a bit of time before you comment and read all of PEGGY's post to date and you'll have no doubt whos side she's on.

Why doesn't it bother democrats that Wilson's wife put him up to making an errant report? WTF???????????

Why doesn't it bother democrats that her role as a "covert" CIA agent is a mute point under the law? not to NOC you but can you explain this comment?

re: the Clinton's selling out America to the Chinese --- Hmmm! Seems I remember Daddy Bush going to China, throwing up, and passing out at dinner with the leader of China. What was the old boy doing there?

That was then, this is now. Bush, Cheney, Rove, Rumsfeld, Rice are significant now. Stay safe, Pat Fitzgerald! Do your magic, and give us indictments that we can be proud of!!!!

Just a couple things-

1st- I am also waiting to see the smearing campaign begin against Fitzgerald.

2nd- I appreaciate your comment David, and there were many things about Clintons administration that I didn't like (i.e. Janet Reno and Wako Texas, Monica Lewinski, and his missed oppertunity on Osama Bin Laden). However, his errs pale in comparison, in my opinion, to those of the Bush administration. People are dying in real time, and his miscalculations cost lives, dollars, and the security of our homeland. Rove and Cheney's role in Valerie Palme is part of a bigger picture, the Downing Street Minutes confirm it, that they fixed the facts and intelligence around the policy for war, and crushed those who got in the way. Remember Paul O'Neil, Richard Clark, the General (help me with the name), Joe Wilson, and many others.

The fact is that the timeline leading to Iraq is littered with the carrers and reputations of those that spoke truth.

The evidence is abundantly clear that this administration did make a huge miscalculation, WMD's to date 0, oil revenue contributing to the reconstruction effort 0, links between Sadam and 9/11- 0. Batting 0.00.

At the same time allowing North Korea to get nucleur weapons, our armed forces to be tangled in a quagmire for an indefinate amount of time, our economy and federal deficit bleeding (don't count on suprise tax revenue to bail us out), our Homeland Security compromised, our constitutional rights eroded ( Patriot Act ), our global competitiveness diminishing right before our eyes, and more terrorism each year since 9/11.

Clinton did make some miscalculations, but it is obvious the cost was not and will not be remembered to be near as great as the cost of this administrations miscalculations.

Being an American does not mean being a democrat or republican, it means defending basic principles. I did so under Clintons administration, and will continue to do so under this Administration, If you look at all the evidence, there is not doubt that Impeachment would be the result of any congressional inquiry.

Then act on the advice of experts instead of the political rehoritic of some miguided fag named Karl Rove.

Charlie- New Orleans LA

John and Dave,
Most us here oppose the war. You two seem to support it. Why not back up your rhetoric with some backbone?
Put up or shut up.

http://operationyellowelephant.blogspot.com/

One good thing about this non-scandal is that it keeps a million misinformed, gullible leftists occupied with something besides crying about the election results. Not too hard to outsmart the demcoratic masses. Baaaaaaaa! Baaaaaaaaa!

The amount of trolling on this thread is a very good sign.

I agree with number two. Karl Rove is NOT a genius or smart. He's just a bully and a trickster. If you watch "Bush's Brain" (or even read the book) you would learn that. When I saw that documentary on the Sundance Channel that's when I really knew he really isn't that smart. I think that by the time Fitzgerald gets finished with this investigation it will be very interesting. Hopefully other scandals (such as 2004) comes out as well in the toppling. I think that Bush made a mistake in appointing Fitzgerald. They probably thought it would be over in 2003 since he was a republican too but they underestimated him. Wow, a republican who is for the law and hungry for it. I have heard good things from democrats on DU and people on both sides of the isle seem to trust and respect Mr. Fitzgerald which is a very good sign. Since this whole thing began to come out into light I've always had a "gut" feeling he was going after something bigger. I can't wait to find out what happens next. It looks like Rove can't spin out of this one!

I also wanted to say I think if Rove did resign it would show the American public (and anybody else watching) that he was truly guilty. Right now they are proclaiming he did nothing wrong so he can't resign. Bush can only fire him. What would happen if Bush fired Rove? Would Rove spill the beans on Bush and sacrifice Bush to save his own butt?

I am honored that hours later after I clocked out I am still enjoying hatred on your website.
However, congratulations to Charlie for actually providing a submission of some substance at least. While I may disagree with some of what you have said, your stance is well thought out and provocative, unlike the other fallacious reasoning infecting this blog.
As to my dear friend Colleen, you have no idea my position, nor this blog's David on the war - and could not have conjectured that from any of our postings. It is fascinating that you would jump to that conclusion and I am appalled at the simple mindedness of it. So, with your challenge to put up or shut up, I will attempt to continue a dialogue with those of intelligence - meaning for you to make such an assumption - my choice would be to shut up because a conversation with you would be one sided - yours.
MMIIXX - Peggy's posts are ludicrous and tinged with nothing but infantile emotionality.
Now, back to someone of substance, Charlie - good thoughts. Your paragraph about being an American and holding all to task regardless of party affiliation was brilliant.
Indeed, let us listen to experts and not talking heads or public faces.
As to F being smeared,...I am not so sure that will happen. The target appears to be Wilson - whether in truth or not, it all balances on him and his credibility and his actions. And that is probably where any attack will stay. Not sure though, you might be correct - the next few days and weeks will show us.
As to Kathy - enjoy spending your money - it is a shame you no longer believe that there can be opposing views in a country such as ours. I believe that is what oppressive leadership like the Taliban believes as well. Low blow I know, but your email was just sad.

To number thirty-two I think it's very smart how Mr. Fitzgerald has stayed silent all this time. I don't think his rep has even said anything. This is very smart move and shows me he's a serious prosecutor because he's not like Ken Starr who took every opportunity to talk to the press about some alligation he claimed to have on Clinton during that whole fiasco nonsense. I didn't even know any of this was going on until it started making the news again. That's how tight a lid Mr. Fitzgerald has. Which is good! So hopefully they can't say this or that about him since he was appointed and he's a republican himself. He also has a friend I believe who works for Gonzalez.

Agreed Emily - he is dealing with this in the best possible way. An extremely smart move to eliminate himself (or at least soften) himself from being any sort of target. It keeps the objectivity of his position in tact.
It would indeed be sad if Rove went after him - horribly bad move that I - as whatever they keep callling me in the above postings - would also be appalled at. As I mentioned to Charlie, only the next few days/weeks will tell.
Time has a cover story coming out this week on the whole situation that I look forward to.

Oh John. I think it's pathetic if you're here. Why don't you do something worthwhile? Eh? Instead of posting at a leftist blog. Very sad indeed. The target is not Wilson but his wife. She was outed. Not him. Why don't you talk about that dear old John? Why are you making excuses for someone who outed an agent? Are you aware that even Poppy Bush is on Wilson's side? Earlier this past week he wrote a letter to Wilson supporting HIM. Poppy has even said anybody who outs an agent is a traitor to the country. It has been proven she was an agent. And Novak also printed the fake company she and her group had who was tracking down Usama BinLaden and other terrorist groups. In 2003 they ALMOST had him. But her name was outed so all that information became useless. Do you remember BinLaden dear old John? Seems like Bushie doesn't.

The only thing John we agree on is how Fitzgerald is handling the case. He isn't doing like Starr did and being a media hog. I didn't even know anything about this until recently. I wasn't politically active until 2004 and now I'm a politics junkie. So that shows he knows what he's doing and is serious. I've read up on him and have heard he's dealt with the mafia so if he deals with the mafia surely he can the Bush crime family. By the end of the year hopefully this case can be wraped up and we can see some people (or a person at least) in jail for the outing of the CIA agent. All this ties together with the downing street minutes to show they were fixing the facts around the policey (ie: they lied).

How sad Emily that I would write a blog supporting your stance, and somehow you would turn it sour. How sad that instead of dealing with someone of opposite political views, you would not perchance want a dialogue, but woud instead consider it sad. I choose to read opposing views and comment rather than to read only those who agree with me or mine. That is a challenge, not a cupcake party as this appears to be.
As to my writing about Wilson - you perhaps misunderstood - I was simply indicating to Charlie that I thought HE would remain the obvious target of any attack from Rove rather than Fitzgerald. So once again, I was actually supporting views on this blog which you took and distorted. Sad.
And how does commentary on Rove turn immediatley into commentary on the war as Coleen alluded to, or Bin Laden as you would steer it? I am here to share and receive information on one topic, and was not aware this was an "old leftists club" refusing opposing views.

Also with Rove if you haven't noticed he goes after his "opponents" strengths and turns it into a weakness. If you all haven't I suggest you go to the PBS website (pbs.org) and watch the 2004 documentary on him called "The Architect". It shows how Karl Rove deals. This movie helped me to understand him more and why I don't think he'll resign. If anything he'll go off to jail. He and Bush are in sync and I think Bush could VERY possibly have known about this. Bush was on the same plane that Colin Powell was on who was waving around the memo with her name on it. If this is true then Bush didn't do anything to stop this outing and he is part of the consperiacy.

Why don't you go back and read post forty-nine John of yours? Look in the mirror hon.

Dear John,
Whats your point ?
You have said:
#8
Now boys boys boys. Stop your gloating and look at some facts.
It is coming out in varied news media that it is not a clear situation here.
Wilson was NOT sent there in any official capacity - in fact at one time he claimed the VP sent him - no one other than his WIFE - who, despite his assertions to the contrary - recommended in a memo for him to go to Niger in the first place - and it is also becoming clear that while Rove certainly should be careful of the way he expresses his opinions - was merely warning a reporter against taking this man too seriously. I believe the comment credited to him was simply (and paraphrased here) "his wife sent him".
The wife was never revealed as a covert operative, nor in fact was her name given (though it would be the simplest thing in the world for this to be discovered) until Wilson himself started disclosing the situation.
Wilson in his zeal to be official, was neither paid for this trip, nor has even GIVEN US A WRITTEN REPORT - he is too busy bragging about the supposed credentials behind it and how important he is.
So relax your attack boys, and enjoy the information coming in.
I was recommended to this website because of my love of reading ridiculous political rhetoric - thank you for not dissapointing me.

#10
If by RNC talking points you mean - "Listen to the news" then you are correct. I speak for no one but myself, and my own assertions based on facts.
It seems that most of the "bloggers" on this website speak from an agenda. Mine is simply to not let you get away with it.
Thank you

#13
Gee, that made perfect sense. Now you know why I love to read these blogs - because of comments like that.
1) The law states that it is illegal to out a covert operative AS a covert operative. It does not mean that you can NEVER even say the person's name, or even say something like "his wife". So, before you make assertions - look towards facts, not just your local network affiliate.
Love the fact that the best you can do so far is call this valid opinion stupid or RNC talking points. Once a person allows opinions other than their OWN or SIMILIAR ONES into their sphere, then they are truly thinking. It seems you have no wish to do that.

#14
The information is not from the RNC but from varied news sources that corroborates the information from the wires/sources/etc. - What a shame that you are more interested in pushing your agenda rather than looking for truths. It is so funny that I would be getting attempted political commentary from the same Peggy who earlier was looking forward to "Dancing in the streets" once Bush came "Crashing down" - that seems to be objective non biased intelligent rhetoric. Thank you for taking the high road.

#15
Please feel free to back up any assertions you would like with facts, not just wishes.

#17
Now this is becoming fun. Four commentaries that have no substance or foundation other than using an ad hominem attack.
Good for you. Go to speech class.

#23
So far no substance. Keep trying kiddies - and that ended up being a game of 6 on one and yet no substantive arguments from any of you. As I stated earlier, I was sent here (actually by a friend of Brad's!) because he knew I would get a good laugh - you have not dissapointed me once. Daddy has to go home now. Keep playing in your own little sand pit and don't allow any other thoughts in to intrude on your self imposed single mindedness.
The thoughts you saw above were mine and mine alone, I do not play the game of this blog as you all seem to do so well. Enjoy simply cheerleading each other's agendas and keeping yourselves mired in the misery of a Democrat Circle Jerk.

#49
I am honored that hours later after I clocked out I am still enjoying hatred on your website.
However, congratulations to Charlie for actually providing a submission of some substance at least. While I may disagree with some of what you have said, your stance is well thought out and provocative, unlike the other fallacious reasoning infecting this blog.
As to my dear friend Colleen, you have no idea my position, nor this blog's David on the war - and could not have conjectured that from any of our postings. It is fascinating that you would jump to that conclusion and I am appalled at the simple mindedness of it. So, with your challenge to put up or shut up, I will attempt to continue a dialogue with those of intelligence - meaning for you to make such an assumption - my choice would be to shut up because a conversation with you would be one sided - yours.
MMIIXX - Peggy's posts are ludicrous and tinged with nothing but infantile emotionality.
Now, back to someone of substance, Charlie - good thoughts. Your paragraph about being an American and holding all to task regardless of party affiliation was brilliant.
Indeed, let us listen to experts and not talking heads or public faces.
As to F being smeared,...I am not so sure that will happen. The target appears to be Wilson - whether in truth or not, it all balances on him and his credibility and his actions. And that is probably where any attack will stay. Not sure though, you might be correct - the next few days and weeks will show us.
As to Kathy - enjoy spending your money - it is a shame you no longer believe that there can be opposing views in a country such as ours. I believe that is what oppressive leadership like the Taliban believes as well. Low blow I know, but your email was just sad.

#51
Agreed Emily - he is dealing with this in the best possible way. An extremely smart move to eliminate himself (or at least soften) himself from being any sort of target. It keeps the objectivity of his position in tact.
It would indeed be sad if Rove went after him - horribly bad move that I - as whatever they keep callling me in the above postings - would also be appalled at. As I mentioned to Charlie, only the next few days/weeks will tell.
Time has a cover story coming out this week on the whole situation that I look forward to.

#54
How sad Emily that I would write a blog supporting your stance, and somehow you would turn it sour. How sad that instead of dealing with someone of opposite political views, you would not perchance want a dialogue, but woud instead consider it sad. I choose to read opposing views and comment rather than to read only those who agree with me or mine. That is a challenge, not a cupcake party as this appears to be.
As to my writing about Wilson - you perhaps misunderstood - I was simply indicating to Charlie that I thought HE would remain the obvious target of any attack from Rove rather than Fitzgerald. So once again, I was actually supporting views on this blog which you took and distorted. Sad.
And how does commentary on Rove turn immediatley into commentary on the war as Coleen alluded to, or Bin Laden as you would steer it? I am here to share and receive information on one topic, and was not aware this was an "old leftists club" refusing opposing views.

#57
Emily.
I wrote it, I do not have to read it again. Reading through a myriad of postings here, the only ones submitting any comments of substance have been YOU emily and Charlie - I appreciate them, agree with them, or even agree to disagree with them. because they come from a place of knowledge, intelligence, and genuine truty. The other attacks are personal, unfounded, and fallacious - which is why I generated commentary against them. My mirror sees clearly.
You do not even know my political stance, and it is very disturbing to think that one is so easily pidgeonholed because of views. Did it ever occur that I might have varied opinions of things and wish to share them? That I can be engaged intelligently by foundationally backed discourse?
That is what a thinking person does. Which you, besides your few attacks, appear to be.

#58
Uhmm,...sorry, that word is truth - truty is something completely different I am sure.

You started with "Now boys boys boys. Stop your gloating and look at some facts." and in all the text above you present NO facts and pat yourself on the back with "I am honored that hours later after I clocked out I am still enjoying hatred on your website." a FACT you state ,that I just cannot see.
I'm a nobody but even I know that the world, me and my family live in today is more dangerous today than it was in 2000 and many questions need to be answered "under oath" before the public will really know who's at fault and how we got to where we are.

John, you have no facts. Most of your posts were to merely belittle the people who comment on this blog. If you want to be taken seriously and considered "intelligent", stick to the facts of the of the discussion. I don't know what your political stance is and I won't assume what it is, but don't assume we're all a bunch of lefty commies either.

You said:
in fact at one time he claimed the VP sent him (in reference to Joe Wilson)
WRONG. He said it was the office of the Vice President, not the vice president himself.
Your fact on that matter alone is garbage.

Also in response to your first post, I, personally, am not gloating the Rove self destruction, deserved or not. 1700+ dead troops and 20,000 or more dead Iraqi civilians, economy on a bubble, civil liberties invaded, real culprits of 9/11 not caught, America isolating itself from the world, and on and on.
In my opinion, there's nothing to gloat about, but there's a lot to fight.

In response to comment #59 or 60, I cannot tell due to the fact that the comment number is not included - I believe however it was Emily.
I do not know if under oath we will still retrieve any truth.
Unfortunately in the political world we are commenting on, it will be hard pressed to find the truth until someone with integrity steps up and takes the responsibility - a sadly unused word in politics today whether democrat or republican or any other party.
Emily, the gloating comment was appopriate when you enter a website and see posts like "He is a liar, thief and cheat." and "I can't wait for the Bush administration to "crash and burn" which are extremist to say the least.
As to the comment on "hatred" - might I present 27, 34, and 35 as indications of that.
As to Horkus, since this is a blog, I felt no need to be too verbose and indicated the VP as the office of the Vice President. The facts I included came from 3 different sources - sorry they were not your facts.
And once again, deal with the situation at hand. DID ROVE GIVE UP THIS NAME and in fact in doing so commit said illegal act. What the hell does the rest of what you have said about the troops, deaths, etc have to do with that topic.
I am glad you want to fight injustice, but you are on a head hunting trip.
Hope this clarified a few things

To continue,...in the unnumbered comment you state that the "world we live in is more dangerous than in 2000.
It would be with or without Bush. Everthing we are discussing is here because of the event that happened on 911 - which was planned during the decade before while Clinton was President. That inciting incident is what began for us in the US a new era when the safety we celebrated would never ever exist again.
And the last years have shown how divided and ripped apart our country is - not because of a particular administration but because we have all as a nation lost faith. When the "next great Democrat" takes office we will still be as divided as shown on this little old blog.
Unity and not hatred is all that will join us, and even then, we will never be able to fall back into the embrace of quiet safety. We have discovered what the rest of the world has always known - that violence and extremism will always exist.
Rove giving up a name will be long forgotten in the history books, and we will still feel the same.

I dare to say if the re-count was left to proceed in 2000 and Gore was in the WH ,maybe someone on his staff would have acted on one of the supposed 52 warning given to the bush team before 911 but alas we will never know will we.
Welcome to the Project (for the) New American Century.

Yes, you are right MMIIXX, sort of like when Gore advised Clinton to ACCEPT the offer of Bin Laden rather than,..oh,..wait,..that didn't happen even though we already knew the danger of this man.
Hindsight is 20/20 my friend, and neither Bush nor Clinton or the fictitious land where Gore is president- could ever have known, with warnings or not, that 911 would occur. There is no way to protect against the thousands of leads and warnings that are given every year. We must instead do our best to be vigilante and catch the ones we can.
Even now with our utmost dilligence London still occured.
Thank you for your comments, but they are misplaced. This is not about Gore or Clinton or Bush - the danger is the terrorists.
Now, let us get back to Rove.
Here are some final comments for now by me:
1) Wilson is an opportunist who saw then and still sees now the ability to put himself in the spotlight.
2) Rove with all doubts gone said - something. It is claimed he stated only "his wife".
3) The law is very specific here, and of course, letter of the law seems to be what politicians go for - Reference Clinton and the definition of sex - so I do believe the law states that noone shall reveal a covert operative as a covert operative.
4) No one is holding the media accountable for the willing and in fact eager dissemination of security information - referenced Geraldo
5) Rove will do everything he can to push the spotlight elsewhere.
6) Fitzgerald is doing a fair and objective job from what can be seen
7) If Rove is indeed guilty, he must be held accountable.
How was that?

That was reference Geraldo as in Geraldo's past indescritions in the dissemination of vital information

Rove's lawyer has already admitted he spoke to a reporter about "Wilson's wife," as if Wilson's wife could be anyone other than Valerie Plame.

Rove must be held accountable whether his actions rise to the level of a crime or not, based on the 1982 law (which is narrowly drawn). That is because he signed a non-disclosure agreement that forbids him from doing what his lawyer has already conceded he did.

How was that?

How was that? That was precise and perfect. No one has stated that there should not be accountability here - let us figure out what that is - and it is doubtful it will be the virtual lynching or dancing in the streets being asked for further up the blogline so to speak. In fact, it may be far less than that - or it may in fact bring Rove down. Let us wait and see what the prosecutor brings up shall we? That is the beauty and the problem with these linked dialogues - we have no real clue and are aimlessly pointing away from our own personal wishes and agendas. And on that note, goodnight, and thank you - finally, for some great conversation.

Oh,...and lest I forget - Lindy
No feeling of superiority here. Just some good old muckracking - which certainly inflamed some passions - good for you.
Oh and,...did already read online.
But I did get you to say na ne na ne na ne!!!! Yi-Hahhhhh! which lightened so many things up. Thank you for that!!!!
Goodnight

Wow,...I missed a lot!

John,

It is facts that I am missing from your posts. I question your news sources. Plame said that she passed on a list of several possible people to go to Nigeria, without recommending any of them. Her husband was only one of several names on that list--she did not single him out or recommend him more than any other names. Wilson was qualified for the position due to his previous experience and she would have been remiss not to include him on a list of candidates.

When others asked you early on to supply facts to back up your allegations you failed to do so. Here on this list I have seen willingness to consider many points of view (I am always willing to challenge sacred cows), but there is little patience for unsubstantiated allegations.

You complain about personal attacks but your first post introduced a condescending attitude ("Now boys boys boys") and continued in this vein, referring to posters here as "kiddies". This tone continued in subsequent posts. (And yes some posters here continued in the same vein in their remarks to you--which was also not helpful.)

I am very glad to have corruption outed wherever it occurs. It is clear that there has been massive election fraud from both GOP and Dems over many years. Just have a look at some of the recent consumer reports coming out of blackboxvoting.org (And I'm not talking about small-scale "voter fraud" which is how the GOP tends to describe the issue.) Neither party has clean hands and the leadership of neither party has displayed any willingness to confront the extent of corruption and corporate interests and corporate monies in elections and our political system as a whole.

I won't respond to comments that insult you or that insult others--both degrade the usefulness of this blog because they waste everyone's time.

Different political views are fine. Trashing others or adopting an insulting or condescending attitude have no place here--on any side.

John & David-

Your talking points are the epic point of **hilarity** but they still don't provide any actual facts.

The **CIA** has confirmed, repeatedly and by independant review that Joseph Wilson's report on there being no uranium deals was true.

They confirmed it, and they are the most credible on this situation. Not some politician, right-wing afciando, leftist, or you or me. But the CIA.

Joe Wilson is **not a democrat** and never was. He's always been a lifelong independant who has supported alot of republicans, like George H. W. Bush.

The corporate media will spin it that he's a democrat, and the man is not.

The bottom line is beneath all the smoke here, is that Karl Rove confirmed to Matthew Cooper and then Robert Novak that Valerie Plame was CIA. He speicifically without directly saying her name, stated "Wilson's Wife works for the agency on WMD related issues"

- That right there, is a huge open door to automatically get the information on Brewster Jennings. He didn't just say "Wilson's Wife works in Niger" he didn't just say "Wilson's Wife" period--He stated she works specifically for the WMD related agency in the CIA.

Furthermore, in their conversation he directly stated "I've already said too much." because he KNEW he had said too much, period. And Lewis Libby then called Matt Cooper later who is the OTHER leaker and confirmed the information...

Just like Karl Rove confirmed it for Novak. He COULD not have any other way, unless he was directly viewing the classified information. That's the bottom line.

RAW STORY Link

Further, there is also confirmation Rove knew it WAS classified.

"Yes. When he said things would be **declassified** soon" (in the next few days)

Rove blatantly lied to the jury and FBI about not knowing her name, not at all discussing the woman before Novak's column came out. The fact is he did, and he lied. He perjured himself.

He also did attempt to conceal conspiracy, because the other official he worked with is Lewis Libby, who likely named Plame outright to Judith Miller and that's why she is refusing to testify.

He also WILLINGLY helped Cooper get that information by telephone call, and lied to authorities again when he stated Cooper contacted him about Welfare reform.

The conversation was never about Welfare at any point. It was about Joseph Wilson, and Cooper, who still refuses to say everything wanted to hear from Karl what he knew about Wilson.

That's it, a done deal. **That's invitation to leak classified information!!!** He can not claim otherwise, reporters do not hold classified memos or de-classify things for the white house. They aren't even allowed near it.

He's in on the conspiracy, and Lewis Libby is the main leaker which means this heads straight to the top. Don't pretend otherwise. The only thing that matters here is the rule of law, not **double super speak politics**

Doug E.

"They understood that you didn't have to attack the fortress anymore. You could just surround it, make faces at the people inside and let them have nervous breakdowns and destroy themselves." --- Norman Mailer

*****

I can tell by the tone of recent posts that the freepers are starting to implode.

The dominoes are falling, the time of the neo-cons is waning.

Is it bad Karma to enjoy watching this so much?

With each passing day I am more shocked and amazed and disgusted, but not surprised, that so many on the right wing continue to defend the indefensible.

Let us count the ways. First, smear the messenger. Second, attempt to intimidate the family of the messenger. Third, blame the media. Fourth, blame the Dems!

Lol!!!

Barf too.

People of America, are you starting to see the pattern?

And to think that it all started with a forged document. Now, let's see, who legendarily started his political career with a fondness for forged documents?

OMG, if this were a movie, it would be so brilliantly, darkly funny!

But it's not a movie, is it?

One more nasty little surprise...

"said Rove learned about the CIA officer either from the media or **from someone in government who said the information came from a journalist. ** "
http://news.yahoo.com/s/...h/cia_leak_investigation

Karl Rove has changed his story at least three times. It gets more obvious and stupid by the day. The media doesn't even need to say a word, it's obvious what kind of reality is happening here.

Rove has finally spun himself into a frenzy, and completely forged his own false reality in the press which has backed him into a corner.

The problem is that reality is only Rove's reality, and the rule of law and the land, know the man is just as guilty as the other conspirators.

With the entire press media near obsolete and the real population not buying his bullshit, the White House faces the ultimate credibility problem.

But this time sadly for them, just stonewalling won't make any difference. Behind the scenes the downing street minutes are being investigated and the facts behind us being lied into a war are coming out one by one like a river of waterfalls.....

This time we will throw these hacks out.

Doug E.

Well said, Doug. It's hysterical to watch the G.O.P. spokesmen pulling all the tricks they rightly condemned Clinton for pulling...parsing words, shifting the focus, claiming all criticism is politically motivated, shooting the messenger, manipulating the media.

Kestrel, don't let it bother you a whit if you're enjoying the carnage. Schadenfreude isn't a sin when the person doing the suffering is a bully, getting his comeuppance.

Well said. So listen, here is a point.
I was sent to this blog for the very purpose of reading extreme postings - and I found them, and for the most part - as Catherine pointed out - that both I and the posters were using the same insulting tactics.
Please understand how insulting it would be to see ones opinions slammed in the earlier postings, which is why I entered with that assault.
Now, if you notice from all subsequent postings, that assault stopped and an attempt was made to have discourse.
I have already stated facts, but here are more -

Further bloggers have attempted to bolster the reputation of Joe Wilson and dispute the memo, so here are a few quotes for you in support of the other side:
ON THE MEMO
Senate Panel Findings on Memo authored by Plame - “My husband has good relations with both the PM and the former Minister of Mines, both of whom could possibly shed light on this sort of activity,”
ON HIS FINDINGS
Intelligence Committee Report - “On at least two occasions [Wilson] admitted that he had no direct knowledge to support some of his claims and that he was drawing on either unrelated past experiences or no information at all. For example, when asked how he “knew” that the Intelligence Community had rejected the possibility of a Niger-Iraq uranium deal, as he wrote in his book, he told Committee staff that his assertion may have involved ‘a little literary flair.’”
ON WILSON SUPPORTING BUSH????
Joe Wilson Himself – Prior to Senate Committee Report - “I think I can call these guys in the White House liars a little more easily than John can,” Wilson orated, “and talk about the people around the president much more directly — name names and say they ought to be fired.”

Now, as to the actual case at hand which that is merely a distraction from, there are two issues now - one, the original "illegal" activity of releasing information.
One- Rove still asserts he never said the name (letter of the law)
Two - The 1982 law states that it must involve the motivation - and that they did so knowingly and in awareness that the government was trying to conceal the identity. (Letter of the law and hard to prove in court one way or the other)
Three - 5 year window - Illegal to divulge the name of an agent who works overseas for 5 years from the time - plame has lived here in the US since 1997
HOWEVER - They are possibly/probably going to have a good bite getting ROVE on MARTHA STEWART SYNDROME - Lying, and hiding. Hmmm, that would, I think, please many here on this blog.
john

It says a lot when posts like John's start showing up, trying (sometimes successfully) to encourage people into an emotional cyclone of accusations and defensiveness that goes nowhere.

I think it's a sign that folks somewhere are increasingly worried.

The trick is not to be distracted. Doug E. that was great how you laid out all the facts.

Wow. This is interesting Catherine,...I am not trying to stir an emotional cyclone up - just giving you facts from my position that were asked for, and even knowingly saying that Rove was going to get it for his tyring to cover this up, and yet you must come at me again with such a smarmy welcome to this blog.
That says a lot more about you than about someone posting an opposing view. It is inconsiderate, and an ad hominem attack.
I could care less whether Rove is kept or outed or worms his way out of this - just providing an opinion and possibilities other than your own.

And to think that your letter was the one that calmed me down earlier and attempt to take a much more level tone. That is a shame. Consider that please. In fact, if you notice at the top of my last posting - I gave an explanation for my earlier insulting tone, and explained why I no longer chose to take that road.

It really does say something Catherine, when the likes of John and David have to come out of the box...

It says the talking points are about dried up that one would even have to completely embarrass them.

Aside from the truth that they fixed the intelligence to go to war, Joseph Wilson has never openly admitted to opposing Bush until the smear campaign that came out after this debacle.

In fact, he's nearly always voted republican.

Also, Wilson got a few "things" incorrect in the Senate report. But the Senate report was also chaired by Pat Roberts, who is a very biased man heavily into smearing others. So whether Wilson was a ringer or a teller or not, the fact is Iraq was not trying to buy Uranium from Africa and these were based on crude forgeries and a totally uncredible conspiracy theory maker named Curveball.

That's what it came down to.

Doug E.

#79 Note: He has made a Fatal Admission

"facts from my position that were asked for" --- We now realize what is going on. When they say, "facts from my position" implies that they look at "facts" as something that are debatable. That is telling.

Republicans are "arguing over facts." that is absurd. You argue over arguments and opinions, not facts. But this is how the RNC 'governs'.

Translation

What we now have evidence of is the full scope of the WMD-DSM approach. The goal here is simply to "continue spinning facts."

But this does little to inspire confidence in leadership.

We now realize that the goal of this "non-sense on this board" is to distract attention from both the laws and the actual evidence by arguing over "the facts" and the "alternate reality."

That is not prudent. To which the RNC base is now abandoning, and the prosecution and grand jury are more emboldened.

Keep on your toes all: Remember, your goal isn't sipmly to keep a stable and rationale mind, but to remember to "not define your secucess in terms of whether the delusional do or do not embrace reality."

If you choose to require others to "get your point" [to which they are incapable] in order for you to feel "whole" then you are allowing them to control your emotions.

To be clear, I am not saying "roll over" or "be quiet" --- rather, know that the strategy of the defeated and guilty is to throw mud on you with the hopes that "if they can make you look bad" their conduct will be "less bad." Don't take the bait, but keep the pressure on them for they are on the ground, they are dying, and their cause is unjust.

They know they've been defeated. Make sure the dying snake is swiftly buried, as even a dead rattle snake can still bite.

Encourage the RNC to dig their own hole faster. This will allow the post-RNC era to transition far more quickly.

Once again Doug, the best you can do is offer up an insult. That is sad. And I am afraid it
has been indicative of my entire time on this blog -
As to disputing Wilson's political leanings, he was a supporter and donater to the Kerry/Edwards campaign (also in reference to which he made the statement I listed above), to Al Gores Campaign, and in fact worked for Gore as a congressional staffer, and in fact donated to Kennedy and Hillary - about as Dem as you can get. - Some people are opportunists and play both sides - you have found one in the likes of Wilson.
Incorrect "things" are a lot different than a little "literary flair"
BUT WE ARE STILL DEVIATING FROM THE POINT.
I stated above the letter of the law, by which Rove may slink his way out (notice choice of words) - HOWEVER - the possibility exists for a much larger scale "conspiracy" as you would call it. Sounds a lot like a politician covering his butt.

Don't feed the trolls. You'll get smarmed for your polite efforts, Catherine.

Ok. I have had just about enough. Constant - thank you for such insulting remarks.
I came on here for no agenda, simply to enjoy the conversation - sorry the conversation wasn't written by you, for you, about and including all your thoughts and opinions.
This blog is not about discourse, but it is indeed a blog simply here to support each other's viewpoints. And that is a sad thing.
I have acknowledged time and time again that I AGREE WITH MANY OF YOUR POINTS - but you continue as if that was never said.
That is sad.
I have stated many times that ROVE IS COVERING HIS BUTT. I have acknowledged this.
Never have you even bothered to.....think.
That is sad.
So why am I leaving this? I will make it clear because you would love to declare some type of philisophical victory.
I am leaving because I hve discovered - much as I was told - that this blog contained postings of a quite extreme and fairly ridiculous nature and that no one really listens to opposing views. And do you know who sent me? A liberal democrat that I have had an ongoing ranting/raving debate with for the last two years. You are too extreme for him.
God bless you. Whatever the outcome of the Rove situation, it has taught me a lot less than my time here with you. You could have swayed me in any logical ways. Unfortunately, you have simply made me dismiss you.
that is not coming from a place of "superiority" or insult - it is coming from a place of dissapointment - I was looking for a challenge and a conversation

Well that was all very interesting.

I don't find it at all odd, KestrelBrightEyes, that people should enjoy what I pray is the imminent fall of this lawless administration. What I do find odd is how this latest troll sees "hatred" in such enjoyment.
That sort of thing's been said before, though, on this blog by other trolls, and it fits in with this administration's penchant for calling black 'white', and up 'down', as in their "Clear Skies" Initiative, and "No Child Left Behind", and "Support Our Troops" while cutting their benefits. So, not so odd after all.

The felony, as I understand it (or, perhaps, one of the felonies, I should say) lies in Congress & the American people having been lied into an illegal war which has resulted in death & injury to tens of thousands & the decimating & looting of a country that in actuality was not a threat to us & had little or nothing to do with the attack on our soil. That seems like a pretty goddamn whopping felony to me.

Most disturbing after that is the outing of an agent who was by job description working for the security of this country. Sounds like treason to me but what the hell do I know.

And most disturbing after that is the fact that the resolution to forbid security clearance to anyone who leaks classified information was voted down by republicans.

And it quickly gets murky as to where, on the scale of one to ten for most disturbing, one puts things like

not adequately arming one's own troops;

scrapping & ignoring a previous administration's compiled advice, staff & plans for countering terrorism, while in the midst of a burgeoning atmosphere of terrorism;

keeping a stranglehold on the media to the point where they all but cease reporting actual, front-page-worthy news as if it didn't exist;

etcetera...etcetera...etcetera...etcetera...

I recall years ago, was it Bob Geldoff? who came back from a meeting in Europe with heads of state from various countries, saying (I paraphrase) with incredulity "They were like five-year-olds! The governments of the world are being run by children!" I'm sure someone out there will correct me if I have gotten that too terribly wrong.
But that is the sad, horrifying, dirty little truth, imho.

So, yeah, if these murdering bastards who never served, whose children never served, who let others' children die for a goddamn pack of lies, go down, I will fucking dance in the streets, my friend, I will celebrate like there's no tomorrow that these people who trampled on the Constitution, on the law, on decency, on every principle that this country has stood for, are FINALLY getting what they deserve.

Thanks, Joan. You said it so well.

Good Morning To All-

Anyone see the cover of newsweek on Rawstory.

On Rove " His hardball style elected Bush and changed politics".

No Doubt. But for the better, I doubt it.

His Hardball style as Nazi genious as it is, has resulted in unimaginable loss of life.

John # 65-

I must respectfully disagree. The problem is only terrorist to an extent. Sure Clinton could have gotten Bin Laden and didn't, and I think everyone has condenmened him for that, but its done, no longer real time.

There will always be someone in the world that will try to kill Americans, no doubt. So the logical question is how do we protect ourselves, especially after 9/11? Bush had a very specific answer to that question, we will fight them abroad instead of here. The problem is that Iraq did not represent any threat to us, and the terrorist responsible for 9/11 came from other Arab countries mainly Saudi Arabia (even the suicide bombers in Iraq are coming from there, Saudi Arabia.) Bush therefore still has yet to answer the origional question, how do we make America safer.

Is it, John, by underfunding homeland security for Iraq, by not funding screening of 99 percent of our ports where a Nuke would most likely be smuggled in, by leaving our Nucleur and Chemical plants vulnerable for 4 years and counting, by cutting benifits to those fighting the war on terror, while allowing Halliburton to lose 1.4 BILLION dollars without a single investigation into how.

My opinion John, is that Bush did not even adress the central issue here. It is well know that Bush and his team i.e. John Bolton, Paul Wolofozitz, etc wanted to take out Sadam before they were even elected to their first term. They tried to persuade Clinton to do so, but failed. They used 9/11 to do exactly what you are accusing us of doing with Rove, advancing their agenda.

But at what cost John, when the central question still needs to be answered, how do we protect us? Do you really feel safer now than before 9/11? Do you deny the fact that terrorism is on the increase? Would you object to me saying that Iraq has become a recruiting center for terrorist, in lite of evidence that proves so?

My agenda is simiple, flush out the liars, and make America safe. There are 294 million people in the US, and 1.2 billion Muslims in the world. Was Iraq an appropriate response, or did we just feul the fire, leaving oursleves vulnerable at the same time?

I think you know my position, which is why I adamantly protest this administration, its miscalculations, its rehortic, and its treasones behavior in the lead up to the Iraq war. Again Joe Wilson's reputation and career is only one of the many littering our self destructive path to war, thanks to an arrogant and unwise administration.

I've bought my Potassioum Iodide, have you?

Charlie- New Orleans

You go Joan! See ya at The Hop!

"I stated above the letter of the law, by which Rove may slink his way out (notice choice of words)"

Yes but apparently you didn't read John Dean's account.

Dean, who has covered this issue consistently said the law would still apply--Because even if Karl did not **intentionally** reveal classified information, he knew it was classified and he revealed it badly I might add. He revealed it in a way where he realized he might have said too much, and stated this fact.

So while that law might not particularly catch him, the other law which **has been cited** by John Dean who wrote the book on these facts can and would catch him.

Doug E.

Hi Everyone.

I'm glad to see that Rove is getting just a fraction of what he has given all these years. And the best part is that Rove has used lies, insinuations, and innuendos... we can use the truth.

I know some other folks have already suggested as much, but at this point it doesn't matter what happens to Rove... what matters is keeping the attack on Joe Wilson's wife tied closely to the bigger story which is lying to America to start a War in Iraq.

I know I sound pedantic and all that, but we have to keep the information flowing from Rove to the DSM. People, for the moment, are soured on Rove... so use it as a bridge to the DSM and the lies used to send our nation into a war that has killed our soldiers, slaughtered civilians, wasted our money, and made us less safe. Rove is only an ice breaker. ... Conversations like, "Hmmm... these lies go all the way to the top. Maybe there IS something to the DSM." Should be starting all over America. We don't need to spin anything... we don't need to argue... we only need to get the evidence out there. People will make up their own minds about what to do. They only have to be willing to analyze it with an open mind. The Rove scandal has opened the eyes of many to the fact that the GOP is not some incarnation of the divine will and that they have lost their moral authority.

I would love to see him go to jail, but if some deus ex machina arrives to prove that Rove didn't out Valerie Plame (and some underling goes down in his place)... we will be in a less powerful position than we are right now.

Currently, many in the press see vulnerability in the White House and are willing to ask the hard questions and publish controversial stories. If we can use the traction we've gained through the Rove story to keep a critical lens in place, we might be able to score some points on issues like the DSM, vote-rigging, and croneyism. Rove is only a foot in the door, and we can stand there with our foot in the door... and maybe get our foot slammed in it. Or we can barge right in and demand a full accounting.

Like I said, I don't mean to sound pedantic... but now is time to write letters to the editor, call congress, bring it up at the coffee shop, circulate literature, put a sign in your yard, and pester the press about the big picture issues. We have a limited time. The public is interested in learning the truth. The GOP is playing defense. Let's get out there and demand the truth.

Oh this is rich...

"If anyone has committed a crime, they will no longer be in my administration."

Biggest understatement of the year award Bu$h....What happened to "if anyone was **involved**" ?

We all know you're complicit in letting this guy off, since Karl Rove makes your "campaigns"...But then once the indictments are handed down, will you still fail to keep your promise?

Harboring traitors much? It went well beyond a joke a long time ago..

Doug E.

Rove is burnt toast smothered in butter to the point of being soggy and when you try to pick him up he just falls apart in drippy, carbonized lumps.

Fitzgerald is just trying to clean up the mess.

Joan, I think it's a case of a troll who wanted to conduct a debate according to his own debating rules. Remember Buckshot? He was like that...always expressing "disappointment" in other people, like a schoolteacher whose students didn't learn how to study properly.

Nobody's a boss here. That frustrates bossy people.

Bush, are you going to continue hiding from the truth now?

"IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN: CONVERSATION WITH WOLFOWITZ

Paul Wolfowitz, the Deputy Secretary of Defense, came to the Sunday lunch on 17 March.
On Iraq I opened by sticking very closely to the script that you used with Condi Rice last week. We backed regime change, but the plan had to be clever and failure was not an option. It would be a tough sell for us domestically, and probably tougher elsewhere in Europe. The US could go it alone if it wanted to. But if it wanted to act with partners, there had to be a strategy for building support for military action against Saddam. I then went through the need to wrongfoot Saddam on the inspectors and the UN SORs and the critical importance of the MEPP as an integral part of the anti-Saddam strategy. If all this could be accomplished skilfully, [sic] we were fairly confident that a number of countries would come on board.
I said that the UK was giving serious thought to publishing a paper that would make the case against Saddam. If the UK were to join with the US in any operation against Saddam, we would have to be able to take a critical mass of the parliamentary and public opinion with us. It was extraordinary how people had forgetten [sic] how bad he was.
Wolfowitz said that he fully agreed. He took a slightly different position from others in the Administration, who were forcussed [sic] on Saddam’s capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction. The WMD danger was of course crucial to the public case against Saddam, particularly the potential linkage to terrorism. But Wolfowitz thought it indispensable to spell out in detail Saddam’s barbarism. This was well documented from what he had done during the occupation of Kuwait, the incursion into Kurdish territory, the assault on the Marsh Arabs, and to hiw [sic] own people. A lot of work had been done on this towards the end of the first Bush administration. Wolfowitz thought that this would go a long way to destroying any notion of moral equivalence between Iraq and Israel. I said that I had been forcefully struck, when addressing university audiences in the US, how ready students were to glow over Saddam’s crimes and to blame the US and the UK for the suffering of the Iraqi people.
Wolfowitz said that it was absurd to deny the link between terrorism and Saddam. There might be doubt about the alleged meeting in Prague between Mohammed Atta, the lead hijacker on 9/11, and Iraqi intelligence (did we, he asked, know anything more about this meeting?). But there were other substantiated cases of Saddam giving comfort to terrorists, including someone involved in the first attack on the World Trade Center (the latest New Yorker apparently has a story about links between Saddam and Al Qaeda operating in Kurdistan).
I asked for Wolfowitz’s take on the struggle inside the Administration between the pro- and anti- INC lobbies (well documented in Sy Hersh’s recent New Yorker piece, which I gave you). He said that he found himself between the two sides (but as the conversation developed, it became clear that Wolfowitz is far more pro-INC than not). He said that he was strongly opposed to what some were advocating: a coalition including all outside factions except the INC (INA, KDP, PUK, SCIRI). This would not work. Hostility towards the INC was in reality hostility towards Chalabi. It was true that Chalabi was not the easiest person to work with. Bute had a good record in bringing high-grade defectors out of Iraq. The CIA stubbornly refused to recognize this. They unreasonably denigrated the INC because of their fixation with Chalabi. When I mentioned that the INC was penetraded by Iraqi intelligence, Wolfowitz commented that this was probably the case with all the opposition groups: it was something we would have to live with. As to the Kurds, it was true that they were living well (another point to be made in any public dossier on Saddam) and that they feared provoking an incursion by Baghdad. But there were good people among the Kurds, including in particular Salih (?) of the PUK. Wolfowitz brushed over my reference to the absence of Sunni in the INC: there was a big difference between Iraq and Iranian Shia. The former just wanted to be rid of Saddam.
Wolfowitz was pretty dismissive of the desirability of a military coup and of the defector generals in the wings. The latter had blood on their hands. The important thing was to try to have Saddam replaced by something like a functioning democracy. Though imperfect, the Kurdish model was not bad. How to achieve this, I asked? Only through a coalition of all the parties was the answer (we did not get into military planning). "
RAW STORY Link on Bush's attempt to "wrongfoot" Saddam in the UN

It started right there on Downing Street didn't it Bush, after the documents were forged!

Dick Cheney and his gang of criminals played you for an idiot. You and your ridiculous religion, your ridiculous feud with Saddom was used to enact a **treason related conspiracy** that involves Iran.

It involves Halliburton, Iran, oil deals and world nuclear proliferation. What's worse is these morons thought they could mingle with terrorists, and not get burned.

Do you remember **Downing Street** bush? Those 16 words are now more powerful than ever!!

Doug E.

MSNBC poll, "Did Rove break the law?" click here to vote

Current readings on the "Did Rove break the law?" poll are as follows:

YES 80%
NO 20%

That's the good news. The bad news is that this is only a poll, and the actual vote is being tabulated by Diebold in Columbus, Ohio.

I agree Joan. There is something pleasing and cathartic about the idea of "justice." People were so happy and didn't really care about the particulars when we overthrew the Taliban. People felt wounded and doing something about it made us feel a little less vulnerable. Iraq used the same formula...

Karl Rove himself has sang the praises of violent retribution in his comments on the differences between liberals and conservatives. He explained that he understood how Americans would respond favorably to a prompt attack on a country. And Rumsfeld explained that he would prefer to attack Iraq over Afghanistan because Iraq has more spectacular targets... we could watch buildings crumble, we could see people wither, it would be more amusing than bombing a bunch of tents. It's the same reason that we use focus groups to name our wars... and create special vocabularies to contextualize the struggle. It's pretty basic psychology. And it is really distrubing... but it "works". From the French and their Guillotine to Russian pogroms, the idea of violent spectacular displays of "justice" are easier than the sort of measured, patiently applied, and impartial justice of civilized societies.

It takes thoughtful, wise, mature, and civilized people to enjoy the more subtle comforts of America's legal system (which is based on process, rights, evidence, testimony, principle, and deliberation). Finding comfort in something which is slow, but constant and fair is not for everyone (unless, of course, in the case of Rove, then the investigation should unfold as glacially as possible). It takes a special disposition (one that is consistent with traditional Christian and Jewish belief, actually) to appreciate justice as a process of discerning what is right through an application of the intellect based on a set of unchanging principles that should be applied to all people. It requires literacy, a sense of history, and a basic appreciation of human rationality.

Fundamentalism (I mean fundamentalism in a political sense) on the other hand, advocates a very narrowly concieved and hasty justice based in a highly emotionally reading of select passages of a primary text of some sort. There is no place for free will or objectivity. There is no attempt to see that the laws of the secular world are carried out with the same mercy, thoughtfulness, and care of our creator. It is quick, violent, bloody, and passionate.

The tragic irony is that the very men who have cultivated the meanest impulses of the American people... the demagogues who whip up xenophobic frenzies, revel in torture and execution, and speak in absolutist terms have created the climate of political bloodlust, vengeance, and attack that they are now trying to dodge.

I hope that people will be merciful to people like Bush and Rove. I'd like to see justice applied impartially to them. And I'd even be willing to see them reformed and given a second chance... like Nixon got. But if they refuse to participate with civilized justice, they might find themselves the victims of a justice that is more savage.

And, as they well know, people will enjoy it. Because the sort of emotional justice that conservatives advocate is pleasurable. Damn, they've really screwed our country up. But, as a faithful person, I, for one, believe that justice will emerge because people, no matter how confused, tend to be good. And the merits of truth are self-evident, while the merits of evil, as Karl Rove has demonstrated, require an ever-increasing amount of energy and micromanagement.

Mr. Bush may "find" his second chance somehow but not Karl Rove....

Karl Rove has duplicitly committed acts of treason with the help of Dick Cheney's own staff....

Ever since Rove learned from Lee Atwater, he's been the Richard Nixon & Olliver North's protoje.

Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld committed mafia style, crimes and treason during Nixon's full term. They are back and have committed worse crimes this time...

Especially the deal they made with Ahmad Chalabi. Getting cozy with terrorists is a really bad thing....It backfires in a very **ugly** way, and Cheney deserves a life sentence for his stenography. If he doesn't well, torture himself to death. But Wolfowitz, Rhode, the lot of these criminals who have conspired deserve prison plain and simple.

Tom DeLay going to jail, don't kid yourselves that is the tip of the iceberg. There is so many officials who should be spending their time in a cell now, that I wonder why Judith Miller is even falling on the sword for them. Is she nuts? They need to be put away.

Doug E.

When I say "second chance," I mean as a pizza delivery driver or a hot dog vendor or a janitor at an adult theater. Not as a president.

Sometimes I think the Bush Presidency might be a lot like Boogie Nights.... without the hollywood ending. Mission Accomplished might be right about where Dirk is recording his rock album. Right now, the corvette has just crashed.

John #85 --

No, WE have had enough! We, as in WE THE PEOPLE. Get it? We are not accepting the lies and manipulation of tyrants. We are not accepting your lying reasons for being here neither.

You have been defeated in your silly schematic. All that remains is the process of shedding the parasite from the host. You have not only been soundly defeated, we have learned of your game and you are now being shed. To that end will be met your demise. And you know it.

Throughout history all tyrants have failed in their silly schematics for dominion over all. You see, there are natural checks and balances on this planet that cannot be defeated or controlled by man. And there may very well have been intervention by God in bringing your defeat. Call it intelligent design but whatever the analysis it's over now. And being the stupid people that you are, you have failed yet again to factor in your defeat.

So now you wish to divide using extremist labels on your host in hopes that you may be allowed to remain. Forget it. We are not stupid. Had you looked beyond your own, you would have known this.

Take your devisive labels and shove them up your ass, john. The people remain armed with the truth and our Constitution. As you will now learn, we will not allow your type to be the cancer that destroys.

I think we should send Rove to Gitmo, let him sit there until we decide whether we have enough evidence to charge him with a crime or not.

Rove would not enjoy Gitmo, but Cheney really would. After all the whole place is **fun in the sunny tropics** and they get....lemon chicken!!

Mr. Cheney would absolutely adore it.

Doug E.

Emily.
I wrote it, I do not have to read it again. Reading through a myriad of postings here, the only ones submitting any comments of substance have been YOU emily and Charlie - I appreciate them, agree with them, or even agree to disagree with them. because they come from a place of knowledge, intelligence, and genuine truty. The other attacks are personal, unfounded, and fallacious - which is why I generated commentary against them. My mirror sees clearly.
You do not even know my political stance, and it is very disturbing to think that one is so easily pidgeonholed because of views. Did it ever occur that I might have varied opinions of things and wish to share them? That I can be engaged intelligently by foundationally backed discourse?
That is what a thinking person does. Which you, besides your few attacks, appear to be.

Uhmm,...sorry, that word is truth - truty is something completely different I am sure.

We are leaving out Libby, Cheney's lacky, who is also in the same position as Rove.

I mean in terms of outing an agent.

I would not be surprised if the indictment includes some counts (separate charges) of conspiracy.

When several persons act together to bring about a common result, and that result is illegal, a criminal conspiracy exists under our law.

A lot more than two people were working on this outing of the CIA agent. They conspired to harm Wilson by harming the CIA agent.

What they forgot was that America comes first and this criminal act injured America.

It is the law of America that has been violated, not the law of Wilson.

Brad,
I appreciate your reply, but I agree with Phil, that people continually confuse ruthlessness with genius. I think of the movie "The Usual Suspects" where the Hungarian crime boss murders his family to keep rivals from using them against him, therefore he's a criminal genius. No, he's just morally bereft, like Rove. I've heard Rove speak. He doesn't strike me as very smart at all. Just the fat dumpy schoolkid that everybody picked on and now he's getting back at the world.
May I offer some constructive criticism? Downplay the comparisons to Hitler. I have found your blog an accurate source of information (Okay, you were wrong about the Chief Justice resigning on Firday, but you can't win them all.) Please resist the hyperbole. By the way, I've heard Hitler's speeches on newsreels and my German is passable. Hitler was a LOT smarter than Rove (tho I am QUICK to add, even more ruthless and evil.) Has Rove learned from Hitler. Hell, yes. Remember what Hitler said about "the big lie."

My 2 cents:

#1:
This sure seems a lot like the Nixon Administration with all of the dirty tricks, secrecy, etc. "Burn the tapes" was the call from the RNC then. I truly hope they do not do the same thing this time.

#2:
Rove may not be the basic source. I think if we continue to dig, we will clearly find that he was informed by Bu$h while aboard Air Force One. If so, he's off the hook. But then Bush would need immediate impeaching!

#3:
Have you considered that this may be a smokescreen to cover up the DSM? It would be better for Bush to have Rove fall on his sword than for Bush to get in trouble. LET'S KEEP OUR EYES ON THE PROPER ISSUE, PEOPLE!!! Do not get distracted from the DSM... or else we will fall into the trap Bush himself has set. However, if we should run two fronts at the same time: DSM AND the Rove scandal... that would be great too!

Hahahaha! Nicely put, Torqued. Thanks for making me laugh.
And KestretBrightEyes...great idea! He should enjoy the rice pilaf.
Czaragorn....cool beans, man! I'll save a dance for ya!

Joan,
I think the main staple at Gitmo is "Fruit Loops." (Couldn't resist.) Hmmm, Karl Rove and Fruit Loops. Fitting.

MrBlueSky - re: 106 - Yep, it's all different points on the same journey. I think we can keep BOTH in the forefront - to me, they are so tangled it would be impossible NOT to! But I don't think Rove will fall on his sword - Bush would be lost without him, and he's counting on him to provide strategy to help strengthen the GOP over the next few years.

Did y'all see this today?

via Rawstory:

to address the one who feels himself to be superior to all of us except Charlie:

I'm not sure that Charlie would feel honored by your selection of him as your choice, due to the fact that your personal attacks on others who post here. Your analysis of anyone's intellect from your warped perspective is simply an attempt to boost your pitifully lacking self-esteem.

If you really wish to try to present your viewpoint in a sincere mode that is other than attack, there is a remote possibility that the host will allow you post further.

I surmise that you will discover at some point during the upcoming week, that Time's story is out. While you were so hard at work on your goofy post, the rest of us have already read it.

na ne na ne na ne!!!! Yi-Hahhhhh!

Now, I must retire for the evening!

G'Nite all!

John may be an urbane troll, but make no mistake, he is a troll none the less. Which is fine by me. But let's call a spade a spade.

Why a troll? Because he uses the classic and oldest troll tricks in the book: Come on in claiming he's presented facts (he's presented none, just disinfo, with no supporting cites - other than a few late in the game and selective comments which don't even support him from the Senate Select Committee) and then decries other for not presenting any facts.

He's also condescending and insulting from the get go. Then accuses others of being insulting.

Anyway, to the substance of John's smartly placed disinformation. He foolishly said:

"As to disputing Wilson's political leanings, he was a supporter and donater to the Kerry/Edwards campaign (also in reference to which he made the statement I listed above), to Al Gores Campaign, and in fact worked for Gore as a congressional staffer, and in fact donated to Kennedy and Hillary - about as Dem as you can get."

Um...But what if was a support of the Bush/Cheney campaign (he was), donated to George W. Bush's campaign (he did), and in fact worked for George H.W. Bush as the Deputy Ambassador in Iraq and the Ambassador to Gabon (he did both).

Doesn't that make him about as "Rep" as you can get?

Add to that he voted for Bush in 2000.

Your non-fact based, non-cited claims about Wilson working claiming to have been sent by Cheney and the other RNC talking points that you parroted (and yes, you did exactly that) are all smartly refuted with actual FACTS and DOCUMENTATION right here:

eriposte Responds point-by-point to RNC Wilson Bashing Talking Points

Have a nice day, John. Thanks for stopping by. Though sticking to FACTS as opposed to regurgitating spin, disinfo, and talking points might be more useful here.

Uhh, Doug (#92)...

1-- "anyone INVOLVED will be kicked out of my administration...
2-- "anyone who committed a CRIME will be kicked out of my administration."
3-- "anyone CONVICTED of a crime will be kicked out of my administration."
4-- "anyone convicted of a FELONY will be kicked out of my administration."
5-- "anyone convicted of a felony and not PARDONED will be kicked out of my administration."

I don't think Rove's searching the want ads yet.

Cyteria -

I'll stand by my opinion that Rove is a genius. His ability to get Bush nominated in 2000 against all odds (using the filthy tacticts he did to slime McCain) is proof enough for me.

As to this comment you made:

"May I offer some constructive criticism? Downplay the comparisons to Hitler. I have found your blog an accurate source of information (Okay, you were wrong about the Chief Justice resigning on Firday, but you can't win them all.) Please resist the hyperbole.

a) There was no "comparisons to Hitler" at least not in so far as the Bush Admin is concerned. Hitler was, however, mentioned as I explained that someone can both evil *and* a genius however.

b) The Chief Justice report was accurate. If you read it, it spells out quite clearly that it was a report received from someone. The title was "Rehnquist Said to Announce Retirement Friday Morning!" Which is true. Both the note I posted (received second hand, and explained as such) as Bob Novak said the same thing.

Still love you though!

Rove is not an evil genius.

Rove is just a genius and he appears to not be in any trouble at all.

Does the left really believe in good and evil? Are there really moral absolutes? Or only when a conservative is in office? If there reallt are moral absolutes, where does it come from?

One defeated, one to go... paulie goes down easy though.

Paul, you can't divide us up with the result being a group you can coin as evil. So give it up, you look foolish. Tell your handlers we aren't buying it.

Anyone else wanna take on the truth? Come on cowards, it's only your existence at stake!

Robert Koehler wrote a very good piece that ran in my local paper Thursday 7/14 (FL Sun Sentinel) and can also be found on truthout.org, titled
'Just one more war to perpetuate terror'.
In it he quotes Wm. Rivers Pitt:
"In London....it is a terrifying, enraging, appalling act of despicable violence that must be immediately avenged. In Iraq, they call events like this 'Tuesday'."

THAT is what is "sad", john-boy. Appallingly, horrifyingly sad. It SICKENS me that my country orchestrated, based on deliberate, systematic deceit, this level of violence and death.

So yes, I absolutely agree that we need to stay focused on the DSM & a few other issues that are larger than whether rove goes to jail. I believe that's happening.
I do rant in despair occasionally but I think there are good people out there, Brad for one, who do not intend to take their eyes off the prize.

But if karl goes to jail, I might still do a little dancin' in the street. I mean, hey.

Torqued - you are making no sense.

Why Rove and Bush are not in trouble, why the left kook fringe are just that, and why John is right.

http://nationalreview.co...mccarthy200507180801.asp

A new height of hypocrisy.

The Bushites think it is fine to kidnap suspected terrorists (and sometimes just anyone in the wrong place at the wrong time), lock them up forever and torture them without investigating or determining their guilt or informing them of their crime.

But when two administration officials are confirmed by the testimony of a journalist under oath in grand jury investigation that they conspired to commit a crime punishable by death and lied to federal investigators in an attempt to cover it up in order to hoodwink Congress, the American people and the World into an unjustified war that has killed 1750+ Americans and 100,000 Iraqis Bush says that he will fire them if they are convicted in a court of law. Where did his new found respect for “innocent until proven guilty” come from?

He must have asked them if they did it. They either said yes or no. So Bush is either complicit in the conspriracy or he knows they lied to him and still refuses to fire them. No other senarioios that I can see.

Jail the bastards! All of them! After a civil(ized)judicial process of course.

If a conservative holds up a bank, is that any different than if a liberal does it?

If a liberal fails to pay his income taxes, isn't that the same as if a conservative does so?

Why the political approach here? This isn't about the political spectrum, it's about a crime. Karl Rove committed a crime. Whether he is indicted or not depends on whether the prosecutor decides the crime rose to an indictable level, based on a narrowly drawn 1982 law. But his lawyer admitted he told a reporter that "Mrs. Wilson worked at the agency," meaning the C.I.A.

That's not in dispute. So what's this crap about moral absolutes, as defined by liberals or conservatives? Not relevant. The only politics being played here is by right-wingers trying to convert a crime into a political value judgment.

Rove has not committed a crime. You are only wishing he did. You must wait for the final outcome of the investigation.

Bill Clinton lied under oath but did you ask for his impeachment? I doubt it.

Paul you are making no sense at all. Who gives a good goddam about rove and scooter besides you and your kind? Tell me, who gives a damn about the fate of these slimy criminals in the white house? Why are you concerned paulie?

I should have added to my comment to John a congratulations for his Clintonian parsing of the "legal issues" concerning the Rove leak. You'd make the Slickster proud, John! Nice going!

Karl is an innocent naif who only thinks of others.......
click here

RLM --

The right and their bosses want to divide us up. On one side they want people they can blame everything on... hence the evil implication the trolls keep hammering at. Soon they will be calling us terrorists, Iran sympathizers and whatever...

The other side they keep as their host. They are parasites. When they are shed they are dead.

abc news poll shows only 25% think Bush is cooperating fully with leak investigation
(from Atrios)

"As the President indicated, he doesn't know all the facts." (link here).

After three years in a crucial matter involving American national security in a leak within his own office the president does not know all the facts?

This means he is unaware of the national security threat from within his own office. Same with Cheney.

He should know if he wants to be considered competent, and so should Cheney.

No person who is honest wants to have it both ways.

Heheh...Just a coincidence I know that Paulie points to the very same article that Rush Limbaugh has been on about all day (Paul will tell you he "thinks for himself")

George H.W. Bush said in a speech to the CIA in 1999 that:

I have nothing but contempt and anger for those who betray the trust by exposing the name of our sources. They are, in my view, the most insidious, of traitors.

Now watch Paul pull out the old Clintonian "depends on the definition of name" defense

These guys are so predictable. It'd funny if it wasn't so evil and dangerous to our country, our democracy and our National Security.

Had enough yet paulie? If so, we've work to do. If not, well, tough shit.

I still see no evidence of Rove doing anything wrong. It seems that Joe Wilson is the leak. Leak a name and then blame someone else. We shall see. We shall see who is right and who is wrong. If Rove is at fault, Bush will get rid of him. However, Bush will still be president and will be until 2008. I hope whoever leaks goes to prison actually.

Clinton lied to cover up his sexual escapades. That's a private issue. In my mind one of the most justified reasons for lying is to hide your private life from the prying eyes of the public, even if it is disgusting.

If Clinton hadn't lied I'd have even less respect for him - and that's not much.

Bush and companies lies have killed thousands.

Paul,

That is very interesting. Allow me to submit some of my own.

" **On the same day the memo was prepared, White House phone logs show Novak placed a call to White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer, according to lawyers familiar with the case and a witness who has testified before the grand jury. Those people say it isn't clear whether Fleischer returned the call, and Fleischer has refused to comment.** "

http://www.bloomberg.com...103&sid=aagJweX0XNCQ

"THE WHITE HOUSE OBLIGATIONS UNDER EXECUTIVE ORDER 12958

Under the executive order, the White House has an affirmative obligation to investigate and take remedial action **separate and apart from any ongoing criminal investigation.** The executive order specifically provides that when a breach occurs, each agency must "take appropriate and prompt corrective action." (see Reference, below) This includes a determination of whether individual employees improperly disseminated or obtained access to classified information.

The executive order further provides that sanctions for violations are not optional. The executive order expressly provides: "Officers and employees of the United States Government … shall be subject to appropriate sanctions if they knowingly, willfully, or negligently … disclose to unauthorized persons information properly classified."

There is no evidence that the White House complied with these requirements.

Reference:

Executive Order No. 12958, Classified National Security Information (as amended), sec. 4.1(a) (Mar. 28, 2003) (online at www.archives.gov/isoo/po...cuments/executive_order_ 12958_amendment.html). "

You see, I can do the same thing. Only while using documented reports and facts. The documents confirms President Bush has violated the Executive Order and numerous other laws.

Just for keeping this level of traitor firmly planted in the White House. Apparently he has no interest in even asking Dick Cheney.....Afraid that he might find out how bad the crime is, and find himself "Unwittingly" used as a pawn.

That's all his religion and feud with saddom has been the whole time, is a pawn to actual turncoat mafia thugs. American "traitors" and some not even american.

Are you interested in seeing that, after all the downing street minutes are here to stay!

Doug E.

This might be OT but what the heck?

CNN ran a poll on Friday and got a result that seems very interesting, especially in light of the fact that trolls have repeatedly called BradBloggers "two-percenters".

CNN asked: Do you believe elected officials in Washington are truly working in the national interest?

Here's the result:
YES: 175 votes, 2%
NO: 8572 votes, 98%

CNN points out that this poll is not "scientific" ... but the results are still very telling, aren't they?

Wow Winter Patriot, that's incredible!!

I guess we must be fully counted in the 2% who agrees with everything, this group of Al Capone crooked fascists does then!!!!

Doug E.

The two-percenters they speak about are themselves. Take away the conservatives in the republican party and what do you have? Two-percenters. The two-percent parasites who hijacked the party. The criminal 2% mostly residing in and around D.C. The evil terrorists in our government.

That 2%.

Torqued #134

I agree.

I have repeatedly pointed out that if the neocons are ejected from the republican party we can live with the remaining 98%.

But that does not absolve the larger, probably 20% of the republican party, who are complicit by moving toward the neocon ideology.

Nor the probably 20% of the democratic party who have done the same.

We need to reject the neocon element because it is criminal rather than political, and get back to politics. I know that "politics" is not a favorite word, however, it does beat "criminal".

That is the best we can do in this dark era of our national history.

That is why I condemn neither the democratic party nor the republican party ... but instead I condemn only the neocon criminal element within.

I do not condemn the 20% who are complacent in allowing the neocons to perform, but I do strongly criticize them for it.

I want to say it is good news that the 80% in each party see this leak of a CIA agent for what it is, and see the bu$hit rhetoric of the 20% defending it for what it is.

Dang this thread has grown.

Maybe Rove should sell some missile guidance "chips" to china and then he would only receive a $100 fine and a slap on the wrist .

P.S. Karl contact Feeney (Fl) for details on this.

This is the most historic event since Gannongate, more damaging than the Downing Street Memos, and queer'ly reminiscent of Watergate and the fall of Nixon.

Just as Gannongate exposed a GOP pedophile and male prostitution ring dating back to the 1980s and the administration of George H. W. Bush, Rovegate will expose how Carl Rove, deputy White House chief of staff, secretly and illegally disinterred the corpse of former Texas Governor James Hogg from the old Oakwood Cemetery in East Austin, in an attempt to discover the whereabouts of the only existing signed first edition of Hogg's 1824 novel, "The Private Memoirs and Confessions of a Justified Sinner."

Uh, no, I don't think Rovegate is about that.

"Rove is Toast" blog
Should be renamed to Festival of the Trolls.

At #60 a compendium of troll talk was twelve. a 20% take. Since the troll talk was a responce to others-make that a 40% take. And there were more since then.

Feed the Trolls -John and Paul and other nom de plumes and you reap the harvest of profound nonsence.

The real story, is that this falls under the Bush Administration's attacking any facts against the War in Iraq. Joe Wilson was a credible person, who had proof there were no WMD's. That's the big picture.

The MSM was also complicent in the run-up to the Iraq War (including that jailed journalist, who loves the Bush Administration so much, she'd rather go to jail than mention Rove as her source. She wrote many pro-Iraq War articles leading up to the war). FAIR, a media monitoring group, said the media (TV/newspapers) had over 90% pro-war articles and guests/interviewees on TV leading up to the war. Gee, General Electric is one of the big 6 media owners, and they make weapons for our government!!! Figure it out yourself...

Today's New York Times devoted its lead editorial to what it called "A Jar of Red Herrings" about the Plame/Rove/Judith Miller imbroglio.

Get this. The Times began by saying that some sources are (like Rove) self-interested people with an agenda and a desire to hurt their political opponents. It then contradicted itself (without realizing it) by saying that reporters have to protect sources, otherwise the public wouldn't be able to learn the truth!

I'm not kidding, folks. This, from the world's most prestigious newspaper. I wrote them a letter (text available on request) which said that Judith Miller had done the opposite...she had protected a source, but had not written the article she should have written, thus the public had NOT LEARNED THE TRUTH. I concluded by asking, "Why is this woman now the journalist's Joan of Arc?"

I've had a lot of letters printed in the Times, but I hold out no hope for this one. They don't like direct criticism.

Dredd #135,

I agree about not seeing this as a party-political issue, rather as a criminal issue.

And I agree that both main parties are enabling the more criminal elements in power to do things that most of us (all parties and independents) would not approve.

The trouble as I see it, is that such a large percentage of elected national representatives (90%? 95%) end up as enablers. That is, enablers of policies that primarily benefit a small minority of vested interests. I don't know what the percentage is at state level--perhaps better, or perhaps worse.

The challenge from my perspective is that while perhaps only 20% (or far less) of Dem or Rep voters might agree with the neo-con political strategy, the proportion of state and national legislators who are willing to support the neo-con element (those who wield power) is far higher. Just look at the widespread support by legislators from both parties for the Patrio Act, for unconstitutionally giving away powers to the Executive, for not looking at the election fraud issue, etc.

We have a system that selects candidates who are not at all representative of the people, and are not committed to the public good. Rather, they serve those who supplied the funds who got them elected. It really isn't about "politics" (that is, policies) at all. Rather it's about pseudo-clubs whose strings are pulled by powerful corporate and financial interests.

It all comes down to money, and the power of those with money to serve their own interests.

> Clinton lied to cover up his sexual escapades. That's a private issue. In my mind one of the most justified reasons for lying is to hide your private life from the prying eyes of the public, even if it is disgusting. If Clinton hadn't lied I'd have even less respect for him - and that's not much.

I love this!!! Some of that leftists morality. I hope you are not married. I hope you do not have a 20 year old daughter who delivers pizza.

So tell me, if Bush had sex with a 20 year old pizza girl you would respect him? You would support him? What if he was accused a raping a lady? Would you support him? Cone on, do not show me that you are a hypocrite.

Lying about sex with a woman other than your wife is very bad.

Lying about the reasons for invading a sovereign country that posed no threat to us, and killing innocent children in the process, is infinitely worse.

Next question, please.

Consensual sex with a 20 year old is none of your business and I don't know what pizza has to do with it. BTW I said that I'd have EVEN LESS respect for Clinton if he hadn't tried to keep his sex live secret AND that I implied that I had very little respect for him in the first place, primarily due to his affair with Monaca. The point is I didn't really need to know about it.

Bush's lies are killing thousands and have changed the world for the worse. My grandfather, father, and I grew up in world where the US was respected and looked up to. My son will grow up in world where we are hated and feared. This will take decades to undo. The fastest way to repair this situation is to convict Bush and neocons of crimes against humanity and put them in jail for the rest of their lives. Then the world will see that we take justice seriously and are trustworthy once more.

When the trolls compare Bush's crimes to Clinton's, they have nothing left to fall back on. There is no comparison...yet Clinton was impeached.

During Iran-Contra (which was a pittance compared
to the stuff that's going on now) I can remember Republicans talking about how awful Jimmy Carter was. During Watergate they complained about LBJ.

The point isn't that Carter and Johnson were great presidents (they weren't, and LBJ did lie a lot), only that the pattern of dismissing sin by searching history for the greater sinner is intellectually bankrupt. The Democrats used to do it, too...they were still running against Herbert Hoover in the 1950s.

It's the only tactic the trolls have left. That's good news, in and of itself.

Bush's transgressions are serious and judgement is pending. Clinton's are history. Forget Clinton; concentrate on the here and now.

hello coach,

i am afoot baller from nigeria,i like playing foot ball bcos it si my talent and i will like to use my tallent 4 your club coachi have just finished my secondary school sir iam anigerian and i have no jub than playing foot ball and i will try all my best in all maches but remember that no one is perfect coach. so coach if you can help me out of so i can play 4your club. plz reply coach
hello coach,

google pr main