 |
SwiftVets.com
Service to Country
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
hmminCanada
Seaman Recruit
Joined: 28 Aug 2004
Posts: 43
|
 Posted: Mon Jul 11, 2005 7:56 pm Post subject: Karl Rove |
 |
|
In regard to Tanya's post above, July 8:
This is how easy it was to find out Wilson's wife's maiden name.
Simply Google: Joseph C. Wilson, married to
The 4th article that comes up is the one linked to by Tanya. The last sentence of the article is: "He is married to the former Valerie Plame and has two sons and two daughters." The date for the article is Feb. 8, 2003. Novak's article was July 14, 2003.
The 5th article is for a different organization but the same bio and dated for October 28 and 29, 2003--too late for the controversy.
Now that took a lot of brains and effort didn't it! I actually found the first one back in 2003 the day that everyone started this whole stupid affair.
Do reporters know how to use Google?
Carolyn |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Rdtf
CNO
Joined: 13 May 2004
Posts: 2209
Location: BUSHville
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 11, 2005 8:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Carolyn,
Good research - but I'll say it again - then why couldn't this have been used to keep them out of jail? 'Your honor, it is public knowledge. My client found it in a google search.'
There is a piece missing to this whole story. I never believe that this stuff is as it seems to be. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tanya
Senior Chief Petty Officer
Joined: 13 Aug 2004
Posts: 570
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
shawa
CNO
Joined: 03 Sep 2004
Posts: 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 11, 2005 10:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
This is great if it turns out to be true!
It answers my main question when O'Donnell first brayed "It was Rove!"
None of these reporters would go to such extremes to protect Rove or anyone else in the Bush Administration!
But OF COURSE they would cover one of their own!!
Also, Cooper insisting that he would go to jail UNLESS he received a PERSONAL waiver from his source, which he did get just before he was due to testify. Everyone assumed Rove gave him the personal waiver.
But I read an article earlier today that Luskin, Rove's lawyer, said Rove
DID NOT give Cooper any personal waiver!! That they were operating under the general blanket waiver.
Set me to wondering just WHAT SOURCE Cooper got the waiver from??
Also wondered at Cooper acting so agonized when he did go to testify.
Agonizing for Rove??? I don't think so.
Agonizing for Miller?? Of course!
_________________
“I love the man that can smile in trouble, that can gather strength from distress, and grow brave by reflection. ‘Tis the business of little minds to shrink; but he whose heart is firm, and whose conscience approves his conduct, will pursue his principles unto death.” (Thomas Paine, 1776) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kate
Admin
Joined: 14 May 2004
Posts: 1891
Location: Upstate, New York
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 11, 2005 10:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Set me to wondering just WHAT SOURCE Cooper got the waiver from?? |
this whole thing just gets more absurd ...supposedly Cooper thinks he got some sort of re-affirmation about the Rove waiver 
in the NYTimes today
| Quote: |
<snip>
A short time ago," Mr. Cooper said, "in somewhat dramatic fashion, I received an express personal release from my source."
But the facts appear more complicated than they seemed in court. Mr. Cooper, it turns out, never spoke to his confidential source that day, said Robert D. Luskin, a lawyer for the source, who is now known to be Karl Rove, the senior White House political adviser.
The development was actually the product of a frenzied series of phone calls initiated that morning by a lawyer for Mr. Cooper and involving Mr. Luskin and the special prosecutor in the case, Patrick J. Fitzgerald. And the calls were the culmination of days of anxiety and introspection by a reporter who by all accounts wanted to live up to his pledge to protect his confidential source yet find a way to avoid going to jail as another reporter, Judith Miller of The New York Times, was about to do.
<snip>
"I remember saying to him," Mr. Waldman continued, " 'Look, there are two principles you're trying to balance. One is the confidentiality of sources. The other is an obligation to your family. They're both moral principles. It's totally appropriate to view that as a balance.' "
Mr. Cooper was resistant to that notion, Mr. Waldman said.
Later, Mr. Waldman asked whether Time's disclosures and a blanket waiver form his source had signed were enough to allow him to testify. In an e-mail message on Tuesday night, Mr. Cooper said he believed the forms could have been coerced and thus worthless.
The only thing that would do, Mr. Cooper wrote, was a "certain, unambiguous waiver" from his source.
Around 7:30 on Wednesday morning, Mr. Cooper had said goodbye to his son, resigned to his fate. His lawyer, Mr. Sauber, called to alert him to a statement from Mr. Luskin in The Wall Street Journal.
"If Matt Cooper is going to jail to protect a source," Mr. Luskin told The Journal, "it's not Karl he's protecting."
That provided an opening, Mr. Cooper said. "I was not looking for a waiver," he said, "but on Wednesday morning my lawyer called and said, 'Look at The Wall Street Journal. I think we should take a shot.' And I said, 'Yes, it's an invitation.' "
In court shortly after 2, he told Judge Thomas F. Hogan of the Federal District Court in Washington that he had received "an express personal release from my source."
That statement surprised Mr. Luskin, Mr. Rove's lawyer. Mr. Luskin said he had only reaffirmed the blanket waiver, in response to a request from Mr. Fitzgerald.
"Karl was not afraid of what Cooper is going to say and is clearly trying to be fully candid with the prosecutor," Mr. Luskin said.
<snip>
Mr. Cooper was not an obvious vehicle for a sensitive leak. He had become one of the magazine's White House correspondents only the month before the conversation and is married to a prominent Democratic strategist, Mandy Grunwald. |
they've buried themselves deeper and deeper in their attempt to get at Rove. That article that Tanya linked, about Miller being her own source is probably right on target
_________________
.
one of..... We The People |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rdtf
CNO
Joined: 13 May 2004
Posts: 2209
Location: BUSHville
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 11, 2005 11:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| would certainly answer a few questions...she had to go to jail, because she had no source to name! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stevie
Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy
Joined: 25 Aug 2004
Posts: 1451
Location: Queen Creek, Arizona
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 11, 2005 11:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I haven't read this all yet.... but one of the ladies on my liberal woman's board posted an article from the Washington Post about it.
It did say that Rove hadn't revealed her name. and he didn't reveal that
she was covert CIA. from all I've read, the 'washington' set all knew it.
the only part I see that Rove did was connect her to Wilson's trip to Niger.
my belief all along has been that Wilson himself outed her!
and is attempting (has been all along) to blame Rove.
_________________
Stevie
Congressmen who willfully take actions during wartime that damage
morale and undermine the military are saboteurs and should
be arrested, exiled or hanged. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SBD
Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2004
Posts: 1022
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 11, 2005 11:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I thought this thread had died, so I started a new one but saw this thread again so I am reposting it here.
SBD
| SBD wrote: | Is Gannon from Talon News the Leak of Valerie Plame?
| Quote: |
Inside the Real West Wing
And then there's Jeff Gannon of Talon News.
Who? Of what?
I first wrote about Gannon in my Feb. 19 column. Gannon works for a tiny, supremely conservative organization called Talon News which publishes a Web site by the same name as well as one called GOPUSA.com. With the sole exception of Gannon, who says he is compensated, all the "reporters" are volunteers.
Gannon's presence in the White House briefing room is something of an irritant to most of the press corps, which considers his questions at briefings to be preposterous softballs. [Note: This paragraph has been corrected. Gannon does not have an assigned seat in the briefing room as was previously reported here.]
And in return, Gannon sometimes writes on his own Web site about his views of the corps and how there is "perhaps no depth to which it will not sink in order to undermine a presidency."
Anyway, the reason Gannon is on the list is most likely an attempt to find out who gave him a secret memo that he mentioned in an interview he had with Plame's husband, former ambassador and administration critic Joseph Wilson.
Gannon asked Wilson: "An internal government memo prepared by U.S. intelligence personnel details a meeting in early 2002 where your wife, a member of the agency for clandestine service working on Iraqi weapons issues, suggested that you could be sent to investigate the reports. Do you dispute that?"
According to a December Washington Post story by Mike Allen and Dana Milbank, "Sources said the CIA is angry about the circulation of a still-classified document to conservative news outlets suggesting Plame had a role in arranging her husband's trip to Africa for the CIA. The document, written by a State Department official who works for its Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR), describes a meeting at the CIA where the Niger trip by Wilson was discussed, said a senior administration official who has seen it."
On top of being secret, CIA officials said it was wrong.
Gannon won't talk about it. But he does keep lobbing those softballs. Sometimes he even brings props. And press secretary McClellan seems to appreciate it.
Yesterday, for instance, McClellan was getting hammered with questions about the 9/11 commission and the possible inappropriate juxtaposition of a visit to a 9/11 memorial with a fundraiser on Thursday.
It was getting ugly. "I'm not even going to dignify that with a response," McClellan said in response to a jibe. (See the full text of the briefing.)
Then he saw daylight:
"Go ahead, Jeff."
Gannon: "Thank you. First of all, I hope the grand jury didn't force you to turn over the wedding card I sent to you and your wife. (Laughter.) Do you see any hypocrisy in the controversy about the President's mention of 9/11 in his ads, when Democratic icon Franklin Delano Roosevelt's campaign issued this button, that says, 'Remember Pearl Harbor'? I have a visual aid for folks watching at home."
McClellan: "You're pointing out some historical facts. Obviously, Pearl Harbor was a defining moment back in the period of World War II, and Franklin Delano Roosevelt was strongly committed to winning World War II and talked about it frequently."
Gannon: "So you think it certainly is valid that the President does talk about it and --"
McClellan: "Yes, he addressed this this weekend, when he was first asked about it. September 11th was a defining moment for our nation. We all shared in that experience. And it's important that we look at how we lead in a post-September 11th world. And that's an important discussion to have with the American people, and to talk about the differences in approaches to winning the war on terrorism and preventing attacks from happening in the first place." |
SBD |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
shawa
CNO
Joined: 03 Sep 2004
Posts: 2004
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 12, 2005 12:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks Kate, for finding that article. I couldn't remember where I had read it. But this is what gave me pause:
| Quote: | A short time ago," Mr. Cooper said, "in somewhat dramatic fashion, I received an express personal release from my source."
But the facts appear more complicated than they seemed in court. Mr. Cooper, it turns out, never spoke to his confidential source that day, said Robert D. Luskin, a lawyer for the source, who is now known to be Karl Rove, the senior White House political adviser. |
Cooper is being disingenuous if he is referring to Rove. He didn't talk to Rove! So who was he refering to.
And This:
| Quote: | | "If Matt Cooper is going to jail to protect a source," Mr. Luskin told The Journal, "it's not Karl he's protecting." |
Obviously Cooper is not protecting Rove, so who is this source that Cooper would go to jail for??
_________________
“I love the man that can smile in trouble, that can gather strength from distress, and grow brave by reflection. ‘Tis the business of little minds to shrink; but he whose heart is firm, and whose conscience approves his conduct, will pursue his principles unto death.” (Thomas Paine, 1776) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tanya
Senior Chief Petty Officer
Joined: 13 Aug 2004
Posts: 570
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tanya
Senior Chief Petty Officer
Joined: 13 Aug 2004
Posts: 570
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 12, 2005 4:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
"NY TIMES FIGHTS BACK: PLANS FRONT SPLASH ON ROVE; REPORTER SITS IN JAIL
Top editors of the NY TIMES made the decision Monday afternoon to turn up the heat on White House adviser Karl Rove.
The TIMES is planning to lead Tuesday editions with growing calls for Rove's resignation, newsroom sources tell the DRUDGE REPORT, a powerplay in this summer's DC all-star game of high stakes finger pointing and intrigue."
http://www.drudgereport.com/flash3kr.htm |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SBD
Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2004
Posts: 1022
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 12, 2005 5:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
http://www.NewsMax.com
For Plame's outing to have been illegal, the one-time deputy AG explained, "her status as undercover must be classified." Also, Plame "must have been assigned to duty outside the United States currently or in the past five years."
| Quote: | Monday, July 11, 2005 10:16 p.m. EDT
Deputy AG: Valerie Plame Leak Not Illegal
The White House press corps lapsed into a full-blown feeding frenzy on Monday over the news that Karl Rove is identified in emails from Time Magazine reporter Matthew Cooper as someone who mentioned that Joseph Wilson's wife worked at the CIA - just days before her name was revealed by columnist Robert Novak.
But the former deputy attorney general who helped draft Intelligence Identities Protection Act - which Bush critics insist was violated when Valerie Plame was identified to Novak - said earlier this year that it's unlikely any laws were broken in the case. Writing in January in the Washington Post, former Assistant Deputy Attorney General Victoria Toensing explained that she helped draft the 1982 law in question.
Said Toensing: "The Novak column and the surrounding facts do not support evidence of criminal conduct."
For Plame's outing to have been illegal, the one-time deputy AG explained, "her status as undercover must be classified." Also, Plame "must have been assigned to duty outside the United States currently or in the past five years."
Since in neither case does Plame meet those criteria, Toensing argued: "There is a serious legal question as to whether she qualifies as 'covert.'"
The law also requires that the celebrated non-spy's outing take place by someone who knew the government had taken "affirmative measures to conceal [the agent's] relationship" to the U.S.
Toensing said that's unlikely.
In fact, the myth that the Intelligence Identities Protection Act was violated in the Plame case began to unravel in October 2003, when New York Times scribe Nicholas Kristof revealed that she abandoned her covert role a full nine years before the Novak column.
"The C.I.A. suspected that Aldrich Ames had given [Plame's] name [along with those of other spies] to the Russians before his espionage arrest in 1994," reported Kristof. "So her undercover security was undermined at that time, and she was brought back to Washington for safety reasons."
The Times columnist also noted that Plame had begun making the transition to CIA "management" even before she was outted by Novak, explaining that "she was moving away from 'noc' – which means non-official cover ... to a new cover as a State Department official, affording her diplomatic protection without having 'C.I.A.' stamped on her forehead."
Kristof concluded: "All in all, I think the Democrats are engaging in hyperbole when they describe the White House as having put [Plame's] life in danger and destroyed her career; her days skulking along the back alleys of cities like Beirut and Algiers were already mostly over." |
SBD |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
shawa
CNO
Joined: 03 Sep 2004
Posts: 2004
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 12, 2005 11:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
What has really infuriated me is how the Media has treated Joe Wilson and his wife as "victims' in this whole controversy!!
As I have stated before, JOE WILSON IS A CONFIRMED LIAR! Both the Senate Intelligence Committee Report and the 911 Committee Report states that he lied!
If anything, HE should be the subject of an investigation.
Far from being victims, I believe that he and his wife were perpetrators.
This was back when Bush was building up to possibly invade Iraq because he saw a threat of Saddam having WMDs.
Plame, a Bush-hating, anti-war, Gore supporter is working at the CIA
on WMD proliferation. I believe she may have been skewing intelligence
reports against the idea that Saddam was actively making WMDs.
She gets a British Intel report that references Saddam attempting to purchase yellow cake from Niger.
She has to investigate it, but doesn't want it to be true because that would add to Bush's reasons to go to war. So she picks
her husband to go to Niger with the express purpose of bringing back a report that there was no indication of Saddam/Niger link which is what Wilson report says. Mission accomplished!!
But then President Bush lays out his reasons for seeing Saddam as a threat to our security, and he mentions the British Intelligence reports that Saddam may have been seeking yellow cake uranium from Niger.
Wilson writes his article,"I am the person who went to Niger to investigate, and Bush is lying, he disregarded my report yada yada yada.
The left picked up the chant ever since--Bush lied! Bush lied!
In all the media frenzy over Plame's identity outing, there is never a mention that Joe Wilson's report has been proven bogus!!
Finally, I find Bummerdietz has laid out Wilson's lies. I only wish this got as much media attention. Wilson is the one who should face an investigation. Why didn't he report that three Niger officials told him Saddam WAS attempting to buy yellow cake from Niger.
Wilson's lies at:
http://www.scyllacharybdis.blogspot.com/
_________________
“I love the man that can smile in trouble, that can gather strength from distress, and grow brave by reflection. ‘Tis the business of little minds to shrink; but he whose heart is firm, and whose conscience approves his conduct, will pursue his principles unto death.” (Thomas Paine, 1776) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rdtf
CNO
Joined: 13 May 2004
Posts: 2209
Location: BUSHville
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 12, 2005 12:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Shawa-
IMHO all your excellent points are why Rove chatted about it to begin with. It infuriated them that the CIA/State Dept allowed this. If Wilson had kept his mouth shut, the mouth that took an oath as a career State Dept official with a high level clearance to support his President and country, then all of this would have stayed under the radar. But because he felt it necessary to undermine his country's efforts and even lie to do it, it has turned into a fiasco. In my opinion no one is at any fault here except him. He knew he had a CIA wife - and he put her at risk, so to speak. He put his whole country and everyone at risk. Too many of these people are on power trips.
Just ask Laurie Mylroie and some others, contrary to popular belief the CIA and the White House are not friends, no matter who is President. Add to the mix the State Department, made up mostly of liberals, and a Republican President has a tough road to cross. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
shawa
CNO
Joined: 03 Sep 2004
Posts: 2004
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 12, 2005 6:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Rdtf said
| Quote: | | contrary to popular belief the CIA and the White House are not friends, no matter who is President. Add to the mix the State Department, made up mostly of liberals, and a Republican President has a tough road to cross. |
Right on! There are many career people in these deparments who have their own opinions of what U.S. foreign policy should be and likely slant their analysis AGAINST the President's policy and goals.
I'm sure that John Bolton was attempting to correct by his complaints to the CIA about certain analysts. And it is the real reason why the Left is fighting his nomination.
_________________
“I love the man that can smile in trouble, that can gather strength from distress, and grow brave by reflection. ‘Tis the business of little minds to shrink; but he whose heart is firm, and whose conscience approves his conduct, will pursue his principles unto death.” (Thomas Paine, 1776) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
