Printable View
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0712/p09s01-coop.htmlQuote:
When columnist Robert Novak reported that ex-Ambassador Joe Wilson had been sent to look into the claim that Iraq had sought yellowcake from Niger because his wife, a CIA analyst, had recommended him, it was the Big Media that demanded the Bush White House be turned upside down to find the source who had outed Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame.
It would seem that Mr. Buchanan either has his facts wrong or meant "analyst" in a sweeping sense, not the C.I.A.-specific terminology. If Mrs. Plame were an analyst there would be no special prosecutor. No law would have been broken.
Erm, that's been pointed out quite a few times now. Looks like he did it (in spirit, at least) and Bush will lose a few poll points over it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemurmania
(Is this some brilliantly devised scheme to get the US population to hate Rove more than GWB?! :idea: )
This isnt going to go anywhere. He says he didnt know she was an operative only that she worled at the CIA. He also never mentioned her name. Yes its tacky but dont expect him to go anywhere. If he didnt know she was an operative he can hardly be accused of intentionaly blowing her cover. Was it common knowledge that she worked for the CIA as an analyst but not as an operative. If so hes off the hook for sure.
Its a liberal in jail. Or didn't you know that?Quote:
Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny
BTW, where is our friend Novack in all this? After all he was the fisrt one to report it. Must be nice to have friends in high places. Where you can start something and let them blame others to finish it.
:balloon2:
Read my post and what you quoted. Thats what I said. Or didnt you know that?Quote:
Its a liberal in jail. Or didn't you know that?
She was not an analyst.
The Directorate of Intelligence is where the analysts work. The Directorate of Operations is responsible for front line espionage.
Within the Central Intelligence Agency, covert action is housed inside the Directorate of Operations, headed by a deputy director for operations (DDO). This directorate consist of, among other subdivisions, a unit for political and economic covert action (the Covert Action Staff, or CAS), for paramilitary (PM) covert action (the Special Operations unit), for counterintelligence (the CI staff [CIS]), and for several geographic desks responsible for the collection of foreign intelligence. For our purposes, we will examine the Special Operations unit.
The Directorate of Operations also houses special groups for conducting counterterrorism and counternarcotics, for tracking nuclear proliferation, and other tasks. Administrated by the DO, the PM group (Special Operations) maintains an elite cadre (Special Activities Staff) that are are highly skilled in weaponry; covert transport of personnel and material by air, sea, and land.; guerrilla warfare; the use of explosives; and escape and evasion techniques. They are prepared to respond quickly to a myriad of possible needs, from parachute drops and communications support to assistance with counternarcotics operations and defector infiltration. For PM tasks (special operations missions) and its other responsibilities, the Special Operations staff attempts to recruit assets with the appropriate specialized skills, though the geographic desks remain the principal units involved in the recruitment of personnel in so-called denied areas (Libya, Iraq, Iran, etc.). Special operations also provides special air, ground, maritime and training support for the Agency's intelligence gathering operations.
Thats not what Im asking. Im asking is it well known or known at all that she worked for the CIA in any capacity. If so then hes off the hook.Quote:
She was not an analyst.
Either you have been listening to RUSH, to long - or you accept the party line, and no longer believe in America as a democratic society (but, a theocracy).Quote:
Originally Posted by Xiahou
Accepting the party line that giving up the name of a CIA agent is acceptable, because their possition in it is unimportant - is like saying that it is OK to give up an undercover drug agent (or informant), because they don't know the whole picture of what the administration's intent is. OK, sorta makes sense. [...]
(edited by Ser Clegane)
[...] Or, just agrueing a misguided point of view? Some times it can be hard to destinguish ... so, think about it a moment. Then, confess that Rove betrayed us, as a nation ... a friend on the principle that his Prez is never wrong ... and that he intended to embarrass someone for showing the prez was wrong.
How hard is that to accept? Plus, he put the man and his wife in harms way. How bad is that? Were we to call him a liberal would it make it easier for you to accept his betrayal?
:balloon2:
You say that and they go off on a rant giving the democratic party line. Hypocricy at its best.Quote:
Accepting the party line
You can bet theres nothing to this story. He had no knowledge that she was an agent case closed. Its a democratic witch hunt and your following a pack of dogs. The more of the story that comes out the better it looks for Rove. In order for it to be a crime he would have to have known she was an agent and intentionally blown her cover. Theres nothing here to make such a case and thats why he isnt a target even of this investigation.
And I am asking where the idea of her being well known as a CIA asset comes from? If it is indeed so well known then point out the source, and this discussion becomes moot.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny
The knowledge that she worked for the CIA had to be known by someone or she would never have had her cover blown.
Er, once.... the majority voted for Gore, the first time. You know? or, maybe you bought into the new reality?Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Corleone
Still wondering where the man that first reported all this fits into the picture - Novack. Of course he is protected, like Rush, and the other "if they agree leave thems alone".
Imagine, we got ourselves a Prez that feels so confident about his position that he can insult the heads of states of lesser pontates by calling them "pieces of work". Or, did you miss that one last week? Bush43, has as much idea of what international politics is about as he does the presidency.
:balloon2:
Once more it all comes down to whether he new she was an agent or not. All indications are that he did not. If that is so theres no where to go with this. All the rest is just the media and the dems going after Rove.Quote:
And I am asking where the idea of her being well known as a CIA asset comes from? If it is indeed so well known then point out the source, and this discussion becomes moot.
Even thought the prosecuter in this case keeps sayng Rove is not a target of the investigation some people cant help but act like he is.
Jebby got to much in his closet to ever run. He got his bro the presiedency, and for him to ever attempt to run would expose his complicancy in the crimes committed. They would both go to jail. Jeb, can never run for office again, and he is using the expanation that his wife (the clepto) says no. Also, that he has a son of military age that is avoiding the military like it were the plague, maybe another reason.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny
Then again, name a Republican congressan's kid in uniform - maybe one ... out of +350.
Who could tell, with all their war talk and justification to support ROVE.
:balloon2:
How convenient that the number one Bush lackey let slip that the wife of an Ambassador who had gone against the Bush company line was a CIA agent.
Of course Rove knew what he was doing, he did it intentionally and with malice. But it will be impossible to prove that in court, so no responsibility will be taken. And he considers himself above the law, so he won't do the right thing. Very revealing about the true morals inside the circle.
As for the idea that this is just the Dems jumping on anything they can to hurt Bush, can you imagine how the Republicans would have howled had one of Clinton's minions done the same thing. OMG, what hypocrisy, the Republicans would have wet their drawers screaming how unpatriotic it was.
ichi :bow:
VeryQuote:
How convenient that the number one Bush lackey let slip that the wife of an Ambassador who had gone against the Bush company line was a CIA agent.
Of courseQuote:
Of course Rove knew what he was doing, he did it intentionally and with malice. But it will be impossible to prove that in court, so no responsibility will be taken. And he considers himself above the law, so he won't do the right thing. Very revealing about the true morals inside the circle.
To be sure.Quote:
As for the idea that this is just the Dems jumping on anything they can to hurt Bush, can you imagine how the Republicans would have howled had one of Clinton's minions done the same thing. OMG, what hypocrisy, the Republicans would have wet their drawers screaming how unpatriotic it was.
Its a good thing Bush brought a new tone to Washington.
I have much less respect for Laura Bush than Hillary. I had a neutral opinion of Laura, until I heard an interview with her during the last convention. Paraphrasing, I got out of that she had been told by Barbara Bush never to criticize Dubya, and was sticking to it. The one time she had made a critical comment about one of Dubya's speeches he had driven into the garage wall. It said a lot to me about both of them. Very sad, and I pity her in a way. I don't think she is unintelligent, but I don't have much respect for someone who can be the partner to the president and yet have almost no impact on his thinking. It certainly isn't a sort of marriage I can understand. I consider my wife my greatest asset (not in a property sense, of course) even when we are diametrically opposed on issues. Of course, unlike Dubya I think gathering dissenting opinions and trying to understand them is a good idea, rather than just assuming I'm infallible and sitting on the right hand of Jesus or something.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny
I always found the disrespect shown by the right wingers toward Hillary downright amazing. From the earliest days, the hatred was palpable and mean spirited in the extreme. So called "gentlemen" speaking of her as they did provided quite a bit of insight into their characters and their fear of women who had their own ideas.
Again, the hypocracy arguement. What is it with you guys? Ever since Redleg introduced it, it seems to be one of your primary arguements. It never had a focus, even when he used it, and it really is nothing more than the common accussation that if I'm wrong so are you. Say what?Quote:
Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny
When, a President surpasses the creeds established by his predicessors. When a President confesses to never having made a mistake. When a President exceeds the law of the land, ignores the constitution, uses legal eagles to justify ignoring international laws - he is no longer a President. He is his own God. He has failed his responsibility to his nation. He has failed his Presidency.
Bush43, has failed us. Maybe not intentionally, but through his governance - by surrounding himslef with yes-men and yes-women. By, ignoring the 51% that voted against him. By believing that he was right and all that opposed him were wrong -, simply because they differed. Simply because.
Imagine a moron claiming he was going to unify the nation (and had a maxed out opportunity to do so - 9/11) that went out instead to solidify a right-wing-satanic possition? Which is what he did.
Of course, he said it was for "Christmas" (er). but you get my point.
~D
Wel its no wonder you like Madame Hilary then.Quote:
Paraphrasing, I got out of that she had been told by Barbara Bush never to criticize Dubya, and was sticking to it. The one time she had made a critical comment about one of Dubya's speeches he had driven into the garage wall. It said a lot to me about both of them. Very sad, and I pity her in a way. I don't think she is unintelligent, but I don't have much respect for someone who can be the partner to the president and yet have almost no impact on his thinking.
Why? As a New Yorker I hate the carpet baggin B-tch.Quote:
I always found the disrespect shown by the right wingers toward Hillary downright amazing.
Theres a lot there to hate.Quote:
From the earliest days, the hatred was palpable and mean spirited in the extreme.
I suppose you have more faith in a woman who dosent care that her husband is running around sexually using women and in fact facilitates it.
And what exactly would that be? Perhaps it is: "My daddy was president therefore I inherited the office and don't have to follow laws meant for others. I'm a spoiled rich kid of no real talent, I was AWOL during Vietnam, did cocaine, beat women, got a DWI, am arrogant as hell, and don't have to answer to anyone. I'm annointed by God and am a righteous president who can do no wrong." That's the tone I've seen. My wife and I noticed it back when he was governor...and it was reinforced when she actually met him. After shaking his hand, she said to me, "That man has never done an honest day's work in his life."Quote:
Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny
Plame didn't have an official job with the CIA, so I do not really believe that Karl Rove didn't clue into the obvious. He had to have known she was undercover, or he is a serious moron.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny
The only way he couldn't have known she was NOC (non-official cover), is if someone else leaked the information to him and that someone is the individual who broke the law. Her cover was classified and that means the CIA will have the documents to prove who had the required clearances.
It is likely that Lewis Libby and Dick Cheney worked with Plame on the WMD issue (CIA's Non-Proliferation Center), and if Karl Rove was ever privy to that he is in big trouble. It wouldn't matter if he was cleared to know, or not.
He committed a crime by revealing, or confirming her covert status, or someone else did! Valerie Plame was a CIA operative working on weapons of mass destruction. Nice to know that Karl Rove is doing his best to help Osama Bin Laden get through to New York again.
At the very least Karl Rove used his position of trust in the government to do what he know was not in his country's best interest. He is not a traitor in the same sense that Bill Clinton didn't have sex with Monica Lewinski!
"Even though I'm a tranquil guy now at this stage of my life, 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."
-George H. W. Bush
That would be I was being sarcastic.Quote:
And what exactly would that be?
I believe he was elected not once but twice.Quote:
"My daddy was president therefore I inherited the office and don't have to follow laws meant for others.
Talent enough to be president of the most powerful nation the world has ever seen.Quote:
I'm a spoiled rich kid of no real talent
FalseQuote:
I was AWOL during Vietnam
Only an accusation. Besides I dont see that as any big deal. I bet Clinton has tried that and much more .Quote:
did cocaine
Who did he beat. At least he wasnt accused of raping them in any event.Quote:
beat women
Well that certainly disqualifies him from holding public office.Quote:
got a DWI
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I see no such thing.Quote:
am arrogant as hell, and don't have to answer to anyone. I'm annointed by God and am a righteous president who can do no wrong."That's the tone I've seen
For a man who usually makes reasoned and inteligent posts Im afraid your letting your hatred of the man get the better of you.
And your probably correct. But do you think Kerry, Kennedy or Hilary have either?Quote:
My wife and I noticed it back when he was governor...and it was reinforced when she actually met him. After shaking his hand, she said to me, "That man has never done an honest day's work in his life."
Perhaps not. I've looked at the transcript from Hardball that it supposedly came out in and can't find it.Quote:
Originally Posted by sharrukin
Here is the link to (as far as I can tell) the transcript in question if anyone else wants to pour over it. The closest I could find was them talking about how all of the "Plame" articles, including Novak's cite multiple anonymous government sources. :shrug:
Are you looking for an award for the most naive poster around?Quote:
Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny
Just assume it was not happening in the US, and there is no party line going over there, would you really have the same opinion?
Don't you feel intellectually dishonest? Just a bit?
When I think the same exact people were all over the case for a blowjob and an unconsequential lie... And that was for a presidential impeachement. Now covering a security leak, which is a bit more serious. Oh, the irony.
I guess principles only apply to others.
How many of Plame contacts are now lost? What credibility the CIA got left? If you were to help the CIA, would you still do it knowing that any dumb politician in Washington would sell your liaison name for the sake of political convenience, very possibly endangering you in the process?
This case is also a problem for the media. Although not as important as the intelligence damage done, there is an issue with media not being able to cover its source (which is too bad for M. Rove)...
On that aspect, I found that quote disturbing:
Hell, yes they would have sit on it. If they ever want to have story again, they better protect their source. That's journalism 101 and for sure it's not dumb. They gave the source after a controversial supreme court decision.Quote:
Did the various editors at the Times, the WaPo, and Time magazine really sit on evidence that would have incriminated Karl Rove all through last fall's campaign? What happened to the public's right to know? ...Either they are awfully dumb (possible!), or the story is not there. Or both.
There is one sure point; I would not trust that so called analysis (or well, just usual biaised blog) as far as keeping source is concerned... Looks like anyone giving that person some anonymous information is going to be disappointed ~D
I don't think Rove will be successfully prosecuted. I don't believe him innocent, but that says how much trust I got in US (or any other...) justice for those cases.
I hope a prosecutor will have the balls to pleasantly surprise me.
Louis,
Nope, he was only elected once. The first election was a sham. He lost the popular vote, and he lost Florida. Make all the excuses you want, but it is true. The Florida count was not valid and it did not represent the intent of those who actually voted. I have not, nor will I ever consider his first administration as being legitimate.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny
So was Nixon. Dubya has never earned anything on merit, nothing. He sells snake oil to the gullible, and they buy it. It is a bizarre mass hallucination. I look forward to reading the historical assessment of Dubya, it will be most unkind toward his legacy.Quote:
Talent enough to be president of the most powerful nation the world has ever seen.
Definitely TRUE. He can't produce a single witness to prove he served his last two years or so, despite various groups offering $50,000 dollar rewards for such evidence. He failed to report when was ordered to, and he failed to take his physicals. His daddy swung him a Guard spot in the first place. He was a mediocre pilot at best, and a discipline problem with his sense of privilege. To me, he represents the antithesis of American meritocracy and achievement!Quote:
False
Clinton at least made an admission of drug use (as weak as it was.) Dubya has dodge answering his. I don't recall Clinton as a member of the armed services during war time doing drugs. Of course, in some ways neither was Dubya, he was AWOL and did not bother to even maintain his flight status through a simple physical. We were paying him though. And I love the redirect to Clinton trying to use the "two wrongs make a right" approach. Clinton was 10 times the President Dubya has been. Clinton's failings were of a personal nature, but Dubya's are failures of leadership and abuse of power.Quote:
Only an accusation. Besides I dont see that as any big deal. I bet Clinton has tried that and much more .
I can't recall, I've seen some stuff referring to the court transcript though. Wife beaters are one of the lowest levels of scum in my book.Quote:
Who did he beat. At least he wasnt accused of raping them in any event.
It's more of a case of false advertising...passing oneself off as something you are not. Dubya is a fraud.Quote:
And your probably correct. But do you think Kerry, Kennedy or Hilary have either?
An early example: His "dove hunting trip" during the Texas governor campaign was a real hoot. He shot a protected bird, a killdeer, then obliviously mocked dumbfounded reporters for not congratulating him on a "nice shot." They then pointed out that he had illegally shot a bird and damage control started...
Take off the rose colored glasses and you can see right through him.
That's right Khafir, I'm so stupid, I actually follow the elecoral law on the matter. Is it possible for you to take sides in an issue without launching into bitter insults against anyone who disagrees with you? It doesn't speak well for how well adjusted your ego is if everyone must constantly agree with every last word you say.Quote:
Originally Posted by KafirChobee
Not you too, Red. I'm amazed, this story has ginned up all the worst on your guys' side. Look, if the Florida election was a sham, why would the New York Times & USA Today come out and say there was no way Gore could have won Florida?Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Harvest
Do you know how Gore would have won Florida? The only scenario that worked was for him to exclued all absentee ballots, not just ones delivered late. That's why he and Daly toyed with that idea for a while, even though there was no grounds for doing so. Yeah, screw the military, just let us win...
Well Red, I'll give you credit. You and your wife definitely have the Howard Dean talking points down pat. You're right, we've all never done an honest day's work in our life. When I have a 65, 70 hour work week, that's not real work. It can't be, because I vote Republican. I must be playing Baldur's Gate or something.Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Harvest
Okay, if that's where this discussion has gone, I'm done. You and Khafir... you're right! Republicans, and anyone who votes for them... we're shiftless, we're lazy, we're dishonest, we hate women, the poor, minorities, gays and anybody who doesn't agree with us. You got us!!! Although bonus points for being at least a little subtle. Have fun with this argument. Personally, I thought you at least had better arguments then remolding Dean's screeds 'they've never done an honest day's work in their lives" indeed. :no:
I think it's unfair to compare Red with Kafir's lunacy. His comment seemed aimed at the President and I share some of his view.
Anyway, back on topic.
Looks like the left is going to get a trophy. Rove shouldn't have opened his mouth, and Bush should ease him out of the White House.
Of course, that won't be good enough. The press will go down and start hounding every personal conversation Rove has with anyone associated with the GOP; meanwhile the FBI will continue tracking down Al Qaeda sleeper cells and the Armed Forces will continue rehabillitating two countries that have been abused by various tyrants for the past three decades.
At least the media has its priorities straight though. If your beloved Democrats can't win an election on their ideas, trump up some charges against the Republicans' chief strategist.
It still wouldn't surprise me at all if Matt Cooper's "notes" are a complete fabrication.
Prol, I don't think you realize. That comment on the surface was aimed at the President, but it was a subtle play on words that really was a replay of Howard Dean's slam on all of us.
When asked why Election Day should be made a national holiday, Dean answered "Our people need the day off cause they can't work a full day, then wait in line for 4 hours. It's easy for the Republicans to vote. They've never worked an honest day in their life".