home

New Damaging Information About Karl Rove

By Jeralyn, Section Valerie Plame Leak Case
Posted on Tue Jul 19, 2005 at 07:32:21 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

The Supreme Court nomination of John G. Roberts couldn't come at a better time for Bush. What better way to distract us from the Karl Rove issue?

Murray Waas is breaking another story about Karl Rove, and why grand jury investigators believe Rove didn't tell the truth in the first interview....when he claimed, as we wrote here, that he learned of Valerie Plame's identity from a journalist, but he couldn't remember which one. Waas writes:

White House deputy chief of staff Karl Rove did not disclose that he had ever discussed CIA officer Valerie Plame with Time magazine reporter Matthew Cooper during Rove’s first interview with the FBI, according to legal sources with firsthand knowledge of the matter.

The omission by Rove created doubt for federal investigators, almost from the inception of their criminal probe into who leaked Plame's name to columnist Robert Novak, as to whether Rove was withholding crucial information from them, and perhaps even misleading or lying to them, the sources said.

....Also leading to the early skepticism of Rove's accounts was the claim that although he first heard that Plame worked for the CIA from a journalist, he said could not recall the name of the journalist. Later, the sources said, Rove wavered even further, saying he was not sure at all where he first heard the information.

....Investigators believe Rove may have learned Plame's identity from the classified June 10 memo, which was sent to Colin Powell on July 7, the day Powell left with Bush for Africa on Air Force One, and which likely was seen by others on the plane.

.... Fitzgerald has focused on whether Rove might have learned of Plame's identity from one of the many senior White House officials who read the memo, according to the Times account and attorneys whose clients have testified before the federal grand jury.

Let's not get distracted. The Judiciary Committee will do its investigation. There will be plenty of time to argue against or concur with Roberts' nomination in the weeks to come. We need to keep our eye on Rove and company.

< Ex-CIA Agents Send Letter on Valerie Plame | More on John G. Roberts' Criminal Decisions >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    New Damaging Information About Karl Rove | 16 comments (16 topical)
    Re: New Damaging Information About Karl Rove (none / 0) (#1)
    by jimcee on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:24 PM EST
    The Rove thing has me confused. The Democrats and other anti-Bush resources are expending all of thier energy creating a scandal that might possibly result in Karl Rove resigning but then again maybe not. And if Rove resigns it doesn't mean he still won't be an influential right wing advisor it just means his title will change. I really think that the Dems have had thier ranks split by a Karl Rove feint. Attack an advisor to the president and you attack the President in proxy but not in person and that seems unseemly to the average joe. At the same time the Bushies nominate someone to the Supreme Court that is more conserative than the Dems have said is exceptable and have threatened a filibuster if they don't approve. As 2006 approaches the Dems are going to appear to be obstructionist and the Republicans will play the middle of the road and give the appearance of moderation. I would suggest that if the Dems manage to force Rove out it will be a Pyhhric victory as the short term damage will be the appearance of radicalism in thier ranks. Both sides need the middle and the middle doesn't like radicals so the side that seems less rabid will win the day. I may be wrong but I think the Left's attack on Rove will blow up in thier faces. It is a Quixotic tilt....(Metaphor apoligies).....

    Re: New Damaging Information About Karl Rove (none / 0) (#2)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:25 PM EST
    I think it's far too late for Republicans to return to the middle of the road. The Schiavo case alone will guarantee that. If Democrats are smart, they will sit out the Roberts battle, ignore NARAL and let Bush have his pick. The Rove case will take care of itself, via the grand jury, but polls show it is further eroding the administration's credibility, not that of the other side...

    Re: New Damaging Information About Karl Rove (none / 0) (#3)
    by merlallen on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:25 PM EST
    jimcee, has it ever occurred to you that people who oppose chickengeorge aren't necessarily just bush haters or anti bush, but rather anti-bush policy? for all i know he might be a good guy, but he is a lousy president. and also he seems to really hate America and doesn't much care about the military and especially veterans. maybe he hates vets out of a sense of shame for his own behavior during Vietnam. At least that's what I think. you see, it's the right wing who really know how to hate. I think it must be buried in the Bible in code or something.

    Re: New Damaging Information About Karl Rove (none / 0) (#4)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:25 PM EST
    bring'em down

    Re: New Damaging Information About Karl Rove (none / 0) (#5)
    by scarshapedstar on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:25 PM EST
    "jimcee, has it ever occurred to you that people who oppose chickengeorge aren't necessarily just bush haters or anti bush, but rather anti-bush policy?" Yeah, really. If I talk about how Louisiana is in a perpetual decline, is that mindless Kathleen Blanco hatred? Was is mindless Mike Foster hatred 2 years ago? And yet any criticism of anything that happens in America today is "Bush hatred". Let it go already. Anyway, jimcee, I don't think people view this as some "cowardly" proxy attack on Bush. Sounds a wee bit projected. I think your average American thinks that what's cowardly is for those in the halls of power to screw with the Wilsons simply for exposing their lies, and then not own up to it. And judging from the latest polls, it seems I'm right.

    Re: New Damaging Information About Karl Rove (none / 0) (#6)
    by john horse on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:25 PM EST
    jimcee, For your information, the Democrats did not "create" the scandal. That was done by the actions of Rove and company. What is unique about the Rove scandal isn't that there is a scandal but that it is actually being investigated.

    Re: New Damaging Information About Karl Rove (none / 0) (#7)
    by jimcee on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:25 PM EST
    I am not talking about Bush hatred as much as the Dems rushing to the attack against Rove. If they were confident in their views that Rove is guilty of something they would sit back and wait for the Grand Jury's results in October but instead they are on the attack now and it seems a thin gruel to dine on. Thier proxy attacks on Bush are not cowardly just dumb and it isn't helping thier image at all. The Republicans did the same thing with Clinton and fell flat on thier faces. I would think that the Dems would have learned from the Repubs humiliation. Something about not learning from recent history.

    Re: New Damaging Information About Karl Rove (none / 0) (#8)
    by ppjakajim on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:25 PM EST
    merlallen writes:
    jimcee, has it ever occurred to you that people who oppose chickengeorge aren't necessarily just bush haters or anti bush, but rather anti-bush policy?
    Reasonable people debating political points don't use the language you use here, or the other perjoratives that are in common use. I realize that many of them come because of the age of the writer (quite young), and many are the "Internet effect," which is a fancy way of saying some people say nasty things when they are shielded from physical and societal reactions. Either way, it doesn't win points in the debate, nor does it help win elections, no matter how cute it sounds or how good it makes them feel.

    Re: New Damaging Information About Karl Rove (none / 0) (#9)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:25 PM EST
    I agree again ppj, on the not using stupid perjortives point, but jimcee's post is ludicrous. Let's see here: creating a scandal that might possibly result in Karl Rove resigning but then again maybe not.
    Um no...I think Rove, et al. created the scandal when they decided to get back at a diplomat by destroying his wife's career, thus rendering a CIA dummy corporation no longer viable, possibly putting lives in danger(those agents who can, in any way, be connected to Plame), and then lying about it.
    I really think that the Dems have had thier ranks split by a Karl Rove feint. Attack an advisor to the president and you attack the President in proxy but not in person and that seems unseemly to the average joe.
    No again. I'm not sure what the Karl Rove feint is. Are you suggesting that the administration had Rove help disclose the identity of a CIA agent so that the dems would take their eye off the supreme court ball? And also, according to every poll I've seen, it isn't the dems who seem unseemly to the American public.
    And if Rove resigns it doesn't mean he still won't be an influential right wing advisor it just means his title will change.
    No, but it would be a PR nightmanre for the administration. But don't worry, Rove probably won't resign, and Bush won't fire him unless he's convicted of a crime he committed while in office. And that, honestly, has to be the lowest employment standard set in quite a long time.

    Re: New Damaging Information About Karl Rove (none / 0) (#10)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:25 PM EST
    I kind of messed that up but I'm sure people can figure it out: "creating" was taken from jimcee's post.

    Re: New Damaging Information About Karl Rove (none / 0) (#11)
    by jimcee on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:27 PM EST
    I just get the feeling that Rove said all he had to say and be technically within the law. If his leaking were found out the press and the Dems would go on a feeding frenzy and it was found out and has caused a feeding frenzy. I think Muhamid Ali used to call it the 'ropa-dopa'. As I said earlier is that this is a distraction from the Supreme Court battle. When the Left was distracted by its attacks on Rove then the administration nominates a surprise choice for the Supremes they were caught flat footed so they will not fight as hard to trash the nominee as they might have just a few weeks ago. The Art of War I think they call it. In the end if Rove is forced from his job what exactly has happened that advances the Dems cause? In the meantime the cacophony about Rove from the Left making them seem exactly as Rove described them at that meet and greet that had you howling last month. Ropa meet Dopa.

    Re: New Damaging Information About Karl Rove (none / 0) (#12)
    by Sailor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:27 PM EST
    McClellan said at the time: "The president knows that Karl Rove wasn't involved" well someone (or everyone) sure as hell lied. You wanna know how bad rove committing treason is for this admin:
    Bush accelerated his search for a Supreme Court nominee in part because of special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald's investigation into the leak of a CIA agent's name, according to Republicans familiar with administration strategy.

    Bush originally had planned to announce a replacement for retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor on July 26 or 27, just before his planned July 28 departure for a month-long vacation at his Crawford, Texas, ranch, said two administration officials, who spoke on the condition they not be named.
    Re: New Damaging Information About Karl Rove (none / 0) (#13)
    by jimcee on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:27 PM EST
    And in The Art of War that is called a feint. It is a subtle change of plans that can be the difference between victory and defeat. The only thing that is sure to happen once the battle is joined is that all the earlier battle plans have been made obsolete. The Dems are being out-meneuvered right now and it will be interesting to see if they can adjust thier attack accordingly. I don't think they are that flexible and they are are in for another rout on the political battlefield. I would be surprised if events prove me wrong but they may.

    Re: New Damaging Information About Karl Rove (none / 0) (#14)
    by Sailor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:27 PM EST
    McClellan said at the time: "The president knows that Karl Rove wasn't involved" well someone (or everyone) sure as hell lied. You wanna know how bad rove committing treason is for this admin:
    Bush accelerated his search for a Supreme Court nominee in part because of special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald's investigation into the leak of a CIA agent's name, according to Republicans familiar with administration strategy.

    Bush originally had planned to announce a replacement for retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor on July 26 or 27, just before his planned July 28 departure for a month-long vacation at his Crawford, Texas, ranch, said two administration officials, who spoke on the condition they not be named.
    Re: New Damaging Information About Karl Rove (none / 0) (#15)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:28 PM EST
    jimcee, the thing about sweaters is sometimes you just pull on one thread and the whole thing comes unraveled. Read this part of the story again: "....Investigators believe Rove may have learned Plame's identity from the classified June 10 memo, which was sent to Colin Powell on July 7, the day Powell left with Bush for Africa on Air Force One, and which likely was seen by others on the plane. .... Fitzgerald has focused on whether Rove might have learned of Plame's identity from one of the many senior White House officials who read the memo, according to the Times account and attorneys whose clients have testified before the federal grand jury." Who saw the memo before Rove and gave him the info, or did Rove read it when he should not have had access? Just because you have a clearance doesn't mean you get to read everything at your clearance level; there must also be a need to know. So now we have the chance that clearances are misused in the White House, which leads the investigation in a new direction. And so on. That hanging thread of Karl Rove may be enough to unravel the whole sweater. Fitzgerald really does seem to know what he is doing and also seems perfectly willing to pull on the threads.

    Re: New Damaging Information About Karl Rove (none / 0) (#16)
    by Jlvngstn on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:28 PM EST
    I don't think Bush accelerated his decision to "bury the rove story", it was one week earlier than he had stated He met with the candidates and as consistent with his decision making style (rightly or wrongly, and i do think he is hasty) he selected Roberts. He obviously liked the guy a lot and moved forward. I have interviewed hundreds of folks for positions within my firm, and some you just know they are "right" and don't feel the need to continue looking. I don't know if Roberts is right but I also don't think the timing is anything more than Bush saying "I got my guy, don't need to look any further".....

    New Damaging Information About Karl Rove | 16 comments (16 topical)