Rove admits smear campaign against Wilson

[GrGr]

Plugging Leaks

More details emerge on the Plame investigation, as Karl Rove's testimony is revealed for the first time.

By Murray S. Waas
Web Exclusive: 3.8.04
Print Friendly | Email Article

President Bush's chief political adviser, Karl Rove, told the FBI in an interview last October that he circulated and discussed damaging information regarding CIA operative Valerie Plame with others in the White House, outside political consultants, and journalists, according to a government official and an attorney familiar with the ongoing special counsel's investigation of the matter.

But Rove also adamantly insisted to the FBI that he was not the administration official who leaked the information that Plame was a covert CIA operative to conservative columnist Robert Novak last July. Rather, Rove insisted, he had only circulated information about Plame after it had appeared in Novak's column. He also told the FBI, the same sources said, that circulating the information was a legitimate means to counter what he claimed was politically motivated criticism of the Bush administration by Plame's husband, former Ambassador Joseph Wilson.

Rove and other White House officials described to the FBI what sources characterized as an aggressive campaign to discredit Wilson through the leaking and disseminating of derogatory information regarding him and his wife to the press, utilizing proxies such as conservative interest groups and the Republican National Committee to achieve those ends, and distributing talking points to allies of the administration on Capitol Hill and elsewhere. Rove is said to have named at least six other administration officials who were involved in the effort to discredit Wilson.

etc. link

 

[sMiLeYz]

Well finally he admits it! We long knew Rove has no ethnics, or scruples whatsoever.

 

[smashp]

hang him High.

 

[CaptnKirk]

Repeat after me, "Treason, in a time of war, is a felony - punishable by the death penalty."
I'll settle for the death of his political career, and get this band of cheats out of our Government.

 

[DanJ]

Rove admitting to a smear campaign?? I'm sure McCain is thrilled.....

Rove is the devil.

 

[digitalsm]

Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
Repeat after me, "Treason, in a time of war, is a felony - punishable by the death penalty."
I'll settle for the death of his political career, and get this band of cheats out of our Government.

Its not treason, if what he says is accurate, nor is it a crime. Even if wasn't accurate, he it still isnt treason, its a specific crime, that is on the books, that the penalty is 20 years. Even if they wanted to call it treason, they would have the most difficult task of having TWO witnesses testifying that he did it.

 

[sMiLeYz]

It basically amounts to treason, he exposed a NOC to the media, not a analyst mr. digitalsm. Her life was compromised, the front she was working for was compromised, and basically every contact she ever had has potentially has their lives in danger. This is no exageration.

You know it's against federal law to blow a cover of an agent? That's basically what it amounts to. To get him, they blew the cover of his wife.

 

[CaptnKirk]

they would have the most difficult task of having TWO witnesses testifying that he did it

??? Floating it around in a board meeting with a roomfull of witnesses ?
O.K., Hey guys - Who want's to keep their skin ?
There's at least 2 from that group that don't want to walk the same plank to a sword-fall with Rove

 

[chess9]

I haven't read the pertinent statute, but if what Rove did isn't a crime, it should be. How can the Bush administration claim to be fighting global terror on the one hand while it is delivering our CIA agents into the hands of our enemies?

Why aren't conservatives screaming bloody murder? They should be yelling the loudest, but they have been remarkably silent. Hypocrisy? NO!

This is IN THE NATURE OF TREASON, but probably not treason.

Yet another reason why Bush must be retired to his new ranch in suburban Baghdad.

-Robert

 

[arsbanned]

they would have the most difficult task of having TWO witnesses testifying that he did it.

That's really what you're saying: "Yeah, so, have fun trying to prove it!"

This Rove fellow has a lot of integrity.... The scary thing is, these neocons have no compunction at all about breaking the law, lying, cheating and stealing to further their agenda.

 

[heartsurgeon]

so let me get this straight..

you feel it is treason for rove to talk about an article he read in the newspaper..

i always knew liberals admired the soviet union and the way they ran things there!

 

[digitalsm]

Originally posted by: sMiLeYz
It basically amounts to treason, he exposed a NOC to the media, not a analyst mr. digitalsm. Her life was compromised, the front she was working for was compromised, and basically every contact she ever had has potentially has their lives in danger. This is no exageration.

You know it's against federal law to blow a cover of an agent? That's basically what it amounts to. To get him, they blew the cover of his wife.

Actually no outing a agent is not treason, its a specific federal law and it nets 20 years. However, if what he says is true, and that he didnt start smearing until she was already outed, its not treason or a crime. She was already outed. Rove is on record saying he only did it after the information came out, not before.

Can you people not fvcking read. I said if what he says is true, in that he didnt spread information except AFTER she was already outed, he did NOT break any law. And if hes lieing, well, hes broke multiple laws, none of which are treason.

 

[digitalsm]

Originally posted by: chess9
I haven't read the pertinent statute, but if what Rove did isn't a crime, it should be. How can the Bush administration claim to be fighting global terror on the one hand while it is delivering our CIA agents into the hands of our enemies?

Why aren't conservatives screaming bloody murder? They should be yelling the loudest, but they have been remarkably silent. Hypocrisy? NO!

This is IN THE NATURE OF TREASON, but probably not treason.

Yet another reason why Bush must be retired to his new ranch in suburban Baghdad.

-Robert

Its not a crime, if hes not the one that outed her. Unless he conspired with someone and got them to out her. He has only admitted circulating information about Plame AFTER she was already out. Tasteless yes, illegal NO. Plus I didnt mention it before, but the source of this article, and the lack of named sources, don't strike me as being the most umm how shall we put this, unbiased?

Oh and why the fvck is it than when right leaning journalists use unnamed sources they are discredited for it and lambasted for it as well, but people turn a blind eye when left leaning journalists do the same damn thing.

 

[chess9]

Digitalsm:

You are the one who can't read. Rove's intent was obvious. He wanted to harm Wilson through his wife. He admitted as much. If the news was OUT THERE then why did HE have to put it out there?

The reason is obvious. He was the one who made sure some dumber than a box of rocks underling did his dirty work for him.

I can almost believe you are defending the bastage. Try doing more than smelling the onion.

-Robert

 

[digitalsm]

Originally posted by: chess9
Digitalsm:

You are the one who can't read. Rove's intent was obvious. He wanted to harm Wilson through his wife. He admitted as much. If the news was OUT THERE then why did HE have to put it out there?

The reason is obvious. He was the one who made sure some dumber than a box of rocks underling did his dirty work for him.

I can almost believe you are defending the bastage. Try doing more than smelling the onion.

-Robert

Why? Because Novak isnt read by the majoriy of americans. Is he outing her by spreading what was already printed, but not read by most? No. Technically under the law he did nothing wrong. Tasteless and possible immoral? Yes. Unless they can prove

1. He leaked the info
2. He EXPRESSLY told someone to leak the info(ie: conspire to leak)

He didnt do anything wrong.

Im not defending him. Its just the law is the law. As far as I can see if what he says is true, he hasn't broken any law.

 

[chess9]

Novak is on a public talk show. It was on CNN almost immediately. You don't need to read that rag the Chicago Tribune to get your information.

I know how Washington works. I've been there and almost done similar in a past iteration. Rove was behind this leak because no one in the Bush administration would have done so without first discussing it with Rove. I have no doubt Rove AIDED AND ABETTED the cretin who released the information. That would make Rove an accessory and just as big a felon.

Again, try PEELING the onion.
-Robert

 

[tnitsuj]

You people need to stop throiwng around words such as Treason and Felony with no correlation to the actual events or any evidence of it. Just because you may want someone to be guilty of a crime doesn't mean that they are guilty of a crime even if you find them to be despicable human beings.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
so let me get this straight..

you feel it is treason for rove to talk about an article he read in the newspaper..

i always knew liberals admired the soviet union and the way they ran things there!

hehe - that's what I was thinking after reading this.

But as the leftists say - I'll believe it when it comes from a mainstream source.

bleat on...

CkG

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: tnitsuj
You people need to stop throiwng around words such as Treason and Felony with no correlation to the actual events or any evidence of it. Just because you may want someone to be guilty of a crime doesn't mean that they are guilty of a crime even if you find them to be despicable human beings.

:beer:

CkG

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
so let me get this straight..

you feel it is treason for rove to talk about an article he read in the newspaper..

i always knew liberals admired the soviet union and the way they ran things there!

hehe - that's what I was thinking after reading this.

But as the leftists say - I'll believe it when it comes from a mainstream source.

bleat on...

CkG

Did Rove commit treason? Time will tell. In the meantime, we can all enjoy the hypocrisy of the Bush apologists as they rationalize why this was not a crime. We all know full well that, had this been a Democratic administration, they would be screeching for heads on a platter for compromising our national security. Since it's Bush, however, they just chuckle about how boys will be boys and return to important issues like a stain on Kerry's tie.

 

[heartsurgeon]

"Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort."

meanwhile..i suggest you Rove Bashers learn the following definition:

slander
n. oral defamation, in which someone tells one or more persons an untruth about another, which untruth will harm the reputation of the person defamed. Slander is a civil wrong (tort) and can be the basis for a lawsuit. Damages (payoff for worth) for slander may be limited to actual (special) damages unless there is malicious intent, since such damages are usually difficult to specify and harder to prove. Some statements, such as an untrue accusation of having committed a crime, having a loathsome disease or being unable to perform one's occupation, are treated as slander per se since the harm and malice are obvious and therefore usually result in general and even punitive damage recovery by the person harmed. Words spoken over the air on television or radio are treated as libel (written defamation) and not slander on the theory that broadcasting reaches a large audience as much as if not more than printed publications.

 

[tnitsuj]

Originally posted by: heartsurgeon

"Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort."

meanwhile..i suggest you Rove Bashers learn the following definition:

slander
n. oral defamation, in which someone tells one or more persons an untruth about another, which untruth will harm the reputation of the person defamed. Slander is a civil wrong (tort) and can be the basis for a lawsuit. Damages (payoff for worth) for slander may be limited to actual (special) damages unless there is malicious intent, since such damages are usually difficult to specify and harder to prove. Some statements, such as an untrue accusation of having committed a crime, having a loathsome disease or being unable to perform one's occupation, are treated as slander per se since the harm and malice are obvious and therefore usually result in general and even punitive damage recovery by the person harmed. Words spoken over the air on television or radio are treated as libel (written defamation) and not slander on the theory that broadcasting reaches a large audience as much as if not more than printed publications.

Heartsurgeon, you have no business speaking of others using the term treason in complete contrast to the legal standards involved. I remember you repeatedly referring to oponents of the war as guilty of treason. Just as despicable as those who are painting Mr. Rove as somehow treasonous.

 

[DealMonkey]

The American Prospect? Is this story showing up anywhere else? Links?

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: heartsurgeon

"Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort."

meanwhile..i suggest you Rove Bashers learn the following definition:

slander
n. oral defamation, in which someone tells one or more persons an untruth about another, which untruth will harm the reputation of the person defamed. Slander is a civil wrong (tort) and can be the basis for a lawsuit. Damages (payoff for worth) for slander may be limited to actual (special) damages unless there is malicious intent, since such damages are usually difficult to specify and harder to prove. Some statements, such as an untrue accusation of having committed a crime, having a loathsome disease or being unable to perform one's occupation, are treated as slander per se since the harm and malice are obvious and therefore usually result in general and even punitive damage recovery by the person harmed. Words spoken over the air on television or radio are treated as libel (written defamation) and not slander on the theory that broadcasting reaches a large audience as much as if not more than printed publications.

Yes, dear, and compromising our national security is usually considered to be giving aid and comfort to our enemies. (At least it is if it's a Democrat who compromised national securuty. Republicans conveniently place themselves above the law, presumably because they know what's best for the great unwashed masses.)

By the way, expressing one's opinions about political figures is generally protected by that pesky First Amendment. It is nowhere close to slander. I'm sure you and King George would love to repeal it, but it hasn't happened yet. Just FYI.

 

[DealMonkey]

Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
meanwhile..i suggest you Rove Bashers learn the following definition:

slander
...

Ms. Coulter?