Karl Rove Betrayed CIA Agent's Cover - Anyone Surprised?

POSTED BY: Knibblet
UPDATED: Thursday, July 18, 2024 00:11
VIEWED: 14186
PAGE 1 of 12

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT PAGE

KNIBBLET

Tuesday, July 12, 2005 2:54 PM

Karl Rove - the human equivalent of a seeping sack of infected pus - gets pissed that a US Ambassador follows his concience and declares that the rush to war in Iraq is NOT justified.

To shut up the person who won't polish his jackboots and step along with El Presidente, Rove betrays the man's wife's identity as a CIA agent.

Treason isn't a pretty word. Treason isn't hyperbole when you're talking about a rat bastard betraying the identity of Valerie Plame and endangering the lives of the agents associated with and the work being done by her.

I'm sure no one is surprised as this is exactly the sort of thing good ole pusbag Karl has done throughout his career; however, does anyone really think that Dubya is going to do anything about it?

Nah ... it's not like El Presidente hasn't known it was his badly disciplined guard hound all along. If he didn't, it's just another example of his pickled brain not seeing something under his nose.

I know there are going to be a ton of responses about how I'm bitter that the democrats lost the election ... yadda yadda yadda ...

Make your little posts, but demand that Dubya does what he swore to do. Demand that Karl Rove be fired.

http://tv.groups.yahoo.com/group/MN-Firefly/

ODDNESS2HER

Tuesday, July 12, 2005 4:27 PM

Right on, Knibblet!

SERGEANTX

Tuesday, July 12, 2005 6:05 PM

There's hardly anything solid yet. With anyone else, yeah, he'd be in jail by now. But this is "Turd Blossom" himself. I'll be surprised if he even gets a slap on the wrist.

SergeantX

"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock

SIGNYM

Tuesday, July 12, 2005 6:58 PM

Rove may not have been the only one involved. There's always Eliot Abrams and Dick Cheney to consider.

The rightwing spin is that Karl Rove thought that Plame was "just" a secretary. The right is in such a tizzy, they can't even keep their stories straight, forgetting that they also accused Plame of authorizing a trip to Niger for her husband. All I can say is- DANG, those CIA "secretaries" sure have a lot of pull!

Bush said that he would "fire" anyone who leaked her name. FIRE??? Plame's expertise was in WMD and a whole cover operation was blown. She was so deep she had no official cover, which means if she were caught the CIA would disavow any knowledge of her. I heard, and am trying to run down the source, that her "outing" caused at least one CIA officer to be killed. You don't "fire" someone for that. If they are extremely lucky, they should rot in jail for a lifetime.

CONNORFLYNN

Tuesday, July 12, 2005 7:09 PM

Puuuuuuuuuhhhhleeeease LOL.

She was a desk Jockey who went to all the big politicos parties and was a Democratic campaign contributor, not to mention a calling her an undercover "agent" (I use the term loosely) when she was FAR from under cover is a joke. It was WELL known that she worked in the CIA.

Not to defend Mini-Cheney, but comeon now..LOL. Old Rovester didn't break any laws. This is a bandwagon mentality at it's worst. This is like calling for Clinton to be impeached cause he said he didn't have sex with an intern. WHO GIVES A FLYING CRAP?

I say Let's go after Cheney and friends about the lack of accountability on Iraq. Let's go after them about the lies surrounding the whole "Yellowcake" debaucle. Let's go after all the Washington shitheels who take money from lobbyists. Thats way more important then some rich bitch who's sugah daddy got into a tussel with Bush Jr. because he too was called out on his word "manipulation".

In my opinion they are all scumbags. Every last one of em.

SIGNYM

Tuesday, July 12, 2005 7:41 PM

You know, this wouldn't be the first time that an undercover officer had posed as a "desk jockey" who flits around internationally with no apparent impact.

Quote:
Novak's initial column identified Plame as "an Agency operative on weapons of mass destruction." He has since stated that he believed Plame was merely an analyst at the CIA, not a covert operative—the difference being that analysts are not undercover, so identifying them is not a crime. Critics contend that after decades as a Washington reporter Novak was well aware of the difference and would be unlikely to make such a mistake. Novak has also claimed that Plame's CIA employment was an open secret in Washington, indicating that effective "affirmative measures" to conceal her relationship to the CIA were not being taken. Several ex-CIA operatives who knew Plame have disputed this and indicated that she was at one time a NOC (nonofficial cover) covert operative.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plame

Besides, it doesn't have to be an "either/or" proposition. I can get worked up over all kinds of issues!

CONNORFLYNN

Tuesday, July 12, 2005 7:57 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
You know, this wouldn't be the first time that an undercover officer had posed as a "desk jockey" who flits around internationally with no apparent impact.
Quote:
Novak's initial column identified Plame as "an Agency operative on weapons of mass destruction." He has since stated that he believed Plame was merely an analyst at the CIA, not a covert operative—the difference being that analysts are not undercover, so identifying them is not a crime. Critics contend that after decades as a Washington reporter Novak was well aware of the difference and would be unlikely to make such a mistake. Novak has also claimed that Plame's CIA employment was an open secret in Washington, indicating that effective "affirmative measures" to conceal her relationship to the CIA were not being taken. Several ex-CIA operatives who knew Plame have disputed this and indicated that she was at one time a NOC (nonofficial cover) covert operative.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plame

Besides, it doesn't have to be an "either/or" proposition. I can get worked up over all kinds of issues!

I don't buy it. It seems just a little toooooo "Bourne Identity" like for me.

I like Wiki, particularly since they seem to be drifting away from being totally biased and more fact oriented. Which is something I find important these days. However, I read this as well from the same link, which leads me to believe that this is a mole hill being called a mountain.

Quote:
In his October 1, 2003 article "The CIA Leak" Novak states this explanation for the two "senior administration officials" and the "CIA official" referenced in his June 14 article:

"During a long conversation with a senior administration official, I asked why Wilson was assigned the mission to Niger. He said Wilson had been sent by the CIA's counterproliferation section at the suggestion of one of its employees, his wife. It was an offhand revelation from this official, who is no partisan gunslinger. When I called another official for confirmation, he said: "Oh, you know about it." The published report that somebody in the White House failed to plant this story with six reporters and finally found me as a willing pawn is simply untrue.
At the CIA, the official designated to talk to me denied that Wilson's wife had inspired his selection but said she was delegated to request his help. He asked me not to use her name, saying she probably never again will be given a foreign assignment but that exposure of her name might cause "difficulties" if she travels abroad. He never suggested to me that Wilson's wife or anybody else would be endangered. If he had, I would not have used her name. I used it in the sixth paragraph of my column because it looked like the missing explanation of an otherwise incredible choice by the CIA for its mission."

As for the getting worked up about other issues..
can I hear am "AMEN!!" LOL

My problem with this is that everytime we seem close to getting to the real thrust of something, this kind of crap jumps up and leads us away from finding any truth. I'd still like to know how this administration keeps getting let off the hook in regards to accountability on ANYTHING!!! LOL.

My head hurts now...tooo much... thinking..

PS.. (Off the topic a little teensie weensie bit) I spent a weekend in Woodstock this last weekend. What a crazy cool town LOL. There are some things hippies do right. Living and enjoying life is one of them LOL. I've begun to really enjoy my weekend ventures looking for some serenity. Though I'm not ready to throw on some Birkenstocks just yet lol

There was an interesting political conversation I walked into regarding the G8 Summit. It was another shining example of how easily we are swayed from real issues like Africa to whether or not a Politicos wife's career was slowed.

AURAPTOR

Tuesday, July 12, 2005 10:48 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Knibblet:
Karl Rove - the human equivalent of a seeping sack of infected pus - gets pissed that a US Ambassador follows his concience and declares that the rush to war in Iraq is NOT justified.

To shut up the person who won't polish his jackboots and step along with El Presidente, Rove betrays the man's wife's identity as a CIA agent.

Treason isn't a pretty word. Treason isn't hyperbole when you're talking about a rat bastard betraying the identity of Valerie Plame and endangering the lives of the agents associated with and the work being done by her.

I'm sure no one is surprised as this is exactly the sort of thing good ole pusbag Karl has done throughout his career; however, does anyone really think that Dubya is going to do anything about it?

Nah ... it's not like El Presidente hasn't known it was his badly disciplined guard hound all along. If he didn't, it's just another example of his pickled brain not seeing something under his nose.

I know there are going to be a ton of responses about how I'm bitter that the democrats lost the election ... yadda yadda yadda ...

Make your little posts, but demand that Dubya does what he swore to do. Demand that Karl Rove be fired.

http://tv.groups.yahoo.com/group/MN-Firefly/

Only that isn't what happened.

Treason? Please. No CIA agent's 'identity' was betrayed. Not by Rove, at least. She was working a desk job and not on any protection list by the CIA. It's funny to see the Left get all worked up over imaginary non issues.

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

KNIBBLET

Wednesday, July 13, 2005 12:03 AM

Fine, let's be calm then.

Dubya said he'd fire anyone on his staff that leaked classified information. Even if Karl Rove were so incredibly stupid that he didn't realize the information was classifed, he still did it and ignorance isn't an excuse.
Just like all of Dubya's bullshit stories, he'll never fire Rove or anyone else in his administration who dropped the ball, ignored the truth, manipulated intelligence, outright lied or leaked classifed information.
Hell ... I guess if he did clean house, he'd have to scrub the toilets out himself.

By the way, I'm still wondering why those Bush twins - who seem to be healthy young Americans - aren't carrying an M16 in Iraq. After all, Bush is happy enough to send everyone else's kids off to die.

Yes, despite my desire to be calm, I read more death notices from Iraq.

http://tv.groups.yahoo.com/group/MN-Firefly/

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Wednesday, July 13, 2005 12:44 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Knibblet:
Dubya said he'd fire anyone on his staff that leaked classified information. Even if Karl Rove were so incredibly stupid that he didn't realize the information was classifed, he still did it and ignorance isn't an excuse.
Just like all of Dubya's bullshit stories, he'll never fire Rove or anyone else in his administration who dropped the ball, ignored the truth, manipulated intelligence, outright lied or leaked classifed information.
Hell ... I guess if he did clean house, he'd have to scrub the toilets out himself.

For crying out loud.

Why should he fire Rove? How do you know he “did it?” Rove hasn’t been convicted of any crime, and I’ve not seen any hard evidence of anything, just the keyed up accusations of Liberals and other anti-Rovites. Just because you don’t agree with the guy doesn’t mean we should fire him at the first sign of the appearance of impropriety.

If he is convicted of knowingly leaking the name of an agent I’ll call for his imprisonment, but until there is a guilty verdict from a trial or at least hard evidence, there is hardly any reason to go off the deep end.

If the government fired everyone who leaked classified information, we wouldn’t have a Congress.

Quote:
Originally posted by Knibblet:
By the way, I'm still wondering why those Bush twins - who seem to be healthy young Americans - aren't carrying an M16 in Iraq. After all, Bush is happy enough to send everyone else's kids off to die.

He’s not sending anyone who didn’t sign up to go. We have an all volunteer military. If the Bush twins want to try their hand at recruitment and possibly go to Iraq, that is their prerogative.

-------------
Qui desiderat pacem praeparet bellum.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT PAGE