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

POSTED BY: Knibblet
UPDATED: Thursday, July 18, 2024 00:11
VIEWED: 14186
PAGE 7 of 12

PREV PAGE 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 NEXT PAGE

SIGNYM

Saturday, July 16, 2005 7:37 PM

Quote:
If Karl Rove did this terrible thing why hasn't anything happened to him yet?

Maybe it has to do with the fact that the Justice Department (with Bush's direct political appointee as head) sat on the investigation for over a year before it was given UNDER POLITICAL PRESSURE to a Special Presecutor based outside of Washington? (Chicago) Maybe it's because Rove is so politically connected that any Bush apointee, or anyone who reports to a Bush appointee, is looking at career suicide for pursuing it?

SERGEANTX

Saturday, July 16, 2005 7:41 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by lynchaj:
...I have ask why people are pursuing this with such acrimony.

Andrew Lynch

Well, that's an easy one. Karl Rove, rightly or wrongly, has garnered quite a reputation for dirty pool. It might be fun to have a successful cheater on your side, not so much for the other guys. He's done his share of gloating and media manipulation. There's definitely some payback going on here, regardless of the facts of the case.

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

Saturday, July 16, 2005 9:48 PM

The Special Prosecutor was waiting for the whole issue of confidential sources to be adjudicated, which it fianlly was. The source (Rove) was revealed just within the past week. It's all been in the news.

As far as the Justic Department being openly corrupt- I'm saying the entire Bush administration is corrupt, not just the upper echelons of the Justice Department. And as far as civil servants doing their job regardless of political or personal cost- look at what happens to the ones who do, starting with Joe Wilson. I could compile a whole list of dedicated civil servants who have been fired, maligned, or sidetracked for openly disagreeing with the Bush administration. Where shall I start?

SIGNYM

Sunday, July 17, 2005 12:13 AM

Fitzgerald is the Special Prosecutor who required ppl to testify before the Grand Jury. Time turned Matt Cooper's emails over to the Grand Jury which described the conversation with Rove. The critical email says, in part: "Spoke to Rove on double super secret background for about two mins before he went on vacation....it was, KR said, wilson's wife, who apparently works at the agency on wmd issues who authorized the trip". Cooper also testified before the grand jury last week. I suppose that we will find out what he said later, when he writes his story for Time.

The Special Prosecutor is also looking at where the WH got the information in the first place on Plame's potential connection to Joe Wilson's trip. The State Department had a memo linking Wilson and Plame, and Colin Powell (the link between the WH and the State Department) was seen walking aorund with it.

SERGEANTX

Sunday, July 17, 2005 12:56 AM

It struck me today, the odd parallels between the Karl Rove case and Michael Jackson's latest acquittal - useful ones at that.

I mean, Michael Jackson beat the rap, and for all I know he's perfectly innocent, but can't we all agree that parents would be negligent in the extreme if they sent their kid off to one of MJ's sleepovers? I'm sort of seeing the Karl Rove thing the same way. He'll probably get off, he always does, but do we really want someone like that in a position of such power and influence?

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

RUE

Sunday, July 17, 2005 2:36 AM

Quote:
... KR said, wilson's wife, who apparently works at the agency on wmd issues who authorized the trip.

Was KR spreading slime again? Wilson's wife had nothing to do with Joe Wilson being sent to Niger. And that is old, old information (located somewhere within the Senate Report).

Nearly everything I know I learned by the grace of others.

SIGNYM

Sunday, July 17, 2005 2:09 PM

Karl Rove has a special talent for skating away from his misdeeds, of which there are plenty. However, the person that I find leaves the fewest fingerprints is Cheney. Try researching him on the inet. His only affiliation is with Halliburton. But according to O'Neill (ex- Treasury Sc'y) Bush never made a decision without first speaking in private with Cheney. After the two of them had gone off into another room for a few minutes, Bush would then emerge and announce "his" decision.

Cheney was there to hold Bush's hand before the 9-11 Commission. According to the CIA people, Cheney and his aide Libby checked into the CIA Langley offices "multiple" times- an unheard of level of personal interest- when the WMD information was being compiled (eg cherry-picked). www.detnews.com/2003/nation/0306/05/nation-184523.htm

Rumor says that Cheney selected Rumsfeld, who then appointed Wolfowitz and Feith. Cheney also chaired the infamously secret Energy Commission. He is truly is the other half of Bush's brain.

"Never use a letter when a conversation will do, never use a conversation when a wink and a nod will do."

SIGNYM

Sunday, July 17, 2005 2:16 PM

Quote:
I don't think anyone should be referring to Karl Rove as someone who has committed a criminal act because he is innocent until proven guilty. Calling Karl Rove nasty names based on unproven beliefs is an unjustified smear. I haven't seen any facts indicating his guilt but a lot of unfounded assertions

It is a proven fact that Rove mishandled classified information. That may not rise to the level of a crime, but look at the purpose of that action- by his own admission to malign Joe Wilson, one of the few dedicated govt employees who did exactly what you said they should do- come forward publically to tell the truth. Karl did the same thing that you accuse his detractors of- he maligned someone and made "fair game" of that person's wife, ruined her career, and potentially undercut our "war on terror" by removing/ endangering operatives and sources from our roster.

And you think we should wait until he's been proven to have committed a crime before we call him "nasty names"? I guess what you're saying is... you approve of such actions, even if they don't meet the "criminality" threshold?

SIGNYM

Sunday, July 17, 2005 2:46 PM

AJ- I don't assume guilt. But I recognize it when I find it. I know we've been through this discussion before, but I can list you a number of documented cases... not counting MWD... where the Bush administration lied and then beat down the civil servants who dared to tell the truth. Do you agree with that behavior?

SIGNYM

Sunday, July 17, 2005 3:09 PM

AJ- you seem to be fundamentally confused. Mishandling classified information is not necessarily a crime. It's a proven fact that Karl mishandled classified information, and yet it's entirely possible that no charges will ever be filed if he can show that he didn't know it was classified, for example.

Do you think it's acceptable for an Administration to lie to Congress and to the American people? (This is outside of the WMD question, which I know we will never agree on.) What is your opinion? It's a simple question- "yes" or "no" will do. Thanks.

PREV PAGE 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 NEXT PAGE