Posted on 07/02/2005 7:59:14 AM PDT by summer
Rove just seems terribly unlikely. However, O'Donnell might have been trying to imply and infer, in hopes he'd be right, and slinging a little mud while he was at it. If he's wrong, he'll just insist that his remarks were "misunderstood."
Even then he had his sights set on Rove. He was cooking up conspiracy theories that Rove was behind the Swifties.
Just so you know who is saying this:
Lawrence O'Donnell is a senior policy analyst for MSNBC and an Emmy award-winning producer of NBC's "The West Wing." In the early 1990s, he was Democratic chief of staff of the U.S. Senate Committee on Finance and before that the chief of staff of the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works. From 1989 to 1992, he was a senior advisor to Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan.
IF he told the grand jury?
That's quite a leap, even for speculation. No one knows what Rove told the grand jury. To assume that A, he's the leaker, and B, that he committed perjury by denying such to the grand jury is wild speculation upon wild speculation.
I believe you, but why is the government spending our money on an investigation when a crime hasn't even been committed? I don't understand that.
O'Donnell just wanted to throw some red meat to the DUmmie types, who will take what he says as gospel.
The sooner this is out in the open, the better. Now, how is it Deep Throat couldn't be "forcibly" identified where this Plame situation is a run-away train?
Dems thought they were going to have a "gotcha" moment and prove the vindictiveness of the White House. They didn't care whether this was actually a crime. C-Span had a woman on a day or so ago who is a lawyer and a director of some journalists' organization. She said she warned them repeatedly not to pursue this in the fashion that they did and that it was very unlikely that any crime had been committed. But the desire to "get Bush" was so great that they were blinded and hence have been hoist on their own petard, which is really a lovely thing to see.
Maybe they did discover a crime, but not the one originally inferred. At least, that's been my working theory for awhile now.
dfwgator said it best in post 48. I would not be surprised if he posts at DU.
The sooner this is out in the open the sooner MSM can move on to chewing up speculative possible potential SCOTUS nominees. In between chatter about Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes and the Aruba "murder"...
Rove always seems to be at least six steps ahead of everyone else, and everything he does seems to get the results he wants.
How could this leak conceivably help him or this administration? Unless there's some complicated process by which it would, can't see Rove doing it.
It may help everyone keenly interested if we knew what crime had been committed. It's one thing to say "a crime has been committed" yet by the same token, no charge has been brought forth other than bringing out the long swords and screaming "a crime has been committed". If the Democrats are going forth, they may find themselves trying to defend charges of false allegations.
He's a male?
Need one say more...?
...do you think for 10 seconds that Time Inc would protect Karl Rove, The "Bush Brain"? Or that Rove would talk to Time to out a CIA official? even Novak said it wasn't anyone in the Bush Administration that leaked her name. O'Donnall is a lying sack of guano!
...unless of course one speaks eloquently and logically of a bottom-dwelling network's bottom-dwelling, stool-swallowing political hack...
That's what I've said all along. There was never any crime commited because Plame never was in the undercover business. She was a civilian analyst, never an agent or officer.
If memory serves correctly. The White House denied any involvement by Rove.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.