Posted on 07/02/2005 10:40:22 AM PDT by hipaatwo
I revealed in yesterday's taping of the McLaughlin Group that Time magazine's emails will reveal that Karl Rove was Matt Cooper's source. I have known this for months but didn't want to say it at a time that would risk me getting dragged into the grand jury.
McLaughlin is seen in some markets on Friday night, so some websites have picked it up, including Drudge, but I don't expect it to have much impact because McLaughlin is not considered a news show and it will be pre-empted in the big markets on Sunday because of tennis.
Since I revealed the big scoop, I have had it reconfirmed by yet another highly authoritative source. Too many people know this. It should break wide open this week. I know Newsweek is working on an 'It's Rove!' story and will probably break it tomorrow.
O'Donnell is crazy. He has really overdosed on frootloops.
Am i the only one who hopes it was Rove?
Watch Karl kill em again
Here are some examples:
excerpt:
Sydney Blumenthal
Journalist-turned-White House-communications specialist, Blumenthal was hauled before Starr's grand jury when the independent counsel suspected Blumenthal's damage control might be tantamount to obstruction of justice.
~snip~
Inside Starr And His Operation
excerpt:
Starr's use of his subpoena powers also strikes some critics as overkill. The parade of witnesses that Starr hauled before a grand jury last week included sympathetic figures like Betty Currie, Clinton's personal secretary.
~snip~
There are more examples available. It was not the misuse of an arcane word, but a deliberate message that the grand jury was abusing its power.
Am i the only one who hopes it was Rove?
I can't speak for anyone else on this board but me, and no I don't hope it is him. I hope it isn't him to smash the DUmmies dreams. This is timed perfectly with the President at the G8 summit and out of the Country next week. Something smells bad to me.
It isn't true. It is simply Larry O'Donnell's latest demented fantasy.
Unfortunately, the dictionaries have become so spineless that they now recognize "haul" as acceptable--a word that changes the meaning utterly and politically. So the writers and publishers can claim they are using the word "correctly." One of my biggest complaints about Merriam-Webster and the other dictionaries.
The lunatic has really put himself out on the line if he is lying on this. I would tend to believe that, although he is insane, he is not this insane.
No I actually hope it's not Rove. If it was then he did break the law and no one is above the law. I think it's just a smear. We will see next week I guess.
Hey, if it's not Rove, Rove has a great slander case.
Oh, trust me, I know all the players and the implications and such. Your comment just kind of came out of nowhere and by saying she was undercover (she wasn't, by most indications) and "sleeping with" conveying an affair rather than marriage confused me as to what you were trying to say.
You're right, it wasn't him, but since she more than likely wasn't undercover, can you explain why whoever revealed her role in recommending her husband broke any law?
Yeah, Rove did it....yeah, sure thing....that's the ticket....
He doesn't have access. They're just shooting in the dark hoping to hit someone-so to speak. Karl Rove is their "Republican of the Day" target.
President Bush about Plame leak, Oct 6, 2003
www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/10/20031006-4.html
Q Mr. President, on another issue, the CIA leak-gate. What is your confidence level in the results of the DOJ investigation about any of your staffers not being found guilty or being found guilty? And what do you say to critics of the administration who say that this administration retaliates against naysayers?
PRESIDENT BUSH: First of all, I'm glad you brought that question up. This is a very serious matter, and our administration takes it seriously. As members of the press corps here know, I have, at times, complained about leaks of security information, whether the leaks be in the legislative branch or in the executive branch. And I take those leaks very seriously.
And, therefore, we will cooperate fully with the Justice Department. I've got all the confidence in the world the Justice Department will do a good, thorough job. And that's exactly what I want them to do, is a good, thorough job. I'd like to know who leaked, and if anybody has got any information inside our government or outside our government who leaked, you ought to take it to the Justice Department so we can find out the leaker.
I have told my staff, I want full cooperation with the Justice Department. And when they ask for information, we expect the information to be delivered on a timely basis. I expect it to be delivered on a timely basis. I want there to be full participation, because, April, I am most interested in finding out the truth.
And, you know, there's a lot of leaking in Washington, D.C. It's a town famous for it. And if this helps stop leaks of -- this investigation in finding the truth, it will not only hold someone to account who should not have leaked -- and this is a serious charge, by the way. We're talking about a criminal action, but also hopefully will help set a clear signal we expect other leaks to stop, as well. And so I look forward to finding the truth.
I don't think that's a point. If the perception is that what he did was illegal or even falls into a grey area (not to say it is even Rove) then he becomes a liability.
The fact is he will be tried and convicted in the MSM who will howl if some charges (however small) are not brought. Guilt or innocence have nothing to do with it.
Why Rove? Do the Dems fear that the president's highly successful Political Adviser will tender his resignation in late '06 and go to work for the next promising Republican presidential candidate? I think so. I smell fear.
That's kinda funny. Sounds like bathroom humor.
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.