The MSM and the liberals have been trying to find build this non-story into a Iran-Contra II (or at least something) for almost 2 years now. What a flop.
Check out the Time magazine cover from 2003.
Posted on 07/06/2005 12:19:29 PM PDT by Pyro7480
All they need do is go over to the NYT website, run an Advanced Search (byline) for Judith Miller, and check out the headlines of her articles. Her latest beat, BTW, is the UN Oil for Food scandal.
Yes I know, she took a lot of heat from the lefties over her WMD articles.
Rove's name has been circulating as the source for days. Why wouldn't he just release a statement saying he is not involved in revealing the information. They have already pointed fingers at him, why would he wait to make a statement in his own defense?
Shep Smith is grieving all over Fox, the little sniveling snit.
Shep is really an a$$hole with his elitists attitude.
One dog protects the other no matter what.
Personally, it's a lot to do about nothing.
Elitist reporters are finding out they are not above the law.
This source protection thing, is not in any constitution I have read.
Why should he worry about this - The source will come out and it won't be Rove. If it was Rove believe me the MSM would have been all over it a long time ago and it would have been leaked.
Q: What do you call a New York Times reporter in jail?
A: A good start.
Any truth to the rumor, which I started:
Larry King volunteers to be Deep Leaker.
So she is like 3 years late on that story. Give her a prize.
The MSM and the liberals have been trying to find build this non-story into a Iran-Contra II (or at least something) for almost 2 years now. What a flop.
Check out the Time magazine cover from 2003.
Shep gives me the creeps! There is something really creepy about him!
Maybe.
Hard to know how the MSM will play this though. Their desire for "freedom of the press" runs up against their Bush hatred and their belief (unsupported by ANY facts that I can see) that Rove was the leaker.
:)
It would be really interesting if the reason she won't testify is that in the great tradition of the New York Times she had no source, she just made it up, and doesn't want to admit it.
He doesn't have to.
This is the USA, the accuser is supposed to PROVE the allegation, not the other way around.
I'm smelling ozone, BTW...
Right.
Rove signed a release of confidentiality a long time ago. In other words, he released all of them from any form of cover. He's not the one.
It didn't say he should be worried about it, only that a statement of denial should have followed after repeately being suspected of being the source. Seems to me, if I have been repeately accused of something I did not do, I would simply deny it. Standing quiet is fine, but only for so long.
No, that's not for sure.
She's from the very liberal press.
She works for the New York Times - like William Safire.
This investigation is strictly a witchhunt against Karl Rove. Noone is above the law, but you may be cheering for the wrong side.
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.