Posted on 07/14/2005 1:50:45 PM PDT by Pukin Dog
Don’t ask me, because you know I won’t tell you how I came across this information.
Here is the scoop.
This is all about the Supreme Court.
With the knowledge that Rove was Matthew Cooper’s background source regarding the Plame incident, no matter the fact that no laws were broken, the Democrats leaped upon the matter as a way for Democrats and the MSM to possibly prevent Bush from changing the makeup of the Supreme Court. Under normal circumstances, Democrats cannot stop Bush from reshaping the Supreme Court, and that has Democrats terrified. They cannot sustain a Filibuster without Frist invoking the Nuclear Option on them, so they only have one last option, which is now underway.
The Democrats must demonize Bush to the degree that they can then begin their long-awaited impeachment articles, with the MSM in tow. If Congress can introduce articles of impeachment against Bush, then the MSM will demand that Bush postpone any nominations to the Supreme Court until the matter is decided. It is the only hope they have left of preventing a Conservative Supreme Court from taking hold, and if they do not accomplish this, the flow of money into Democratic coffers will stop instantaneously.
Next week, you will begin to hear Democrats suggesting that if Bush does not fire Karl Rove, then he is guilty of “Obstruction of Justice” and “Lying to the American People” in order to protect a friend. The Media will play along dutifully, because it was there idea in the first place.
Forget about Judith Miller.
Because the Special Prosecutor has asked the White House not to discuss the matter, no one will be able to inform Miller or the NY Times on how Miller should lie to save herself. Without that knowledge, the Times will not let her testify at all. They are paying her to be silent, and it is they who are actually guilty of ‘Obstruction of Justice’ Miller knows who the leaker is, and you all know who I believe that person to be.
What you all are about to see, is the most coordinated, vicious attack ever in the history of Politics against this administration, because those involved have everything at stake. Without control of the Supreme Court, the Liberal agenda is dead for the next 30-40 years. All of their Environmental nonsense, Abortion, Private Property, Affirmative Action and Civil Rights issues go right down the tubes.
The Bush Administration is aware of what is to come, and might be able to prevent it with a little ‘inside baseball’ but the looniest on the left will attempt this no matter what the outcome.
Expect editorials next week, arguing whether or not it is fair for a president who “stole the first election” and won the second election by the “smallest margin of any incumbent President” who is “embroiled in a National Security Scandal” to be deciding on the makeup of the Supreme Court. At the same time, Liberal Senators will begin to suggest that Conformation hearings on anyone Bush selects should be postponed until the investigations are over. Unfortunately for our side, they have an alley in one Arlen Specter. They will be leaning heavily on him to go along with delayed hearings. Specter is already angry with Bush over the Stem-cell research issue.
Will it work? No. Why? Because Bush understands the law, and also understands (with Rove’s help) that no matter how loud and long the Democrats scream, they and the MSM really cant do anything about the Supreme Court, but can effect public opinion. Bush, by telling Republicans to shut up about his choice, has set precedent for when he tells (by his Supreme Court selections) the Democrats the same thing. If he ignores both sides, he can just choose who he wants, and that is exactly what he will do.
So get ready for an ugly, ugly Summer and Fall. Don’t expect to hear much from Bush on Rove, or the Courts after he makes his selections. Republicans in Congress will also be silent (except Specter and Hagel) and will not risk their own re-elections and legacies to side with Democrats this time round.
So there it is, take it or leave it. I wont answer any questions about how or where I got the information, so don’t ask me.
-PD
Screwed up how?
First we heard how there was no way it was Rove who did the leaking. Too much integrity to do such a thing. Then it begins to look like he did it.
How could Rove have "leaked it" about Plame, if the media already knew about her? Rove found out about her from a journalist, so he could not have "leaked" anything from the administration.
Besides, Bush didn't promise to fire a leaker, he promosed to fire anyone breaking the law and Rove didn't break any law. That's the second sentence in the Bush statement that the MSM is ignoring right now. All Bush has to do, when the time is right, is say "I said I would fire whomever broke the law", and the quote is there, he did in fact say that when this first hit the fan in 2003.
The MSM is spinning this from whole cloth, but it will fall apart in the end and embarrass them even more than they are already.
'Well, it sounds pretty stupid to me.'
If you're not deaf, you'd be the expert there.
Rove laughed at them.
Silly Liberal Media, get a clue!
The point is the Dems liken Rove to some Jedi and if he pulls an Obi Wan they will be worse off.
I always thought that was a potato pancake.
I believe that's a kartoffle. (g)
Nothing but smoke to the Rove thing. Bush and Rove are privately laughing their asses off.
A couple of things about *nuclear options*. First off, only the commander-in-chief can authorize their use, not senators or committee chairmen. For there to be a realuse of a *nuclear option,* it'll have to come fromthe President, who, BTW, was long agoin the business of shooting down those who might attempt to bring a nuclear weapon our way-for real. Happily, he never had to do so.
But the only time real nukes have been employed, they were decisive after being used in multiples; it took the use of the first on Hiroshima on 06 August 1945 [What was that?!?!]AND the second on Nagasaki at 11:02 am on August 9th. [What?! AGAIN!?] THAT did it. Note that if necessary, a third atomic bomb was being prepared for delivery, which probably wouldn't have been available for use until August 20th or later, but which almost certainly would indeed have been used, had the Japanese not surrendered. The lesson here is that Bush needs not one *nuclear option*, but several.
And if he does have to use one or more, it needs to be on the scale of those war-ending devices that brought the Japs to their knees, not just a mere change in the niceties of congressional rules or procedures. It needs to be something that's the equivalent of thousands of enemy casualties, a ruined city, and with the certainty that there's more and worse to follow.
And if used, there can be no doubt that those it's used against are our enemy.
Oh, that's ripe.. Got to get home and see if Brit has the tape on that.
Rove's the man.....
I disagree.....
They've been whispering it for months on end....If what they've been doing isn't a campaign...I'm a blind chipmunk.
The question in my mini-mind is, can they get their no-good rotting fish of a campaign some legs...I dunno, but I know they won't quit trying.
FRegards,
I seem to recall that Bush's exact phrase was that he'd take care of any leaker he found within his administration.
"If there's a leak out of the administration, I want to know who it is. And if a person has violated law, the person will be taken care of...And so I welcome the investigation...I have told our administration people in my administration to be fully cooperative. I want to know the truth."
[FDCH Political Transcripts, 10/30/03]
But Bush gets to define what he considers to be a leaker. And Bush gets to define just how he might take care of him.... A golf outing? Maybe a pay raise?
I disagree.....
Correct. But this will not be the issue they go after, in my opinion. They've spent almost a year and a half setting up something else.
Remember, when the magician wants you to not notice what he's doing somewhere, he misdirects your attention elsewhere. This is the misdirection, the distraction.
Were you one of my kids?
Thanks for the link, it looks like more papers than I thought, filed briefs asking for an end to the investigation.
We'll have to see if those are your handprints on my butt.
Hey, Eva, you're going to love this:
The Novak Exception II (Schumer VOTED AGAINST 1982 Law Prohibiting Identifying CIA Agents)
OpinionJournal.com ^ | March 13, 2004 | Wall St Jnl (Editors)
Posted on 07/14/2005 2:51:46 PM EDT by ml/nj
Then Congressman Chuck ("The Schmuck") Schumer was one of only 56 who voted AGAINST the law prohibiting revealing the names of CIA agents. From the WSJ: (March 2004)
All of which puts an interesting tint on the selective outrage we've been hearing. New York Senator Chuck Schumer was one of the first to claim shock over the Novak column, indignantly thundering how the leak "was tantamount to putting a gun to that agent's head." That's interesting, because as Congressman Schumer he was one of only 56 to vote against the law whose sacral character he now invokes.
ML/NJ
Can't say I disagree.....
I dunno what they will settle on...but I won't put anything past them. They don't give up. Never.
Overturning Roe Vs Wade would simply let the states make the decision.
But the profits from such state-sanctioned abortions could be federally taxed. And eliminating the tax-supported subsidies for the abortion profiteers would reduce the problem considerably.
For those of us who don't hang upon your every word, how about a name?
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.