Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

MSNBC Analyst Says Cooper Documents Reveal Karl Rove as Source in Plame Case
Editori and Publisher ^ | July 1, 2005 | E&P Staff

Posted on 07/02/2005 7:59:14 AM PDT by summer

NEW YORK -- Now that Time Inc. has turned over documents to federal court, presumably revealing who its reporter, Matt Cooper, identified as his source in the Valerie Plame/CIA case, speculation runs rampant on the name of that source, and what might happen to him or her. Tonight, on the syndicated McLaughlin Group political talk show, Lawrence O'Donnell, senior MSNBC political analyst, claimed to know that name--and it is, according to him, top White House mastermind Karl Rove.

Here is the transcript of O'Donnell's remarks:

"What we're going to go to now in the next stage, when Matt Cooper's e-mails, within Time Magazine, are handed over to the grand jury, the ultimate revelation, probably within the week of who his source is.

"And I know I'm going to get pulled into the grand jury for saying this but the source of...for Matt Cooper was Karl Rove, and that will be revealed in this document dump that Time magazine's going to do with the grand jury."

Other panelists then joined in discussing whether, if true, this would suggest a perjury rap for Rove, if he told the grand jury he did not leak to Cooper. ...

(Excerpt) Read more at editorandpublisher.com ...


TOPICS: Extended News; Front Page News; US: District of Columbia
KEYWORDS: cialeak; plamecase
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200201-208 next last
To: Woliff

The Supreme Court did not resurrect it. The reporters and their employers appealed the numerous (and unanimous) decisions compelling the reporters to testify and when the USSC refused to hear the appeal that was the end of the road for this aspect.


161 posted on 07/02/2005 1:42:10 PM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper
you ignored common sense explanations that provide context to the saga as well.

Not at all. I just think we have to wait and see, and as I pointed out, you can't always believe a tv pundit or MSM.
162 posted on 07/02/2005 1:42:18 PM PDT by summer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies]

To: summer

Oh boy....

LOL


163 posted on 07/02/2005 1:43:16 PM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper
I have to question why you are pushing the O'Donnell/Wilson version.

ROTFLMAO...I don't know which "version" that is -- but I have been hopping around the web, and this story is all over the place. That may mean it is something, or that it is nothing, or that everyone else out there is reading FR! Save your suspicions for someone more deserving of them than me! :)
164 posted on 07/02/2005 1:43:57 PM PDT by summer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies]

To: zencat

NO! he's like a female Elanore Clift...


165 posted on 07/02/2005 1:45:15 PM PDT by Lx (Do you like it, do you like it Scott? I call it Mr. and Mrs. Tennerman chili.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper

The refusal to hear the appeal was instrumental in the decision to turn over the documents.


166 posted on 07/02/2005 1:47:55 PM PDT by Woliff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies]

To: Woliff
Your article proves the Editor and Publisher is assisting in deceitful spin. Here is another lefty source---from well over a year ago:

Air Force One Phone Records Subpoenaed

March 5, 2004

The article is from March of last year, but it notes the Subpoenas were issued and complied with in January of that year. So, as I pointed out right at the beginning, this Rove and now Air Force One business is merely stirring up old angles of the story that were long ago investigated and settled.

167 posted on 07/02/2005 1:50:09 PM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: Woliff

No kidding.

(that was my point---it was not "resurrected")


168 posted on 07/02/2005 1:53:23 PM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 166 | View Replies]

To: mystery-ak

Ping to my #167. That E&P article seeks to confuse by referencing old subpoenas and trying to make it all sound of a piece.


169 posted on 07/02/2005 1:54:47 PM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies]

To: Woliff

No, it's the over a year old issue. Your source is being disingenuous.


170 posted on 07/02/2005 1:55:35 PM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 159 | View Replies]

To: summer

"MSNBC Analyst"

Analyst?
Is that what they're calling the Creepy Liar these days?
"Anal-ist" is more like it.


171 posted on 07/02/2005 1:56:19 PM PDT by Checkers (Gitmo has killed fewer people than Michael Schiavo.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper

For an investigation that was not going anywhere the term resurrected is appropriate


172 posted on 07/02/2005 1:58:05 PM PDT by Woliff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies]

To: RepublicanMensan

"That would be the democrats' wet dream."

That's pretty pathetic. Mine would be Angelina Jolie or Reese Witherspoon...
Hey, whatever works...


173 posted on 07/02/2005 1:58:56 PM PDT by Checkers (Gitmo has killed fewer people than Michael Schiavo.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: summer
If IF IF Rove was involved. (And I don't for a second believe he was.) I don't think he's dumb enough to take a risk himself that other lower level operatives would gladly do even at considerable risk if it aided the cause.

Rove is nothing if not a shrewd tactician. He's not going to be the one caught with his hand in the cookie jar even if he REALLY wants those macaroons.

And once more for those FReepers who are a little slow, "NO, I do NOT think he was involved."
174 posted on 07/02/2005 1:59:51 PM PDT by Dr.Zoidberg (Children's classic songs updated for Islam "If you're happy and you know it, Go Kaboom!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Woliff; summer
That link now says:

Story originally posted here was out of date and posted in error.

I will indulge in an "I told you so" moment.

You can further take it to the bank that Karl Rove was not the source for Novak's original column. As I said, I'm sure his name is in various reporters' notes after the fact discussing the issue and that seems clear from the articles today, despite the spin being put on it by O'Donnell and his ilk.

175 posted on 07/02/2005 2:00:04 PM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 159 | View Replies]

To: summer
don't know which "version" that is

The "Karl Rove was the leaker" version.

176 posted on 07/02/2005 2:01:00 PM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 164 | View Replies]

To: Woliff

No, it's not.


177 posted on 07/02/2005 2:04:15 PM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies]

To: Bommer

"O'Donnall is a lying sack of guano!"

THAT IS WAY OUT OF LINE, BUDDY.
THAT'S THE KIND OF POST THAT GIVES FREE REPUBLIC A BAD NAME!



Guano serves a purpose as an excellent fertilizer.


178 posted on 07/02/2005 2:05:54 PM PDT by Checkers (Gitmo has killed fewer people than Michael Schiavo.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper
re your post #175 - Very interesting that the E&P story E&P posted was actually out of date. Thanks for correcting this thread.

As for the "Karl was the leaker" version -- well, I have no idea why Newsweek is saying what it's saying in this new article. Newsweek seems to be agreeing with the analyst West Wing guy.

I do know I agree with those saying Karl Rove is a smart guy.

So -- what is really going on here? Again, I don't know. I don't think the MSM is going to tell us today, either. Like I said much earlier in this thread, we just have to wait and see. And, no, just because something is in MSM, or in the blogosphere, doesn't make it true. This is a long holiday weekend, you know! :)
179 posted on 07/02/2005 2:09:42 PM PDT by summer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper

I only report what was posted I do not authenticate the content.


180 posted on 07/02/2005 2:10:32 PM PDT by Woliff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 175 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200201-208 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson