Posted on 07/17/2005 4:22:38 AM PDT by johnny7
Some in GOP fear more revelations, and hope naming a court nominee will overshadow case.
WASHINGTON If Karl Rove was source No. 2, who was source No. 1? Rove, President Bush's top political advisor, has survived a bruising week of controversy over his role in the unmasking of a CIA officer. But White House officials and their Republican allies acknowledge that they may face more revelations in the weeks and months to come.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
Did you see the blood=thirsty bunch on the Chris Matthews show just now- they could hardly be any more thrilled over the possibilty of taking down Rove, etc.
If he is correct then why did Wilson himself recently claim that his wife was not under cover at the time of Novaks column?
I heard it was just until the end of the inquisition... er... investigation.
Perhaps, Fitzgerald thinks someone at the CIA lied about a "crime" being committed.
Is it a federal crime to falsely accuse someone of a federal crime?
"He writes this as if this possibility is a BAD thing for the GOP..."
I agree. He is saying this is bad for the libs. Note he says it "would cast an ENTIRELY DIFFERENT shadow on the matter". This can only mean the facts pointing AWAY from this Administration and in another direction. You can't get more "entirely different" then that. we all seem to think that this is foreshadowing Dems in Dutch.
Actually, Bush should tell Rove to go fishing with Cheney for a few days. And make sure there is a picture of him holding up the smallest fish he caught!
Can you find a source for that? I heard that too, but then I found the article reporting the CIA still considered her covert. Post #119
A good question and one that needs to be answered.
But would finding that out negate Plame being covert?
I think that Karl Rove did American security a favor by questioning Joe Wilson's libelous story, which essentially told the whole world [enemies included] that Americans invaded Iraq under false pretenses.
Actually that is close to the theory presented on FOX news. FOX news contributers had heard she was CIA on the Washington social circuit prior to the publishing of the articles. "Everybody knew it."
If the complainer was lying, yes.
Its more like they're playing Omaha Hi-Low. The MSM tried for the high hand. Now they're going for the low. It seems like the White House is slowing playing a perfect Hi-Low hand and will beat them for the whole pot.
I normally don't, but forced myself on the outside chance there might be one who was half way fair.
*********************************************************** "A statement by Wilson on Wolf Blitzer's July 14, 2005 CNN program that, "my wife was not a clandestine officer the day that Bob Novak blew her identity", has caused some to consider it an indication that Wilson acknowledged Plame was no longer covert at the time. However, this statement was made in response to a question about whether Plame's actions had blown her cover, and Wilson went on to continue with his assertion that Novak was responsible for his wife's exposure.
Here is where he attempts to back track, poorly imo.
"Wilson later explained that his wife was not covert on that day because that was the day her cover was blown, although the original statement matches with other statements of that nature. Former covert CIA agent Fred Rustmann, for instance, has claimed in the Washington Times on 15 July 2005 that "she made no bones about the fact that she was an agency employee and her husband was a diplomat...Her neighbors knew this, her friends knew this, his friends knew this." It was the position of the CIA, according to Rustmann, that she was a "non-official cover," or NOC, until 1997, and hadn't been out as that type of agent since then, instead having overt status. These statements are contrary to information in an older October 1, 2003 Knight Ridder report entitled "Justice Launches Probe Into CIA Leak," where an anonymous CIA official was quoted as saying, "If she was not undercover, we would have no reason to file a criminal referral," referring to the referral by the CIA to the Justice Department that a crime may have been committed." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valerie_Plame
The same 2003 article that you reference says [in one sentence, no less] [Direct quote from the article]
Question: Are the CIA folks who say she was covert the same lying CIA folks who say Bush misrepresented intelligence?
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.