Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

White HouseScrambles to Stop Criminal Indictment of Rove/Capital Hill Blue

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
ElsewheresDaughter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 05:13 PM
Original message
White HouseScrambles to Stop Criminal Indictment of Rove/Capital Hill Blue
Edited on Thu Jul-07-05 05:43 PM by ElsewheresDaughter
The Bush Administration is scrambling behind the scenes to stop a criminal indictment against Presidential advisor Karl Rove for disclosing classified information to reporters in an attempt to discredit a White House critic.

Time Magazine emails turned over to a grand jury show Rove leaked CIA Operative Valerie Plames name to journalists after her husband, Ambassador Joseph Wilson, went public with claims the Bush Administration knowing used false information to justify the invasion of Iraq. Plame, until the disclosure, worked as a covert operative for the intelligence agency.

Some government officials have noted to Time in interviews... that Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, is a CIA official who monitors the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, Time reporter Matthew Cooper wrote in the magazine in July, 2003.

Emails recently turned over to a federal grand jury investigating the leak show Cooper told his editors that Rove was the source of the information. In addition, Rove attorney Karl Luskin confirms that Cooper interviewed Rove for the article but claims that his client never knowingly disclosed classified information.

However, a producer for MSNBCs Hardball program testified before the grand jury that in July, 2003, Rove called the shows host, Chris Matthews, and said Plame was fair game.

As a top White House aide, Rove has "code level" clearance on security matters and would easily have had access to Plame's status at the CIA. White House sources say he requested additional information on both Plame and Wilson before talking to reporters.

If Rove knowingly disclosed classified information he could face federal felony indictments. Sources within the investigation say special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald is pursuing such an indictment against Rove but that the White House is pressuring the Justice Department to put the brakes on such a move.

Its a power game, says one Justice Department attorney familiar with the investigation. The White House is very, very worried that this will come back down on Rove and them.

Rove has long been suspected as the leak of Plames name which first appeared in conservative commentator Robert Novaks column in July 2003. Novak has reportedly cut a deal with the special prosecutor to avoid jail time but two other reporters who also reported Plames name Cooper and New York Times reporter Judith Miller could be jailed for refusing to testify before the grand jury.

MSBC political analyst Lawrence ODonnell, appearing on the syndicated McLaughlin Group talk show, also outed Rove as the source last Friday, saying he has two sources that confirm Rove masterminded the leak.

Bill Israel, a former reporter who teaches journalism at the University of Massachusetts and who taught with Rove at the University at Texas, says Rove could have easily set up the Plame affair.

Rove once described himself as a die-hard Nixonite; he is, like the former president, both student and master of plausible deniability, Israel says. Consequently, when former U.S. Ambassador Joseph Wilson challenged President Bushs embrace of the British notion that Saddam Hussein imported uranium from Niger to produce nuclear weapons, retaliation by Rove was never in doubt.

http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/article_6...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
drm604 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 05:30 PM
Response to Original message
1. Link?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ElsewheresDaughter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 05:38 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. it's posted...thanks for the reminder
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberaliraqvet26 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 05:32 PM
Response to Original message
2. I dont think they are scrambling
this story isn't going anywhere fast.

Terrorist attacks, G-8, hurricanes, supreme court retirements, missing white girls from 'bama in aruba will take up all the medias time
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DoYouEverWonder Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 06:12 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. The courts don't care about all that
the M$M might not be paying much attention, but when Rove gets indicted they'll all show up and act surprised.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HootieMcBoob Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 06:26 PM
Response to Reply #2
6. You think Fitzpatrick is glued to CNN?
Just because the news channels aren't reporting on anything doesn't mean that the prosecutor in shit case is sitting on his hands. The world still goes on even when the cable news channels aren't watching.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
magnolia Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 01:37 PM
Response to Reply #2
13. Who cares about stories!
We want indictments.

Let the media sit on this. The court will move forward.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paula777 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 06:14 PM
Response to Original message
5. WOW - Just fucking WOW. I hope this is true and he goes DOWN
I would love to see that fucker in handcuffs
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rhett o rick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 02:04 PM
Response to Reply #5
15. If convicted, the case will be thrown out on appeal. "They" own the
judiciary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bvar22 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 06:40 PM
Response to Original message
7. Yeah
Harboring a "traitor" in the bush* WhiteHouse could cause some bad PR.
They better hire an Image Consultant to deal with this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sendero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 06:49 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. They don't use..
... focus groups, didn't you get the memo? :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tuvor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 07:09 PM
Response to Original message
9. Lately I've been hearing that Capitol Hill Blue is a dubious source.
Is that actually the case?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cronquist Donating Member (34 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 07:11 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. they have made some very interesting claims
but I don't remember if any panned out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
newyawker99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-09-05 01:00 PM
Response to Reply #10
18. Hi Cronquist!!
Welcome to DU!! :toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
berni_mccoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 08:43 PM
Response to Original message
11. Glad to see others are using my graph in their sig! :-)
It really says what the war is all about.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ElsewheresDaughter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 01:15 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. berni..yes it is a woderful visual and i hope you don't mind my borrowing?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
berni_mccoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 01:48 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. No, please do, borrow away
I want this to spread as much as possible.

People need to have the real reason for the war staring them in the face.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
skip fox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 02:44 PM
Response to Original message
16. Rove "mastermined the leak" as you say. Here's how
The situation strongly implies that there were at least 2 different primary sources (since Matt Cooper's specifically released him, but Judith Miller's apparently did not do the same for her) and reason maintains there were at least 6 initial calls (the 6 reporters contacted: Robert Novak, Cooper, Miller, and 3 others), and 3 follow-up calls (Novak, Miller, Cooper). This is the minimum.

In order to make sure the story leaked properly, discrediting Wilson's Niger yellow-cake findings by implying he and his wife, Valerie Plame, had an agenda against the president from the beginning one person would have to coordinate the calling. (Of course he could have made calls as well.) Neither of the 2 or more should call the other's initial contact (that would seem too eager, perhaps a dirty trick). In addition, 4-5 others would have to know the story was true in order to confirm it, and they had to be encouraged to do so.

Who better than the master of such odious activity, Karl Rove? Perhaps Cheney (who would have felt responsibility in such a matter since it was the behest of his office that the CIA sent Wilson to Niger) used his clearance to discover this information and brought it to Rove at a meeting of the White House Iraq Group (see snippy's beautiful post in DU, link at bottom of this post). Then Rove would go into high gear, doing what he does best (I mean worst). He coordinated the callings, made sure there were the requisite secondary sources ready and willing to confirm (perhaps each having different details or a different slant).

Therefore, Rove may well be both a conspirator (a little RICO, anybody?), and the leaker of illegal information, AND we may have at least one other indictment handed down. Think of the possibilities! Rice, Cheney, Libby, Hughes (why the hell did she retire before?), Matalin, etc. Maybe even W. (But the more I think about it, I wonder how many real reporters wouldn't be suspicious of a call from Rove? He might be the primary source for the likes of Novak, but few others.)

But think about the above and then read snippy's lovely item backed up by a Washington Post article:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ElsewheresDaughter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 03:14 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. posting "snippy's 10/1/03 post" here for easy reading..hope it is ok......
Edited on Fri Jul-08-05 03:19 PM by ElsewheresDaughter
snippy (1000+ posts) Wed Oct-01-03 07:32 PM
Response to Original message
28. This was not a one man operation. Scooter Libby is part of WHIG.

The Wilson affair should be used to expose the entire broad and well coordinated campaign of lies by the Bush administration concerning the invasion of Iraq. The Wilson affair is only one small part of that campaign. The Wilson affair has legs because there is easily understood evidence of an easily understood crime. But I think that it is a mistake to be content to use it to bring one or two flunkies in the administration down. Whoever ultimately takes the fall for this either never will be indicted or will be pardoned and become republican folk heroes. Think Ollie North.

I think nearly every single fact and allegation about the entire Wilson affair indicates that it was an operation of the White House Iraq Group, or WHIG. The WHIG was formed by White House Chief of Staff Andy Card in August of 2002 to market and create support for the invasion of Iraq. It also was charged with framing the debate so that republicans would benefit politically from the invasion. WHIG's responsibilities included the creation and coordination of all of the lies to support the invasion, including the yellowcake and other nuclear weapons lies. Scooter Libby was a participant in the WHIG.

From an excellent article describing the WHIG:

The group met weekly in the Situation Room. Among the regular participants were Karl Rove, the president's senior political adviser; communications strategists Karen Hughes, Mary Matalin and James R. Wilkinson; legislative liaison Nicholas E. Calio; and policy advisers led by Rice and her deputy, Stephen J. Hadley, along with I. Lewis Libby, Cheney's chief of staff.

The first days of September would bring some of the most important decisions of the prewar period: what to demand of the United Nations in the president's Sept. 12 address to the General Assembly, when to take the issue to Congress, and how to frame the conflict with Iraq in the midterm election campaign that began in earnest after Labor Day.

A "strategic communications" task force under the WHIG began to plan speeches and white papers. There were many themes in the coming weeks, but Iraq's nuclear menace was among the most prominent.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=artic ...

The WHIG not only chose what lies to use, it also chose when, where, and how the lies would be disseminated. And by whom.

The fact that at least two people in the administration were shopping the story indicates that a decision to disclose the information was made. It was not casually revealed during the course of conversation. It was an actual decision made by someone. The fact that at least two people in the administration were shopping the story also indicates delegation and coordination by someone.

If lies about Iraq's nuclear weapons program are involved, it is a WHIG operation. If a decision about a communication concerning any of the Iraq lies was made in the White House, WHIG was involved in the decision. If the job of making that communication was delegated to two or more people and coordinated, WHIG was involved in the delegation and coordination. That means the White House Chief of Staff, Andy Card and Turd Blossom Rove were involved.

I am hoping that the investigation of the disclosure of the information on Wilson's wife will lead to a broader investigation of what I think are the three most important questions about the invasion of Iraq (from the standpoint of revealing the criminal behavior of Bush and his minions):

1. Who made the decision to use a campaign of lies to market the invasion of Iraq? (Turd Blossom Rove? Whistle Ass? Cheney? Roger Ailes? Rush Limbaugh? Someone else?)

2. When was that decision made? (Before or after January, 2001? or September 11, 2001? or March, 2002 when Bush told three Senators in Rice's office: "Fuck Saddam. We're taking him out."? or September 2002 when Andrew Card said about trying to sell the American people on the invasion of Iraq: "From a marketing point of view, you don't introduce new products in August."?)

3. Why was that decision made? (Political reasons? Financial reasons? Personal reasons? Religious reasons? Other reasons?)


I think the answers to these questions would reveal a criminal conspiracy much broader than the decision to out Wilson's wife. That conspiracy involves more powerful people than Scooter Libby.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Q Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-09-05 01:23 PM
Response to Original message
19. I guess we'll finally find out if BushCo is above the law...
...and if Americans care that the Bushies believe they're beyond it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Sep 17th 2014, 12:43 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC