Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

PlameGate: Rove vs Novak?

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
 
Ian David Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-16-05 07:34 AM
Original message
PlameGate: Rove vs Novak?
When Karl Rove says he got his info from Novak, does that mean he's trying to put Novak in jail to save his own ass?

And if that's the case, is it wise to:

1) Piss-off the media even more by sending yet another reporter to jail?

2) Piss-off Novak who probably has more dirt on GOP insiders than we can possibly imagine?

Remember, the media didn't give a shit about this until one of their own, Judith Miller, went to jail.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
emulatorloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-16-05 07:55 AM
Response to Original message
1. No, it means Rove perjured himself
At least that's my guess.

If there is any truth to this (AND I DOUBT IT), the likely scenario is that Rove told Miller, Miller told Novak. Rove probably just hadn't got around to calling Novak yet. But he sure did call Cooper.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Poppyseedman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-16-05 08:01 AM
Response to Reply #1
6. Even Copper admits he called Rove.
This thing is dead, as soon as the next "big story" is manufactured by the MSM it will disappear of the radar screen

Way too many people have put their foot in their mouth over this and would like to get the story behind them to get the shoe leather taste out of their mouths
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emulatorloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-16-05 08:29 AM
Response to Reply #6
8. Tell it to the Grand Jury and Patrick Fitzgerald
I doubt they are influenced by the GOP spin
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Poppyseedman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-16-05 09:14 AM
Response to Reply #8
11. I'm not being influenced by GOP spin
I have followed this story quite closely and think once again we are being taken for a nice little ride by the MSM to keep the masses fixated on over - blow stories.

Natalee Hollaway two weeks ago. A Hurricane named Dennis that affected only a small part of the country last week. Rove this week.

There are real serious issues not be addressed in this country, but instead the MSM is all a twitter over a possible Rovian scandal, which on it's face seemed very juicy, but as normal all sort of innuendos were tossed about without any real information out there to confirm or deny.

So until Fitzgerald actually issues indictments, it's all political posturing which so far as made the democrats look pretty foolish with all their pronouncements and press conferences.

I just wish the democratic party would stop thinking it's the 70's all over again and start taking the high ground and LEAD with ideas instead of trying to take down an administration that isn't going down.

It's almost 2006 and we still are chasing Bush around trying to nail him on anything that might stick.

How many times will it take until we learn the guy is not a moron and has our number.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dansolo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-16-05 10:20 AM
Response to Reply #11
17. Treason is not a serious issue?
You've got to be kidding? The prosecutor, Fitzgerald, is not a partisan hack like Ken Starr. He is not conducting a fishing expedition. I trust him, and if he has felt the need to pursue this as much as he has, than I believe that there is something there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Poppyseedman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-16-05 10:25 AM
Response to Reply #17
18. Treason. You are kidding right???
Look up the definition.

If Fitzgerald does indict someone, it will not be for treason.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xultar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-16-05 07:56 AM
Response to Original message
2. Well Novakula is not the media. I don't think people like him because
he is willing to print any and all leaks that come his way.
I didn't think he was 'respected' enough to warrant the media to backlash against the reich wing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Poppyseedman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-16-05 07:57 AM
Response to Original message
3. I'm not sure how close you are watching this little political game going
on, but, Rove is no longer the big issue, at least the big issue the media was hoping it would be. Novak isn't going to jail.

Judith Miller is either protecting Joe Wilson or herself.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emulatorloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-16-05 08:49 AM
Response to Reply #3
9. !?!?!?! Perhaps Rove isn't the big issue anymore, but it ain't Joe Wilson
Edited on Sat Jul-16-05 08:52 AM by emulatorloo
So you think the Grand Jury is about to indict Joe Wilson?

Rove may not be the big issue anymore, but the big issue is in the White House.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1932786
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Poppyseedman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-16-05 09:18 AM
Response to Reply #9
12. I'm not sure who the grand jury will indict, if they indict anybody
It isn't going to be Karl Rove.

My personal gut feel is Judith Miller is protecting herself

BTW, thanks for the link
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emulatorloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-16-05 09:21 AM
Response to Reply #12
13. agreed about Miller protecting herself -- the question is why?
Edited on Sat Jul-16-05 09:23 AM by emulatorloo
my gut feeling is because she is up to her eyeballs coordinating with the White House Iraq Group as they "marketed" the war -- of which Rove was but one member.

Karl Rove
Karen Hughes
Mary Matalin
Jim Wilkinson
Nicholas Callo
Condi Rice
Stephen Hadley
Scooter Libby
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Poppyseedman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-16-05 09:23 AM
Response to Reply #13
14. That is the $64,000 question
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
snippy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-16-05 09:37 AM
Response to Reply #3
15. delete
Edited on Sat Jul-16-05 09:40 AM by snippy
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
meg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-16-05 07:59 AM
Response to Original message
4. No. I think they cooked up this story
Edited on Sat Jul-16-05 07:59 AM by meg
AFTER Novak's article caused a stink. Not against the law for Novak to know and tell. However, if this is true that they did cook this up and Fitzgerald can prove it: Novak and Rove go to jail for conspiracy and obstruction of justice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vickitulsa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-16-05 08:50 AM
Response to Reply #4
10. What Novak Should (But Won't) Share
by Victoria Sousa

Note: I wrote the following spoof yesterday. Of course, as fast as this story is breaking and developing, everything we say becomes out of date pretty quickly. But I thought some of you might enjoy this anyway.

_______________

When the reporter who first outed Valerie Plame Wilson in a big way finally publishes his "definitive" article -- which he has probably already begun if not completed, American citizens along with everyone else will presumably have the answers that have not yet been forthcoming through any other sources. I believe that if Bob Novak would tell the truth instead of spinning it, we would all be surprised -- in more ways than one!

His news piece might go something like this.

~*~*~*~*~

Even on a "double secret background" basis, my buddy Karl Rove could not do what I could -- target Ambassador Joe Wilson for his refusal to agree with GWB's pre-war stance on WMD's in Iraq by very publicly revealing Wilson's wife's employment by the CIA. It is I who should be in Karl's shoes right now as he tries to fend off the many legitimate attacks from various directions.

Karl didn't call me to plant a vengeful story about Mrs. Wilson. Rather I, knowing that Rove is, like me, an openly dedicated Republican who will resort to dubious methods to sway public opinion away from the Democrats' point of view, called the president's right hand man to see if he would confirm my suspicion that Mrs. Wilson works for the CIA -- or give me any other dirt on the pair that I might use.

However, Karl Rove is too smart to risk being indicted for a crime, even if doing so by discrediting or "wounding" an enemy might boost his liege's position on the need to go to war in Iraq, or on any other issues.

No, it is I, Bob Novak, who should be brought up on treason charges or at the very least corrected and condemned by the public and my colleagues in the press. I will not name my source for the initial tip I received about Mrs. Wilson's employment by the CIA, but I could not publish an article revealing this fact until I confirmed with a ranking GOP contact on the "inside" that it was indeed a fact. I don't want to be embarrassed or even sued, after all, for writing something for publication that could be proven to be incorrect and perhaps libelous.

So I took my question about Mrs. Wilson's employment status at the CIA to my old friend who should know or could find out if she does work for "The Company." Karl took my call, of course, since he and I have the same goals in terms of backing up our president's reasoning for his stated policy and actions even if it means putting a dissenter or an opponent in danger or destroys her future as a CIA operative.

When Rove confirmed to me that the tip I got about Mrs. Wilson was correct, he did so for my information and at the same time cautioned me that I should be careful about what I write publicly on this matter. I won't say if I knew for certain that Mrs. Wilson's job at the CIA was as a covert operative, but I was of course well aware that no one should think he can "out" a covert Company operative without risking facing serious legal consequences for doing so.

I did not, as some have claimed, inform Karl that Mrs. Wilson was a CIA employee, but I did ask him if he could confirm this as fact for me. He could and did -- in what time frame I will not say. (He may have had to go check it out and get back with me.)

Another thing: I have waited so long to publish this tell-all article not because I am scrupulous about revealing important information while an investigation is in progress but because I want the confusion, rancor, interest and suspense to build. That way my final word on the matter offered upon the conclusion of the investigation will make me look like the ultimate authority, even if I have no real expert knowledge or power except to harm people by telling sensitive secrets about them to the world. That is a very real influence, after all, and I will take whatever credit I can get for undoing an opponent of the president and the GOP. I have been around for a long time and am a "senior" reporter, though others who don't like me might just call me "old."

Of course the real article I write, not this version you are reading that was written by a U.S. citizen who isn't even a blogger, let alone a journalist, will spin the entire story to favor my own party, the GOP, and as much as possible clear both my friend Karl Rove and myself. I will do what I can to get Karl off the hook, but I won't put myself *on* the hook in order to do so! The last thing I want to have happen is that I end up in prison, convicted on the evidence of my own writing and the intent of it (much like corporate thief Bernie Ebbers was sentenced to 25 years in the federal prison system, which means a life sentence at his age).

I'm not worried that I will face such a fate, however. I have been, as I admitted above, a reporter for the Republican cause for more years than I care to remember. I didn't last this long in the field of political journalism by being stupid enough to put my own head on the chopping block. In fact, if it comes right down to it, I'll sacrifice my pal Karl in a heartbeat to protect my own neck.

~*~*~*~*~

Now doesn't that sound like a refreshingly honest telling of these events, which have become a political and legal hot potato of late? Why not just level with the American public for a change? (Hah! Dream on, girl.) We're not all as naive and gullible as some characters on the political stage might think.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
napi21 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-16-05 07:59 AM
Response to Original message
5. Wasn't it hatered of the Press that finally brought Nixon down?
It's sure no secret that the Press can make or break a politician, and all of them should already know that! I'm not putting the Press above the law, but they can publish stories or ignore them, and all very legally.

I think this admin. is in a very deep hole and is still digging! They've already pi**ed off the CIA (a group that I sure wouldn't on MY bad side) and now they're pi**ing off the MSM??? Keep it going folks, here's another shovel!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ayeshahaqqiqa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-16-05 08:22 AM
Response to Original message
7. It is said Novak made a deal with the SP
don't know if this is so-but if it is the case, I wonder if it includes immunity from prosecution.

BTW, I don't think this issue is dead. It is just starting. Anyone who lived through Watergate knows that at times things look "dead" and then everything breaks loose.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vickitulsa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-16-05 11:51 AM
Response to Reply #7
19. Totally agree on this. I can't trust my memory enough
to recount the number of times it seemed that Nixon had gotten clean away with the Watergate break-in cover-up. He was re-elected to a second term, though, remember? (Or remember your history lessons if you are younger than 50.) ;)

Then it was only a few months into that second term (hmmm, do I smell yet another similarity?) that the nastiest dirt began to be brought to light and Nixon with all his cohorts and accomplices -- some of whom ratted on him, on principle or spite or revenge for being fired and expected to take the fall for him -- were out there twisting in the wind.

I don't think it's at all foolish or a waste of time to at least follow this story of the leaked CIA operative's identity by a top WH "servant of the people." We needn't put all our eggs in one basket or expect that this is all it will take to have Laura packing her bags for real. Of course it's not that simple ... but then this story has become very, very complex in a relatively short time. It may have begun quite some time ago, back to 2003 or even further, but it seems to be a story that has been gathering steam almost without respite for the last few weeks. A story with no meat to it has no legs. This story has legs!

And I hope it will help propel those vermin out of "OUR" White House!



Quote below is by Dwight D. Eisenhower
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lefergus70 Donating Member (94 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-16-05 10:02 AM
Response to Original message
16. We mustn't forget the larger issue
As Daniel Schorr has written: "The role of Rove and associates added up to a small incident in a very large scandal - the effort to delude America into thinking it faced a threat dire enough to justify a war."

Leroy
http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0715-02.htm


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 Fri Apr 19th 2024, 10:42 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