Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Am. Prospect: An Unlikely Story (Rove hides alibi from FBI in 2003)

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
 
Carolab Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 06:51 PM
Original message
Am. Prospect: An Unlikely Story (Rove hides alibi from FBI in 2003)
Edited on Wed Jul-20-05 06:58 PM by Carolab
White House deputy chief of staff Karl Rove did not disclose that he had ever discussed CIA officer Valerie Plame with Time magazine reporter Matthew Cooper during Roves first interview with the FBI, according to legal sources with firsthand knowledge of the matter.

The omission by Rove created doubt for federal investigators, almost from the inception of their criminal probe into who leaked Plame's name to columnist Robert Novak, as to whether Rove was withholding crucial information from them, and perhaps even misleading or lying to them, the sources said.

Also leading to the early skepticism of Rove's accounts was the claim that although he first heard that Plame worked for the CIA from a journalist, he said could not recall the name of the journalist. Later, the sources said, Rove wavered even further, saying he was not sure at all where he first heard the information.

Rove's attorney, Robert Luskin, has said that Rove never knew that Plame was a covert officer when he discussed her CIA employment with reporters, and that he only first learned of her clandestine status when he read about it in the newspaper. Luskin did not return a telephone call today seeking comment for this story.

{snip}

Fitzgerald has focused on whether Rove might have learned of Plame's identity from one of the many senior White House officials who read the memo, according to the Times account and attorneys whose clients have testified before the federal grand jury.


(link to article): http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=V...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
joemurphy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 07:04 PM
Response to Original message
1. I think Waas made a mistake in this article.
It's my understanding that Marc Grossman was the recipient and not the author of the "Air Force One Memo". I've read elsewhere that Carl Ford, Jr. was the document's author. The article was written on June 10, 2005 and was apparently around for about 3 weeks prior to the big Bush air trip to Niger.

There was a "workup" being done on Wilson long before he personally published his July 6, 2003 article in the NYT.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Carolab Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 07:10 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. You are correct per this article.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050720/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/c... ;_ylt=AnNb1ixL6Ed1eTZimGSus8Os0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA3b2NibDltBHNlYwM3MTY-

Want to send the link to Waas?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joemurphy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 09:01 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. You go ahead and tell him if you want.
I like Waas's stuff but this article was a little sloppy. It also leaves a little fuzzy whether Plame was mentioned by name in the "Air Force One Memo" (apparently she wasn't, at least not a "Valerie Plame" anyway).

I guess I'm nitpicking, but precision is important in this thing. If you start publishing things with the facts even a little wrong or fuzzy, the Republicans start jumping all over you -- as Joe Wilson found out when he got sloppy with the "Cheney sent me to Niger" blurb.

Between you and me, I'm sort of waiting for them to start jumping on Matt Cooper, who was clearly stretching things when he said that he got a "dramatic" specific waiver the day of his contempt hearing.

Sigh. It would be nice if people would just tell things the way they really happen. I can dream, I guess.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joemurphy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 09:16 PM
Response to Reply #2
6. You can tell Waas if you'd like. I'll pass.
I like Waas's stuff but this one article was a bit sloppy. It also leaves a little fuzzy whether Plame was mentioned by name in the "Air Force One Memo" (apparently she wasn't, at least not a "Valerie Plame" anyway).

I guess I'm nitpicking, but precision is important in this thing. If you start publishing things with the facts even a little wrong, fuzzy, or jumbled, the Republicans bring out their talking heads and start jumping all over you -- as Joe Wilson found out when he got sloppy with the "Cheney sent me to Niger" blurb. Now, of course, Joe Wilson's the liar and Rove's young George Washington.

Between you and me, I'm sort of waiting for them to start jumping on Matt Cooper, who was clearly stretching things when he said that he got a "dramatic" specific waiver from Rove the day of his contempt hearing, which supposedly released him from his confidentiality agreement and allowed him to, at last, speak freely. Total baloney, of course. But there you are.

One last thing, if you're interested. Supposedly, Condi's folks at the NSC supposedly put together a "Briefing Book" right after Wilson's article came out filled with all they could find on Wilson, his wife, and his trip. According to an article I read, the Air Force One Memo was included in the "Briefing Book", either in whole or in part, and was faxed to the Air Force One passengers on their way to Africa. Thus, not only do we have the Air Force One Memo intact and in Powell's hands on the flight to the Dark Continent, we also have this Briefing Book supposedly floating around on the plane in unknown hands as well. The article I read said that the Briefing Book too was supposedly designated as "classified".

If you're interested, let me know and I'll try to dig up the cite to the article about this Briefing Book...I think it was a Bloomberg story, but I can't remember for sure. You can probably Google it yourself and find it. Funny deal. No one else has mentioned it.

Sigh. It would be nice if people would just tell things the way they really happen. I can dream, I guess.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Carolab Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:27 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. I sent an e-mail with the link to the Yahoo news story.
Thanks for bringing that up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
writes2000 Donating Member (481 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 09:04 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. You mean June 10, 2003, correct?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joemurphy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:18 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. Yeah. My bad! Arrgh. Embarassed. Correcting it Now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 09:12 PM
Response to Original message
5. This blows me away because
I think of rove after the last 5 years as being above the law..and to have the FBI investigating the leak is causing me unconcealed Joy!

Like some have said..we don't think rove thought anything would ever come of this when he was busy exacting Revenge on Joe Wilson.

Irony of Ironies..it's the free thinkers who are getting Sweet Revenge.
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 Tue Jul 29th 2014, 06:48 PM
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