Cheney's office linked to Rove affair

[NG]

Washington — U.S. Vice-President Richard Cheney's chief of staff, Lewis Libby, was a source along with U.S. President George W. Bush's chief political adviser for a Time story that identified a CIA officer, the magazine reporter said Sunday, further countering White House claims that neither aide was involved in the leak.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20050717.wciaa07171a/BNStory/International/

Wow. Both Cheney and the brain of Bush (Karl Rove) involved in possible acts of treason. Sure makes getting getting a blow job from an intern look minor.

I wonder if they'll do an impeachment based on this?

[stevethewheel]

Didn't Bush say he'd FIRE whoever was responsible?

This should be precious to watch.

Of course, he also said there were WMD's....so who knows.

[Roninvancouver]

unless the grand jury comes back with an indictment on Rove (proly' this week they decide) - Bush won't fire him.

Rove is the puppetmaster.

i think this bush jr presidency may go down in the history books and the most vile of american presidencies...i was watching CNN (channel surfing..bored) and the stats on iraq are staggering....it's cost over $200 billion dollars so far which works out to $2,000 for each american family....and over 112,000 iraqis killed...

and even afghanistan appears to be slipping away again to the taliban and warlords....


http://monkeyvsrobot.net/img/puppetmaster-l.jpg

[15-20_God]

monkey jr. is just bringing corruption to a whole new level. we'll see how long he can dance around this issue.

maybe its time to start making up stories about Iran.

[hagbard]

Hang'm all and let god sort it out.

[NG]

it's cost over $200 billion dollars so far which works out to $2,000 for each american family


Christ. Whatever happened to Conservatives being fiscal conservatives.

Whoever gets in next should bill Americans who voted for Bush the entire cost.

[d_jedi]

Whoever gets in next should bill Americans who voted for Bush the entire cost.
If the Conservatives get in power up here, can we send a bill to all those who voted for the Liberals or NDP for the sponsorship scandal / $5B budget amendment (apparently some of the transit money won't start flowing until 2007, according to the Metro newspaper..), as well?
:D

[d_jedi]

It's pretty clear that Rove should be fired. I doubt Bush will do it, though.
If this administration didn't already have a huge credibility problem with the American public, it does now.

[i6s1]

No way. Plame's cover was already blown years ago. She hadn't been a covert agent for something like 6 years. No crime was commited, there's nothing wrong with revealing that someone works for the CIA. It's only a crime if you blow the cover of a covert operative.

Further, Rove didn't out Plume to get even with Wilson, he did it because Wilson was running around lying to everyone that Cheney picked him for the assignment and his wife had nothing to do with it.

[d_jedi]

No way. Plame's cover was already blown years ago. She hadn't been a covert agent for something like 6 years. No crime was commited, there's nothing wrong with revealing that someone works for the CIA. It's only a crime if you blow the cover of a covert operative.

Further, Rove didn't out Plume to get even with Wilson, he did it because Wilson was running around lying to everyone that Cheney picked him for the assignment and his wife had nothing to do with it.
The issue really isn't about whether what Rove did was illegal or not. It's about credibility. The white house spokeman (dunno his name) said that Karl Rove was not involved (someone was obviously lying here!). President Bush said that anyone involved would be fired. Karl Rove was involved.. and if we are to believe President Bush's own words, Rove should be fired. If he's not, then the Bush administration will take a further credibility hit as a result..

I was willing to give Bush the benefit of the doubt over the justification for the Iraq war. If he lies his way out of this one, I will need to reconsider that position..

[i6s1]

The issue really isn't about whether what Rove did was illegal or not. It's about credibility. The white house spokeman (dunno his name) said that Karl Rove was not involved (someone was obviously lying here!). President Bush said that anyone involved would be fired. Karl Rove was involved.. and if we are to believe President Bush's own words, Rove should be fired. If he's not, then the Bush administration will take a further credibility hit as a result..

I was willing to give Bush the benefit of the doubt over the justification for the Iraq war. If he lies his way out of this one, I will need to reconsider that position..

GWB: "anybody in my administration who leaked classified information."

She wasn't working covertly, her employment with the CIA wasn't classified. Any foreign intel agency worth it's salt would be watching CIAHQ and would have seen here walk in and out of the building every day for the last 6 years.

[d_jedi]

GWB: "anybody in my administration who leaked classified information."

She wasn't working covertly, her employment with the CIA wasn't classified. Any foreign intel agency worth it's salt would be watching CIAHQ and would have seen here walk in and out of the building every day for the last 6 years.

From the New York Times:

Mr. Bush's spokesman, Scott McClellan, had stated a more categorical standard. "The president has set high standards, the highest of standards, for people in his administration," Mr. McClellan said. "He's made it very clear to people in his administration that he expects them to adhere to the highest standards of conduct. If anyone in this administration was involved in it, they would no longer be in this administration."

Mr. Bush himself embraced a broader position on June 10, 2004, when he was asked whether he would fire anyone who had anything to do with leaking Mrs. Wilson's name.

"Yes," Mr. Bush replied, and his spokesmen have reiterated that stance repeatedly in the months since then.

[i6s1]

he was asked whether he would fire anyone who had anything to do with leaking Mrs. Wilson's name.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/11/AR2005071101568.html

The e-mail did not say that Rove identified Plame by name, and Rove has maintained from the beginning that he neither knew her name nor leaked it to anyone.

It's not a leak. You can't "leak" Plume's name any more than you can leak the name of a McDonalds cashier. It was no secret that Plume worked for the CIA, in fact, Novak might have know this already. What Rove revealed was that it was Wilson's wife who got him the trip to Africa.

At the beginning, I think, everyone was under the impression that it was classified information and therefore a criminal thing, that's why the promises for blood came out of the White House. Now that everyone knows there's nothing wrong with what Rove did, there's little point in firing him.

[d_jedi]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/11/AR2005071101568.html



It's not a leak. You can't "leak" Plume's name any more than you can leak the name of a McDonalds cashier. It was no secret that Plume worked for the CIA, in fact, Novak might have know this already. What Rove revealed was that it was Wilson's wife who got him the trip to Africa.

At the beginning, I think, everyone was under the impression that it was classified information and therefore a criminal thing, that's why the promises for blood came out of the White House. Now that everyone knows there's nothing wrong with what Rove did, there's little point in firing him.
I find it hard to believe that Rove was never asked if he was involved in this. If he was, then obviously someone is lying.. and they are not worthy of government office.

I think that's the bottom line. You can argue whether he actually named her (I believe the messages called her "Wilson's wife"), and whether or not naming her compromised her position in the CIA. For a criminal investigation, that's all very relevant information. For the accountability of the US government and government officials, it is irrelevant. The issue is whether the government officials lied to the American public, and what the repercussions for that will be.

[i6s1]

But to further expain myself;

Yes, it does make the adminisration look bad when they promise to fire someone for doing nothing wrong and then not following through.

They should have just said from day one that the information "leaked" wasn't classified and therefore we plan on doing nothing about it.

From what I've seen, Bush walked a tightrope making promises that he knew technically he could keep.

There were better ways to handle this whole non-issue, and now everyone thinks it's a big scandal.

[i6s1]

I find it hard to believe that Rove was never asked if he was involved in this. If he was, then obviously someone is lying.. and they are not worthy of government office.

I think if he was asked if he was asked if he was involved, he would have dodged the question, or said he didn't reveal her name.


I think that's the bottom line. You can argue whether he actually named her (I believe the messages called her "Wilson's wife"), and whether or not naming her compromised her position in the CIA. For a criminal investigation, that's all very relevant information. For the accountability of the US government and government officials, it is irrelevant. The issue is whether the government officials lied to the American public, and what the repercussions for that will be.

Yes, if they lie, it's bad. The reprecussions will probably be some embaressment and some lost credibility.

I'd like to see the exact wording of the denial of Rove's involvment from the White House.

[d_jedi]

But to further expain myself;

Yes, it does make the adminisration look bad when they promise to fire someone for doing nothing wrong and then not following through.

They should have just said from day one that the information "leaked" wasn't classified and therefore we plan on doing nothing about it.

From what I've seen, Bush walked a tightrope making promises that he knew technically he could keep.

There were better ways to handle this whole non-issue, and now everyone thinks it's a big scandal.
I don't accept that Rove did "nothing wrong", either. If his leak of this information was on the up and up, why the need for all the secrecy? And why didn't Rove admit to it - instead of allowing a two year taxpayer-funded investigation into the leak?

[d_jedi]

I think if he was asked if he was asked if he was involved, he would have dodged the question, or said he didn't reveal her name.
And that would just make the American public so much more likely to trust him..



Yes, if they lie, it's bad. The reprecussions will probably be some embaressment and some lost credibility.

I'd like to see the exact wording of the denial of Rove's involvment from the White House.
I'd like to see the exact questions/responses to him, as well.. I can't find any, though.. I would imagine that he was (internally, at least) asked about the matter, though..

[NG]

If the Conservatives get in power up here, can we send a bill to all those who voted for the Liberals or NDP for the sponsorship scandal / $5B budget amendment (apparently some of the transit money won't start flowing until 2007, according to the Metro newspaper..), as well?
:D

Actually unlike the Conservative party the NDP is the only federal party who was not involved in the sponsorship scandel. Whoever told you that the NDP had their hand in the Sponsorship issue was lying.

[d_jedi]

Actually unlike the Conservative party the NDP is the only federal party who was not involved in the sponsorship scandel. Whoever told you that the NDP had their hand in the Sponsorship issue was lying.
I didn't mean to suggest that the NDP was. At the same time, I don't see how the Conservatives were involved.. (the Mulrouney PCs weren't on the up and up with their government contracts, and they - rightly - were booted from office.. but that doesn't have anything to do with the sponsorship program).

[i6s1]

I don't accept that Rove did "nothing wrong", either. If his leak of this information was on the up and up, why the need for all the secrecy?

For the first little while, everyone thought that the leaker had intentionally outed a covert operative - a crimial offense. It took a little while for the truth to come out. Plus, they aren't supposed to comment about who did what while the investigation is ongoing.


And why didn't Rove admit to it - instead of allowing a two year taxpayer-funded investigation into the leak?

The investigation would have gone on anyway no matter what he said.

[hagbard]

Actually unlike the Conservative party the NDP is the only federal party who was not involved in the sponsorship scandel. Whoever told you that the NDP had their hand in the Sponsorship issue was lying.

The NDP have Bingogate and Fast Ferries, at least, here in BC.