Where's the outrage about Karl Rove?!?

markjs

Banned
Andy Manis / AP
'CONCERN' AT THE WHITE HOUSE: Rove

By Michael Isikoff
Newsweek
July 11 issue - Its legal appeals exhausted, Time magazine agreed last week to turn over reporter Matthew Cooper's e-mails and computer notes to a special prosecutor investigating the leak of an undercover CIA agent's identity. The case has been the subject of press controversy for two years. Saying "we are not above the law," Time Inc. Editor in Chief Norman Pearlstine decided to comply with a grand-jury subpoena to turn over documents related to the leak. But Cooper (and a New York Times reporter, Judith Miller) is still refusing to testify and faces jail this week.

At issue is the story of a CIA-sponsored trip taken by former ambassador (and White House critic) Joseph Wilson to investigate reports that Iraq was seeking to buy uranium from the African country of Niger. "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," said Cooper's July 2003 Time online article.

Now the story may be about to take another turn. The e-mails surrendered by Time Inc., which are largely between Cooper and his editors, show that one of Cooper's sources was White House deputy chief of staff Karl Rove, according to two lawyers who asked not to be identified because they are representing witnesses sympathetic to the White House. Cooper and a Time spokeswoman declined to comment. But in an interview with NEWSWEEK, Rove's lawyer, Robert Luskin, confirmed that Rove had been interviewed by Cooper for the article. It is unclear, however, what passed between Cooper and Rove.

The controversy began three days before the Time piece appeared, when columnist Robert Novak, writing about Wilson's trip, reported that Wilson had been sent at the suggestion of his wife, who was identified by name as a CIA operative. The leak to Novak, apparently intended to discredit Wilson's mission, caused a furor when it turned out that Plame was an undercover agent. It is a crime to knowingly reveal the identity of an undercover CIA official. A special prosecutor was appointed and began subpoenaing reporters to find the source of the leak.

Novak appears to have made some kind of arrangement with the special prosecutor, and other journalists who reported on the Plame story have talked to prosecutors with the permission of their sources. Cooper agreed to discuss his contact with Lewis (Scooter) Libby, Vice President Dick Cheney's top aide, after Libby gave him permission to do so. But Cooper drew the line when special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald asked about other sources.

Initially, Fitzgerald's focus was on Novak's sourcing, since Novak was the first to out Plame. But according to Luskin, Rove's lawyer, Rove spoke to Cooper three or four days before Novak's column appeared. Luskin told NEWSWEEK that Rove "never knowingly disclosed classified information" and that "he did not tell any reporter that Valerie Plame worked for the CIA." Luskin declined, however, to discuss any other details. He did say that Rove himself had testified before the grand jury "two or three times" and signed a waiver authorizing reporters to testify about their conversations with him. "He has answered every question that has been put to him about his conversations with Cooper and anybody else," Luskin said. But one of the two lawyers representing a witness sympathetic to the White House told NEWSWEEK that there was growing "concern" in the White House that the prosecutor is interested in Rove. Fitzgerald declined to comment.

In early October 2003, NEWSWEEK reported that immediately after Novak's column appeared in July, Rove called MSNBC "Hardball" host Chris Matthews and told him that Wilson's wife was "fair game." But White House spokesman Scott McClellan told reporters at the time that any suggestion that Rove had played a role in outing Plame was "totally ridiculous." On Oct. 10, McClellan was asked directly if Rove and two other White House aides had ever discussed Valerie Plame with any reporters. McClellan said he had spoken with all three, and "those individuals assured me they were not involved in this."

© 2005 Newsweek, Inc.

From: Newsweek

By Michael Isikoff
Newsweek
July 18 issue - It was 11:07 on a Friday morning, July 11, 2003, and Time magazine correspondent Matt Cooper was tapping out an e-mail to his bureau chief, Michael Duffy. "Subject: Rove/P&C," (for personal and confidential), Cooper began. "Spoke to Rove on double super secret background for about two mins before he went on vacation ..." Cooper proceeded to spell out some guidance on a story that was beginning to roil Washington. He finished, "please don't source this to rove or even WH [White House]" and suggested another reporter check with the CIA.

Last week, after Time turned over that e-mail, among other notes and e-mails, Cooper agreed to testify before a grand jury in the Valerie Plame case. Explaining that he had obtained last-minute "personal consent" from his source, Cooper was able to avoid a jail sentence for contempt of court. Another reporter, Judith Miller of The New York Times, refused to identify her source and chose to go to jail instead.

For two years, a federal prosecutor, Patrick Fitzgerald, has been investigating the leak of Plame's identity as an undercover CIA agent. The leak was first reported by columnist Robert Novak on July 14, 2003. Novak apparently made some arrangement with the prosecutor, but Fitzgerald continued to press other reporters for their sources, possibly to show a pattern (to prove intent) or to make a perjury case. (It is illegal to knowingly identify an undercover CIA officer.) Rove's words on the Plame case have always been carefully chosen. "I didn't know her name. I didn't leak her name," Rove told CNN last year when asked if he had anything to do with the Plame leak. Rove has never publicly acknowledged talking to any reporter about former ambassador Joseph Wilson and his wife. But last week, his lawyer, Robert Luskin, confirmed to NEWSWEEK that Rove did—and that Rove was the secret source who, at the request of both Cooper's lawyer and the prosecutor, gave Cooper permission to testify.

The controversy arose when Wilson wrote an op-ed column in The New York Times saying that he had been sent by the CIA in February 2002 to investigate charges that Iraq was trying to buy uranium from the African country of Niger. Wilson said he had found no evidence to support the claim. Wilson's column was an early attack on the evidence used by the Bush administration to justify going to war in Iraq. The White House wished to discredit Wilson and his attacks. The question for the prosecutor is whether someone in the administration, in an effort to undermine Wilson's credibility, intentionally revealed the covert identity of his wife.

In a brief conversation with Rove, Cooper asked what to make of the flap over Wilson's criticisms. NEWSWEEK obtained a copy of the e-mail that Cooper sent his bureau chief after speaking to Rove. (The e-mail was authenticated by a source intimately familiar with Time's editorial handling of the Wilson story, but who has asked not to be identified because of the magazine's corporate decision not to disclose its contents.) Cooper wrote that Rove offered him a "big warning" not to "get too far out on Wilson." Rove told Cooper that Wilson's trip had not been authorized by "DCIA"—CIA Director George Tenet—or Vice President Dick Cheney. Rather, "it was, KR said, wilson's wife, who apparently works at the agency on wmd [weapons of mass destruction] issues who authorized the trip." Wilson's wife is Plame, then an undercover agent working as an analyst in the CIA's Directorate of Operations counterproliferation division. (Cooper later included the essence of what Rove told him in an online story.) The e-mail characterizing the conversation continues: "not only the genesis of the trip is flawed an[d] suspect but so is the report. he [Rove] implied strongly there's still plenty to implicate iraqi interest in acquiring uranium fro[m] Niger ... "

Nothing in the Cooper e-mail suggests that Rove used Plame's name or knew she was a covert operative. Nonetheless, it is significant that Rove was speaking to Cooper before Novak's column appeared; in other words, before Plame's identity had been published. Fitzgerald has been looking for evidence that Rove spoke to other reporters as well. "Karl Rove has shared with Fitzgerald all the information he has about any potentially relevant contacts he has had with any reporters, including Matt Cooper," Luskin told NEWSWEEK.

A source close to Rove, who declined to be identified because he did not wish to run afoul of the prosecutor or government investigators, added that there was "absolutely no inconsistency" between Cooper's e-mail and what Rove has testified to during his three grand-jury appearances in the case. "A fair reading of the e-mail makes clear that the information conveyed was not part of an organized effort to disclose Plame's identity, but was an effort to discourage Time from publishing things that turned out to be false," the source said, referring to claims in circulation at the time that Cheney and high-level CIA officials arranged for Wilson's trip to Africa.

Fitzgerald is known as a tenacious, thorough prosecutor. He refused to comment, and it is not clear whether he is pursuing evidence that will result in indictments, or just tying up loose ends in a messy case. But the Cooper e-mail offers one new clue to the mystery of what Fitzgerald is probing—and provides a glimpse of what was unfolding at the highest levels as the administration defended a part of its case for going to war in Iraq.

© 2005 Newsweek, Inc.

From: Newsweek

Some are calling Rove's actions treason! I am not sure it rises to that level but he damn well ought to be fired immediately. Idiot son of an asshole is always ranting about accountability but accountability seems to stop at the doors of the white house. Even a republican ought to be able to see that point?!? But as usual they will bury this story..... This is far worse than Lewinskygate anyday!
 
There's no shock value here. Karl is a vindictive prick. Frankly, I'd be more surprised if he didn't supply the leak. He's almost an evil genius. Not quite evil enough, not quite smart enough. But he's trying.
 
See. I don;t think Rove committed a crime here. No covert agent status, no crime. However, I think he fucked up by telling a reporter what he apparently did. Fire him? No. Discipline him somehow? Probably. However, this ain't the real issue to me.

We still have a reporter from the Times sitting in the can for not revealing her source. It can't be Rove, because he's already released all reporters from secrecy. So, exactly who the fuck is she still protecting? That's the question I'd like answered.
 
HomeLAN said:
See. I don;t think Rove committed a crime here. No covert agent status, no crime. However, I think he fucked up by telling a reporter what he apparently did. Fire him? No. Discipline him somehow? Probably. However, this ain't the real issue to me.

We still have a reporter from the Times sitting in the can for not revealing her source. It can't be Rove, because he's already released all reporters from secrecy. So, exactly who the fuck is she still protecting? That's the question I'd like answered.
I agree with you that Rove probably committed no crime. He is a self-important, mean-spirited jackass though, and I think the conservatives in general are making a mistake by lining up behind him. Re the reporter, I wonder if she isn't just building up publicity for the upcoming tell all best-seller.
 
Rove probably committed no crime

Quote the whole thing or not at all. I don't appreciate being edited to further your agenda. I wouldn't do it to you, I don't expect to have it done to me, okay?
 
Ya mean aboot you tryin' to weasel on the obvious fact that the Rovester din' do nuthin' wrong
or that you were 'supposedly' mis-quoted?
I don miss nuthin’
 
Winky said:
Ya mean aboot you tryin' to weasel on the obvious fact that the Rovester din' do nuthin' wrong
or that you were 'supposedly' mis-quoted?
I don miss nuthin’

*sigh* Zip-zoom...

The point was that it's a bad precedent to let someone misquote you at any time. History shows that the misquote is much more likely to be remembered than the actual quote. The simple fact is that no evidence of a crime has yet been presented (IMO). This in no way implies that such will not subsequently come to light ("the Rovester din' do nuthin' wrong" jumps to a possibly unwarranted conclusion). This is very much different from what you tried to say I said. Please don't do it anymore. Either quote the entire phrase or don't quote at all. Much better (again, IMO) to, "Nip it, Andy, Nip it in the bud!"

Again, sorry it was so obscure. It didn't seem that way to me.
 
markjs said:
Some are calling Rove's actions treason! I am not sure it rises to that level but he damn well ought to be fired immediately. Idiot son of an asshole is always ranting about accountability but accountability seems to stop at the doors of the white house. Even a republican ought to be able to see that point?!? But as usual they will bury this story..... This is far worse than Lewinskygate anyday!

Is it, really? You think this is far waorse than hiding papers from the 9-11 commission? More damaging than lying to a federal grand jury? Looks like somebody needs to reaquaint themselves with Sandy Berger.
 
Back
Top