Quote:
Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
The more and more that comes out, the more it becomes evident that (as Sebby so excellently put) that Rove was, if anything, a middleman, who told Novak (when questioned by Novak) that he also heard Plame worked for the CIA, and who told Cooper, when solicited by Cooper, that he may want to hold off on the Wilson lies, as his wife at the CIA (note - he didnt say covert agent, secret-agent woman, Spies-R-Us, 00Plame) was involved in the selection of Wilson.
|
Yet Rove's, and the WH's, immediate reaction was to declare loudly from the mountaintops that they didn't know anything about it. And from the more and more that comes out, that explanation appears to be shit.
"Look -- Vanity Fair!"
Yes. He's a bad, bad man. And should be punished. And was. Though not stringently enough in the eyes of some, even in the absence of dead bodies.
Quote:
|
Alleged is the key word. While all the Dems are calling for Rove's head, I'm waiting for any evidence of the security breach. She wasn't covered by the Act, as the evidence shows she was desk analyst for 6 years prior. It was common knowledge in DC she worked for the CIA (if not her role). She's still working there.
|
Recall, NotBob's original question posited that even if Rove's done nothing illegal, was this conduct troublesome. My point, similarly, is fine with positing that it's only alleged that he violated the law. Regardless, is this acceptable conduct?
Your response - there and here -- is, far as I can tell, either (a) hey - no harm, no foul, or (b) c'mon,
everyone knew that she was CIA! Shit, I bet she did the photo shoot before the Novak article!
