Offering constructive criticism to the social cripples in our midst since early 2005.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by taxwonk
So, you argument here is that two wrongs do make a right?

(PI)

I'm still wondering how Rove's comment was a "wrong."

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
I've heard that 26 of his ex-secretaries and summer associates have died mysteriously.

Wait. Penske's man-hands secretary is the junior Senator from New York?

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by bilmore


"So let's review - Wilson lied about how he got to Niger, he lied about seeing a report that didn't even exist at the time, he lied about the conclusions of his own report(!), he lied about what the administration had been told, and his wife, Valerie Plame, specifically sent him on a mission to intentionally debunk a claim, not to find facts or perform inspections. I'd say the WaPo's conclusion is pretty sound on this one.

I still say 99% of the debunking can be done without specific reference to his wife.

I do concede, however, it helps Rove's claim, if he needs to make it, that the disclosure was inadvertent --he was trying to paint a larger picture, and slipped in some insider knowledge.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by bilmore
I'm still wondering how Rove's comment was a "wrong."

Be patient. Fitzpatrick will make all that clear in his indictment.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by bilmore
I'm still wondering how Rove's comment was a "wrong."

We don't make public many things about the CIA--budget, technology, operations, and the name of agents. Why did Rove make her name public? There are plenty of things that aren't strictly against the law. Doesn't mean they're not "wrong."

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
We don't make public many things about the CIA--budget, technology, operations, and the name of agents. Why did Rove make her name public? There are plenty of things that aren't strictly against the law. Doesn't mean they're not "wrong."

But, if he didn't say "quote me on this" - if he merely said, to a reporter working on a story, that "your story may be balls up - here's one major reason to doubt what you're hearing" - and it's common knowledge amongst the reportarial set that she is what she is - did he make anything public?

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by bilmore
- and it's common knowledge amongst the reportarial set that she is what she is

if this is so, why does the story have any legs at all? And, if so, why not just come right out and say "this story was backed by an agent at CIA-Valerie Plame-who has an agenda. She's been, and continues to be, working against the admin." If it were common knowledge she was out, and working at CIA, then why all the fuss when it becaome public? What was the value of Novak's scoop? Presumably if it were public, any reporter worth his soup could have made the connection, and said "yeah, Wilson, we know his wife got him the boondoggle."

[Not Bob]

Originally posted by bilmore
I'm still wondering how Rove's comment was a "wrong."

Ah, bilmore, it ain't always the crime, sometimes it's the cover-up. Tough to backtrack from these (via slate) http://www.slate.com/id/2122393/:

• Q On the Robert Novak-Joseph Wilson situation, Novak reported earlier this year -- quoting -- "anonymous government sources" telling him that Wilson's wife was a CIA operative. Now, this is apparently a federal offense, to burn the cover a CIA operative. Wilson now believes that the person who did this was Karl Rove. He's quoted from a speech last month as saying, "At the end of the day, it's of keen interest to me to see whether or not we can get Karl Rove frog-marched out of the White House in handcuffs." Did Karl Rove tell that --
  
  MR. McCLELLAN: I haven't heard that. That's just totally ridiculous. But we've already addressed this issue. If I could find out who anonymous people were, I would. I just said, it's totally ridiculous.
  
  Q But did Karl Rove do it?
  
  MR. McCLELLAN: I said, it's totally ridiculous.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...0030916-6.html

• White House press secretary Scott McClellan said yesterday that he knows of no leaks about Wilson's wife. "That is not the way this White House operates, and no one would be authorized to do such a thing," McClellan said. "I don't have any information beyond an anonymous source in a media report to suggest there is anything to this. If someone has information of this nature, then he or she should report it to the Department of Justice."
  
  McClellan, who Rove had speak for him, said of Wilson's comments: "It is a ridiculous suggestion, and it is simply not true." McClellan was asked about Wilson's charge at a White House briefing Sept. 16 and said the accusation is "totally ridiculous."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp...&notFound=true

[SlaveNoMore]

Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
if this is so, why does the story have any legs at all?

Cooper and Miller. Otherwise, it shouldn't.

And, if so, why not just come right out and say "this story was backed by an agent at CIA-Valerie Plame-who has an agenda. She's been, and continues to be, working against the admin."

Well, (i) that specifically names her by name and (ii) leaves out the more important H/W angle

If it were common knowledge she was out, and working at CIA, then why all the fuss when it becaome public?

Because the talk shows gave Joe "Let me tell you about a report I never saw" Wilson a platform to rant and rave.

What was the value of Novak's scoop?

Was it even a scoop? He tossed of her name in his column in a very off-hand way.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally posted by Not Bob
Ah, bilmore, it ain't always the crime, sometimes it's the cover-up. Tough to backtrack from these (via slate) http://www.slate.com/id/2122393/:

• Q On the Robert Novak-Joseph Wilson situation, Novak reported earlier this year -- quoting -- "anonymous government sources" telling him that Wilson's wife was a CIA operative. Now, this is apparently a federal offense, to burn the cover a CIA operative. Wilson now believes that the person who did this was Karl Rove. He's quoted from a speech last month as saying, "At the end of the day, it's of keen interest to me to see whether or not we can get Karl Rove frog-marched out of the White House in handcuffs." Did Karl Rove tell that --
  
  MR. McCLELLAN: I haven't heard that. That's just totally ridiculous. But we've already addressed this issue. If I could find out who anonymous people were, I would. I just said, it's totally ridiculous.
  
  Q But did Karl Rove do it?
  
  MR. McCLELLAN: I said, it's totally ridiculous.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...0030916-6.html

• White House press secretary Scott McClellan said yesterday that he knows of no leaks about Wilson's wife. "That is not the way this White House operates, and no one would be authorized to do such a thing," McClellan said. "I don't have any information beyond an anonymous source in a media report to suggest there is anything to this. If someone has information of this nature, then he or she should report it to the Department of Justice."
  
  McClellan, who Rove had speak for him, said of Wilson's comments: "It is a ridiculous suggestion, and it is simply not true." McClellan was asked about Wilson's charge at a White House briefing Sept. 16 and said the accusation is "totally ridiculous."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp...&notFound=true

Yeah, but McClellan wasn't under oath, so it doesn't count.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
Cooper and Miller. Otherwise, it shouldn't.

that's why the story has play--but the investigation is ongoing, and the pressure to name a counsel arose without them

Well, (i) that specifically names her by name and (ii) leaves out the more important H/W angle

right, she could be named if it was common knowledge. But it wasn't which is why there's an issue at all. Why is the husband/wife issue matter at all? Say that they were just polticially aligned? Wilson's trip was backed by a sympathetic agent within CIA? There are many ways around specifically identifying her and still discrediting the report, all that come a lot less close to breaking the law

Because the talk shows gave Joe "Let me tell you about a report I never saw" Wilson a platform to rant and rave.

as I said, it wasn't common knowledge

Was it even a scoop? He tossed of her name in his column in a very off-hand way.

Apparently Novak, like Rove, isn't very familiar with the gravity of disclosing an agent's name. That, or he assumed no one would ever disclose a covert agent's name, so having been told it it must not be that big a deal. Obviously Rove picked the right dupe.

[Gattigap]

Originally posted by Not Bob
Ah, bilmore, it ain't always the crime, sometimes it's the cover-up. Tough to backtrack from these (via slate) http://www.slate.com/id/2122393/:

What's more, our man in the WH Scott McClellan is taking it in the nads today in the press briefing about the matter. When the press essentially calls you a liar right to your face at a press conference, I'd say the media has found something of a backbone, at least for a day.

• QUESTION: Scott, this is ridiculous. The notion that you’re going to stand before us, after having commented with that level of detail, and tell people watching this that somehow you’ve decided not to talk.
  
  You’ve got a public record out there. Do you stand by your remarks from that podium or not?
  
  ...
  
  MCCLELLAN: If you’ll let me finish.
  
  QUESTION: No, you’re not finishing. You’re not saying anything.
  
  You stood at that podium and said that Karl Rove was not involved. And now we find out that he spoke about Joseph Wilson’s wife. So don’t you owe the American public a fuller explanation. Was he involved or was he not? Because contrary to what you told the American people, he did indeed talk about his wife, didn’t he?

Where, oh where are the strong arms and soothing questions of Jeff Gannon when we truly need him?

Be strong, Scott. Red Nation is praying for you.

Gattigap

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Not Bob
Ah, bilmore, it ain't always the crime, sometimes it's the cover-up. Tough to backtrack from these (via slate) http://www.slate.com/id/2122393/:

• Q On the Robert Novak-Joseph Wilson situation, Novak reported earlier this year -- quoting -- "anonymous government sources" telling him that Wilson's wife was a CIA operative. Now, this is apparently a federal offense, to burn the cover a CIA operative. Wilson now believes that the person who did this was Karl Rove. He's quoted from a speech last month as saying, "At the end of the day, it's of keen interest to me to see whether or not we can get Karl Rove frog-marched out of the White House in handcuffs." Did Karl Rove tell that --
  
  MR. McCLELLAN: I haven't heard that. That's just totally ridiculous. But we've already addressed this issue. If I could find out who anonymous people were, I would. I just said, it's totally ridiculous.
  
  Q But did Karl Rove do it?
  
  MR. McCLELLAN: I said, it's totally ridiculous.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...0030916-6.html

• White House press secretary Scott McClellan said yesterday that he knows of no leaks about Wilson's wife. "That is not the way this White House operates, and no one would be authorized to do such a thing," McClellan said. "I don't have any information beyond an anonymous source in a media report to suggest there is anything to this. If someone has information of this nature, then he or she should report it to the Department of Justice."
  
  McClellan, who Rove had speak for him, said of Wilson's comments: "It is a ridiculous suggestion, and it is simply not true." McClellan was asked about Wilson's charge at a White House briefing Sept. 16 and said the accusation is "totally ridiculous."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp...&notFound=true

Why aren't you this hard on John Basedow?



I think I know why.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Obviously Rove picked the right dupe.

I love the sound of helicopters in the morning. Sounds like . . . victory.

Why this anti-Bush hack got selected to make an anti-Bush whitewash out of lies and more lies is important. He lied about virtually everything, and it appears that this quasi-undercover agent wife (who had been publicly listed as far back as 2001 as being in the CIA) who had a virulently anti-Bush agenda, used her influence to get him selected. Was that a proper use of authority and power for someone who supposedly worked for Bush - to work even harder to undermine him? Seems to me that, in making such an effort, in using her work powers, she puts herself out there. I don't think you can use your "undercover" status as a sword. I think she tried, and it didn't work. Poor babe.

Like NotBob says, the whitewash is just . . . stoopid. It shoulda been cleared up a while ago. But the underlying saga primarily exists so that some people can redirect attention away from the guy who was their hero, but who turned out to be a lying goat. Proof of their effectiveness can be found in the number of people who can remember the original yellowcake stories, but don't remember that Wilson's stories turned out to be all lies.

[Bad_Rich_Chic]

Originally posted by Penske
Does that (excluding the skirt, the shaved legs and the pedicure) make me a pantywaist?

No, but this does:

Originally posted by Bad_Rich_Chic
Dunno. Were you looking at [the Playboy centerfold's] face?

Penske
Yes.

BR(What kind of man lets his wife fill out forms, anyway? Let her do that shit and next she'll think she's competent to do anything she likes)C