Will Bush Fire Karl Rove?
Would the Kermit Puppet fire the hand? 
Sunday, July 17, 2005
Support These Good Causes!
Support Spocko's Brain! Donations will be used to keep the site on the air and to help pay out-of-pocket case expenses in any future litigation with ABC/Disney. Spocko's United Reserves Against Killing of Journalists and Liberals EFF is providing me free legal representation in the ABC matter. Please consider supporting them!" Electronic Frontier Foundation
Donate to the Committee to Protect Journalists
NOLA bloggers have got it going on!
Contributors
Previous Posts
- Evil Genius? Good Christian? Karl Rove
- I Respond to a Wingnut: What kind of twisted reven...
- When Stern Parents Treaten
- Ben Stein you Dick!
- Please Vote in this Meaningless Poll
- OUCH! What hit me?
- The Wisdom of Children
- Counting the dead. 1742 or 6210?
- It's not always fun being right
- The Mad Cow is BACK! But Where is He FROM?
6 Comments:
I give it a 33% chance at this time. Facts to keep in mind are:
1. Wilson is a proven liar. (from his own book, the senate intel comittee and the Butler commission)
2. Novak has agreed to testify and the prosecutor is not looking at Rove.
3. The only people accusing Rove of anything are the media and the democrats.
The only reason Rove would be fired is if Bush thought it would somehow appease the democrats. Bush (for some reason) thinks sometimes that this is possible which is why I give it the 1-3 chance.
This investigation was begun because the leak was real, and the need to find out who the culprits are is legitimate.
A CIA operative was 'outed', possibly to pay back her husband, who has refuting claims the Bush administration was making at the time (about yellow cake uranium).
Was it just political payback? Or could it also have been a message to others in the intelligence community? A message that was meant to convey a threat - that no one was safe from being put in jeapardy if they didn't toe the 'WMDs in Iraq' line that was in play then?
This leak *is* a big deal.
There's a lot of clouding of the water, trying to make the person 'outed' and her husband into the villains. This is sad, and inappropriate. This tool appears to be frequently employed by this administration - blame the victim.
Here are a series of articles written by a former CIA officer and counter-terrorism expert that explain quite nicely just what the ramifications were for revealing Joe Wilson's wife's name.
http://www.tpmcafe.com/author/ljohnson
Also, just because Rove isn't a 'target' of the investigation, doesn't mean that, if evidence is uncovered which implicates him, he can't become the 'subject' of an investigation.
The information Matt Cooper turned over does implicate Rove. Evidently Lewis Libbey, V.P. Cheney's Chief of Staff, has also been implicated (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0507180216jul18,1,2768571.story?coll=chi-newsnationworld-hed).
This kind of behavior is unacceptable. It's doubly unacceptable that this violation of national security appears to have been done purely out of malice.
This isn't about appeasing Democrats. You should be just as outraged, too.
Why does it matter? Here are a couple of good articles on why this *is* such a big deal:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8598301/site/newsweek/
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/chi-0507180155jul18,1,6875475.column?page=1&coll=chi-news-hed
Sadly, though, I have to agree with your assessment. If found guilty, will Bush let Rove go? I find it highly unlikely. After all, look at the quagmire Iraq has become, and yet Donald Rumsfeld's still around.
The question was will Bush fire Karl Rove. I don;t think that's at all likely since, thus far, not one shred of evidence has been unearthed. If some does come to light, it would be a shock to the press ( since their Amicus brief said they didn't see any crime- regardless of who committed it).
I did think the leak was a big deal, well until I heard on CNN that Novak testified before he published the story he called the CIA and they didn't care. All they said was that she wouldn't be getting any overseas assignments
that's my comment above--
Jim
He might have to fire the hand if his owners tell him to do so to maintain appearances.
If he does, look for Bu$h's brain to get immediately hired by some corporation owned by the Carlyle Group and contracting advice to the Codpiece-in-Chief.
Or maybe they'll just do it like Team America, with strings.
someone pointed out the other day how Bush is moving the bar to what is a fireable offense. Wow! Way to have a high standard!
It is interesting to see what talking points went out and how hard they pushed them using standard tactics i.e. Muddy the wather, attack, attack, parse words
"It depends on what your defination of covert is"
Frankly it pisses me off that I feel the need to chase this shit down. Thank you Sarah for your reply, I just wasn't in the mode to answer Jim, but I do appreciate his comment because it shows what struck him as "facts"
And regarding number 3 what does that have do do with anything? Frankly the Republican's SHOULD want to get to the bottom of this. And it could have been answered and dealt with two years ago. This has drug on because they wanted it to.
Who was the injured party her? Wilson, Plame and the country. It was a retailatory act for purely political reasons and there might be others who take the blame (Ari, Libby) who the president sees as more expendable. I expect Ari to fall on his sword since he isnt' in this day to day anymore.
Post a Comment
<< Home