http://www.mediainfo.com/eandp/news/art ... 1000972839<
>
<
>
Quote:<
>
NEW YORK Now that Time Inc. has turned over documents to federal court, presumably revealing who its reporter, Matt Cooper, identified as his source in the Valerie Plame/CIA case, speculation runs rampant on the name of that source, and what might happen to him or her. Friday night, on the syndicated McLaughlin Group political talk show, Lawrence O'Donnell, senior MSNBC political analyst, claimed to know that name--and it is, according to him, top White House mastermind Karl Rove.<
>
<
>
Today, O'Donnell went further, writing a
ief entry at the Huffington Post blog:<
>
<
>
"I revealed in yesterday's taping of the McLaughlin Group that Time magazine's e-mails will reveal that Karl Rove was Matt Cooper's source. I have known this for months but didn't want to say it at a time that would risk me getting dragged into the grand jury.<
>
<
>
"McLaughlin is seen in some markets on Friday night, so some websites have picked it up, including Drudge, but I don't expect it to have much impact because McLaughlin is not considered a news show and it will be pre-empted in the big markets on Sunday because of tennis.<
>
<
>
"Since I revealed the big scoop, I have had it reconfirmed by yet another highly authoritative source. Too many people know this. It should
eak wide open this week. I know Newsweek is working on an 'It's Rove!' story and will probably
eak it tomorrow."<
>
<
>
One of my favorite blogs take on it.<
>
<
>
With the Bolton nomination, the SCOTUS appointment, and now a top White House official may be charged for a federal crime, it should prove to be an interesting summer.<
>
<
>
Is there any doubt that Rove's recent comments about liberals was the first shot in this coming battle? <i></i>

Rove as a traitor. Gotta love that. <i></i>

I hope they fucking slam him for that shit. Anyone who outs a CIA agent for petty, vindictive bullshit needs to spend as much time as possible behind bars. Lord Ssoth<
>
<
>
Their citizens (all of them counted as such) glorified the mythology of rights...<
>
and lost track of their duties. No nation, so constituted, can survive.<i></i>

_________________

Treason is still a capitol offense, right?<
>
<
>
If true, he blatently put her life and the lives of who knows how many other CIA operatives in danger, not to mention how badly this could have (or did, we'll never know) hurt national security.<
>
<
>
I'm not one to throw the death penatly around lightly, but damn if I'm not tempted to say it would be a good idea here.<
>
<
>
The cynic in me expects a presidental pardon though. ---------------------------------<
>
Burog Warrior of Oryx<i></i>

Since it's slowly playing out to possibly be true:<
>
<
>
http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/07/0...index.html<
>
<
>
I would expect a lot of the deaf/blind/dumb conservatives around here to start telling you why Clinton's blowjob is so much worse than anything this administration has done.<
>
<
>
<i></i>

I doubt that, Rove should be hung. <i></i>

If this ends up being true, I'd say the fact that Time set on this information for 2 years through a presidential election, should be enough to end the myth of liberal media bias.
<i></i>

Quote:top White House official may be charged for a federal crime, it should prove to be an interesting summer.<
>
They are all gonna be tried, convicted and stripper of their positions. MUWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.<
>
<
>
Riiiiiight.<
>
<
>
<i></i>

This shit blows Watergate right out of the water. Seriously.<
>
<
>
Tapping phones...versus....releasing the names of CIA covert ops, endangering lives for political agenda.<
>
<
>
Hmmm. <
>
<
>
(Yes, yes, I know the bigger scandal of Watergate was the coverup. But let's just see how deep the rabbit hole goes, shall we?)
<
>
Keep my head from exploding?... You can help!
<i></i>

I wouldn't want it to happen, and I don't believe in the death penalty, but damn... treason being a capitol offense and all, I can't think of a more fitting punishment for a conservative that believes in the death penalty and his pro-war stances as hardline as Mr. Rove. <i></i>

Question, how would it be treason? Releasing the name of the CIA agent is hardly an act of war against the US, and it doesn't give aid or comfort to the enemy.<
>
<
>
Not to mention, that he'd never actually be convicted of it unless he either confesses or that he had told the name to two who could act as witnesses.<
>
<
>
http://www.lectlaw.com/def2/t103.htm<
>
<
>
Basing it on that, I have no idea how accurate that is or how outdated. <i></i>

It's not treason. <
>
<
>
The release of the name was not done to hurt the US. it was done to specifically target some people, but it wasn't done to hurt the United States. <
>
<
>
So, no treason. If he (or whoever leaked it since I don't think we have 'official' confirmation yet) had leaked it to a foreign government, rather than the press...then we could be taking about potential treason. (And even though foreign govts got the information through the press, that wasn't the specific intent).<
>
<
>
Anyhoo regarding the death penalty, we're not talking about a situation where anyone died. If we were, then
inging up the death penalty might be appropriate. Very long prison terms would be more appropriate.<
>
<
>
Maybe Gitmo has some openings.
<
>
Keep my head from exploding?... You can help!
<i></i>

Quote:<
>
Question, how would it be treason?<
>
<
>
<
>
The traitor/treason thing came about from George H. W. Bush's speech here:<
>
<
>
http://www.cia.gov/cia/public_af...42699.html<
>
<
>
Where he made the following remark:<
>
<
>
Quote:<
>
Even though I'm a tranquil guy now at this stage of my life, I have nothing but contempt and anger for those who betray the trust by exposing the name of our sources. They are, in my view, the most insidious of traitors.<
>
<
>
<
>
We're just more than happy to agree with him in labeling Rove a traitor, should this prove to be true, even if it's not entirely accurate usage of the word "Traitor". <i></i>

Quote:We're just more than happy to agree with him in labeling Rove a traitor, should this prove to be true, even if it's not entirely accurate usage of the word "Traitor".Ah ok, didn't know if people were being serious when they said it or not, so that explains it.<
>
<
>
Either way, he needs to fry (figuratively speaking) for that shit. <i></i>

Don't start licking your chops just yet. Rove is not an idiot. Even under the influence of crack-cocaine I don't see Rove leaving any kind of trail, paper or electronic while giving up the name of an undercover CIA operative. So far, we know that Rove was on the phone a couple of times to these jokers. Might have been nothing more than a confirm/deny situation. <i></i>

Quote:It's not treason. <
>
<
>
The release of the name was not done to hurt the US. it was done to specifically target some people, but it wasn't done to hurt the United States. <
>
<
>
So, no treason. If he (or whoever leaked it since I don't think we have 'official' confirmation yet) had leaked it to a foreign government, rather than the press...then we could be taking about potential treason. (And even though foreign govts got the information through the press, that wasn't the specific intent).<
>
<
>
Anyhoo regarding the death penalty, we're not talking about a situation where anyone died. If we were, then
inging up the death penalty might be appropriate. Very long prison terms would be more appropriate.<
>
<
>
Maybe Gitmo has some openings.While it may not be treason (and that's an arguable point), it could certainly be counted as espionage. Giving away classified government information, even if it's not to another government, is espionage. And it's a capital offense, regardless whether anyone was killed or not. Lord Ssoth<
>
<
>
Their citizens (all of them counted as such) glorified the mythology of rights...<
>
and lost track of their duties. No nation, so constituted, can survive.<i></i>

_________________

He had to have given the information to another country for it to be espionage as far as I know. <i></i>

Is there any reason why this is so important that none of the major news networks even mention it on their websites? MSNBC/FoxNews/CNN etc.<
>
<
>
<
>
<i></i>

And don't start digging through Page 5's of their websites. You people talk about treason, and hanging etc and this shit isn't even front page news?! <
>
<i></i>

Media bias?<
>
<
>
Oh wait, that's supposed to be liberal bias. Oops! ---------------------------------<
>
Burog Warrior of Oryx<i></i>

Just in case, Ark.<
>
<
>
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8445.../newsweek/<
>
<
>
Dunno if it's front page news, but I don't see why the fuck that would matter unless you're trying to spin media bias a certain way. ---------------------------------<
>
Burog Warrior of Oryx<i></i>

What are you talking about?!<
>
<
>
NO ONE is showing it front page. Not Liberal/Conservative/Pink/Yellow etc etc etc. I wasn't trying to spin any bias whatsoever, I was wondering why NEWS networks aren't covering it and you fucking people are calling for execution for treason. But, then again, the Lanys community is the experts! <
>
<i></i>

See, I feel politicians and other government officials should be held to higher standards and examples be made out of them when they are found to be guilty. Whether it's full blown espionage, using drugs (not past usage), to knowingly lieing under oath. Whatever a normal citizen would recieve as a punishment for the same offense any politician/government official should be subjected to at least double the sentence, stripped of any immunity, stripped of position, and spend the rest of their life in jail and/or death sentence. <
>
<
>
I realize he hasn't been charged with anything yet, and may still end up walking away from this scratch-free. So until proven guilty I suppose he should be presumed innocent considering these are the standards anyone else under the same conditions would be held to. But if found to be guilty of this, he should fry. Saying this, it does not excuse Clinton of his crime of knowingly lieing under oath and being in contempt of court (especially considering he knows all about law being he was once a fucking lawyer). He should of fried too as far as I'm concerned, but he may have set a new standard of how we deal with politians which wasn't best for a Country filled with corrupt politians/government officials. This also isn't an attempt to distract what's going on here with what Ole' Bubba did, anyone with a half of
ain-cell left can look and see two huge differences. One being Clintons' "crime" was far less damaging to our Country (which btw wasn't the blow-job itself, trying to lie about it under oath is a punishable offense however) vs spilling top secret information by revealing the indentity of a CIA agent can make him be considered a traitor, is a no
ainer of which is worse. While Rove is still considered innocent, Clinton was proven guilty, neither are excusable offenses in my book though.<
>
<
>
Setting examples may be just what this country needs, it's unfortunate it needs to be done but it needs to be done at some time or it will only get worse.<
>
<
>
Quote:Is there any reason why this is so important that none of the major news networks even mention it on their websites? MSNBC/FoxNews/CNN etc.<
>
He hasn't been charged yet & still under investigation, is my guess. <i></i>

Quote:He hasn't been charged yet & still under investigation, is my guess. <
>
Somehow I doubt this. This has never mattered in the past with news organizations and I doubt it matters now. <
>
<i></i>

As far as the OMGOMG WHY IS IT NOT BEING COVERED!!111<
>
<
>
It's not exactly new news...<
>
<
>
(From 2003)<
>
<
>
slate.msn.com/id/2088471/<
>
<
>
Rove's name was being tossed around more than 2 years ago. While some blogging sites claim they have confirmation, none of the major news outlets have confirmation, though it's rumored Newsweek has confirmation and is going to press with it.
<
>
Keep my head from exploding?... You can help!
<i></i>

Quote:OMGOMG WHY IS IT NOT BEING COVERED!!111No, actually I posted it as a general question. So Blogs are the sources here, then? Awesome! <
>
<i></i>

It does if they're all in the neocon's pockets, HAHA!<
>
<
>
Seriously though, either your google skills are weak, or you're not hearing the conservative press fighting back, probably because they're waiting to hear how to fight back.<
>
<
>
This was from the first 10 results on google from "Karl Rove" "Plame Leak".<
>
<
>
http://www.guardian.co.uk/intern...95,00.html<
>
hcgtv.com/item/1192<
>
http://www.newshounds.us/2005/07...e_leak.php<
>
uspolitics.about.com/b/a/182409.htm<
>
en.wikinews.org/wiki/Talk...Plame_leak<
>
http://www.dailykos.com/story/20...193723/786<
>
<
>
It wouldn't surprise me at all if the conservative media ignores this, hoping it just goes away. ---------------------------------<
>
Burog Warrior of Oryx<i></i>

Who?<
>
Who?<
>
Who?<
>
Who?<
>
Who?<
>
Who?<
>
Quote:It wouldn't surprise me at all if the conservative media ignores this, hoping it just goes away. <
>
Ahh. Like NBC/CBS/CNN/ABC? <
>
<i></i>

It was on CNN over the weekend. <i></i>

http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/07/0...index.html<
>
<
>
No one knows just yet what the documents say, which is why it isn't quite yet news. The second the Time information becomes public, it will be plastered everywhere. <i></i>

Quote:<
>
NO ONE is showing it front page. Not Liberal/Conservative/Pink/Yellow<
>
<
>
Sorry to confuse you. I was responding to this statement. ---------------------------------<
>
Burog Warrior of Oryx<i></i>

You're so cute sometimes Ark <i></i>

Quote:Somehow I doubt this. This has never mattered in the past with news organizations and I doubt it matters now. <
>
<
>
Then my second guess is;<
>
<
>
They are looking into it further to see if anyone else besides Rove can be charged. They sure would feel dumb if they got Rove but missed their chance of taking Bush out of office. Rove's guilt won't do anything to Bush now that he's already won, and they're well aware of this. <i></i>

Quote:You're so cute sometimes Ark <
>
Cure like a puppy or cute like Maria Sharapova? <
>
<i></i>

Because it's not official yet. If you look at the news article linked on the first page, it's being said by an analyst that it's Rove. That hasn't officially been announced yet by Time et al. I think I read the timeline for that as 1 week from document turn in on one of the articles? Anyways, once it's official, it will be all over the news networks, who the source is, right now the whisper campaign is loud enough it looks like the analyst was correct.
<i></i>

I use Google News a lot and its been headlines in many publications now for weeks, including NY Times, Washington Post, and CNN. However the story is progressing as information is let out - right now there's a concentration on the journalists and being in contempt of court, Time for releasing the docs, and the possibility of the journalists serving jailtime - once the source is confirmed, then it will move on to Mr. Rove, or whomever it ends up being.<
>
<
>
--Dar <
>
<
>
"This is the flag of the future, but it does not dishonour the past."<i></i>

Quote:Cure like a puppy or cute like Maria Sharapova?<
>
<
>
Cute like one of those small dogs that sit in the window and yip yip yip! at everyone that walks by. <i></i>

Meow. <
>
<i></i>

Instead of trolling Ark, why not participate? I know your viewpoint isn't always the most popular one around here, but I think it's always more fun to argue the points that not everyone agrees with. <
>
<
>
The conservative viewpoint on the leak of the CIA name, was very strongly worded. They had condemnation for whoever did it, along with strong denials (well more or less, depended on who was interviewed). It's been long rumored that it's Rove.<
>
<
>
What would your opinion be regardless of who it is? And would your opinion change if it turned out to be a liberal source trying to smear the Bush administration? Would it change if it turns out to be (and in all likelyhood it will be) Karl Rove?<
>
<
>
And what opinion do you have for those who knew it was Karl Rove, either before he did it (and knew he was going to do it and why) or after he did it (and they didn't step up about it).<
>
<
>
For that matter, I'm curious what anyone thinks regarding all that.
<
>
Keep my head from exploding?... You can help!
<i></i>

I wouldn't be at all surprised if it's just another one of Rove's manipulations. - Leo<i></i>

It's all speculation now, but no matter who it was, releasing the name of a CIA informant is absolutely ing. If it was Rove alone, he should get whatever the maximum sentence is in this case. If he had help, it should trickle up or down the chain accordingly.<
>
<
>
I was not trolling, I was simply pointing out that people here are calling for heads to roll in the administration, and we don't even know yet who it was. <
>
<
>
I am curious as to how this all pans out though. <
>
<i></i>

Does anyone remember that Rove was let go from Bush Sr's team in 1992 because he leaked information to <GASP> Robert Novak?<
>
<
>
lolz! - joxur<i></i>

Most of us where saying 'if' Ark. I know it's fun to play the lone conservative defender agains the liberal hordes, but at least read the thread fully, heh. ---------------------------------<
>
Burog Warrior of Oryx<i></i>

Quote:Most of us where saying 'if' Ark. I know it's fun to play the lone conservative defender agains the liberal hordes, but at least read the thread fully, heh. <
>
Oh, really?<
>
Quote:Rove as a traitor. Gotta love that.<
>
Quote:I hope they fucking slam him for that shit. Anyone who outs a CIA agent for petty, vindictive bullshit needs to spend as much time as possible behind bars. <
>
Quote:I would expect a lot of the deaf/blind/dumb conservatives around here to start telling you why Clinton's blowjob is so much worse than anything this administration has done.<
>
Quote:I doubt that, Rove should be hung. <
>
<
>
As long as we're on the same page that most of you make him innocent until proven guilty.<
>
<
>
/sarcasm off<
>
<
>
<i></i>

Quote:If it was Rove alone, he should get whatever the maximum sentence is in this case. If he had help, it should trickle up or down the chain accordingly.In every other organizational hierarchy, people at the top generally share some of the blame for organizational failings. But not for Bush, I see. He's got a scapegoat for every occasion.<
>
<
>
I'm sure that Rove, if he did do it, will take the fall, and I seriously doubt it will effect Bush at all. Even people who have taken the blame for major administration errors (hi Rummy) never got the axe. Given that it was Rove who got Bush elected, I wonder how much Bush will do to protect him. He owes him a lot.<
>
<
>
If Rove did it. - joxur<i></i>

4 replies compared to what, 10? Where folks said if?<
>
<
>
Fuck you're paranoid. ---------------------------------<
>
Burog Warrior of Oryx<i></i>

Quote:I wonder how much Bush will do to protect him.<
>
Probably as much as any administration would do to protect their own. IF it was him, of course. <
>
<
>
Saying something like this, if true and not tied in directly with The President, will cause Bush to be removed from office, is preposterous. If I steal something from my company, my boss doesn't get fired. I know it's 10000x the scale of that, but hierarchy doesn't always take the fall. <
>
<i></i>

Quote:Lawrence O'Donnell, senior MSNBC political analyst, claimed to know that name--and it is, according to him, top White House mastermind Karl Rove.<
>
<
>
This clown is far from a reliable source. <i></i>

Duffy, I said people want to castrate him before they have the whole story not everyone.<
>
<
>
How does that make me any more paranoid than it makes them naive? <
>
<i></i>

Quote:If I steal something from my company, my boss doesn't get fired. I know it's 10000x the scale of that, but hierarchy doesn't always take the fall.Here are some examples for ya:<
>
<
>
fficial">www.google.com/search?q=c...S fficial<
>
<
>
There ya go, tons of examples of leaders of companies stepping down due to simple allegations and investigations, to say nothing of charges or actual convictions.<
>
<
>
But hey, corporations are different from our country. It's apples and oranges, surely. They have to replace the head of the company or stock and company value will plummet -- it's all based on a simple principle of having confidence in the direction the company is headed and that your leadership can take you there. Our country is different, eh? We don't give a fuck whether our leaders are telling us the truth, or they or their underlings are behaving in a legal manner.<
>
<
>
Comparing something like this to a low-level employee stealing funds is a bit different from the president of the united states' right-hand man putting a servicewoman in harm's way.<
>
<
>
This is all predicated on if it's true <
>
<
>
I guess I just like the idea of accounability. I realize I'm the minority on this feeling. I don't think Bush should get impeached over this (I can't imaigine something so wonderful actually happening), but there should be some accountability. /shrug - joxur<i></i>

Quote:If I steal something from my company, my boss doesn't get fired. I know it's 10000x the scale of that, but hierarchy doesn't always take the fall.<
>
<
>
That's a poor analogy though. A better analogy would be if your boss was being attacked by someone so you committed illegal acts which directly benefitted your boss...but your boss isn't aware of it, then he wouldn't take the fall. <
>
<
>
Except that proving what someone is or is not aware of, can be a bitch. It's a 'when did you stop beating your wife' question. So what you'd have to demonstrate is that he did know either before the fact, or at any time after the fact and tried to cover it up. (See: Watergate).<
>
<
>
Is it possible that Karl Rove could have done this without Pres. Bush's knowledge or permission? Yes. Is it possible that Pres. Bush has not become aware of it at any time after the fact? Yes, it's possible but it becomes more unlikely. <
>
<
>
Is it possible that Karl Rove has acted completely alone on this and no one knew? Yes, but very unlikely.<
>
<
>
Recall my rabbit hole references? Let's pull out the dirty trick bag, shall we?<
>
<
>
There's a ton of speculation that the GOP was behind "memogate", and that they released the documents that got Dan Rather in so much trouble. (Through Roger Stone, through Karl Rove). It's nothing more than speculation, though Roger Stone is well known for dirty tricks, back all the way to Nixon. And Karl Rove has a similar reputation.<
>
<
>
Anyone remember Jeff Gannon, male prostitute (and White House Coorrespondant)? His 'inside' at the White House has been long speculated to be Karl Rove.<
>
<
>
There's really rotten shit that's been going on, the question remains, is it limited to a few people in power who are abusing their power without knowledge or consent of the rest of the Bush Administration, or will this ride end much the same way Watergate ultimately ended? <
>
<
>
Dunno. This Administration should be called the Teflon Administration. They've dodged shit that boggles the mind. Heads will roll over the CIA leak, but I'd be surprised if the mud spatters too far. <
>
<
>
And if Karl Rove is confirmed to be the leak, I'd be surprised if he does time. It will be interesting, if nothing else, to see all this crap unfold. <
>
<
>

<
>
Keep my head from exploding?... You can help!
<i></i>

Where is CD when you need her? I know how much she adores Karl Rove. <
>
<i></i>

Honeymoon, unless she's back now
<i></i>

<
>
The best part in this thread so far was Arkayn working hard to prove the conservative bias of the media .<
>
<
>
<i></i>

_________________
Magic in Fribur's World

Quote:The best part in this thread so far was Arkayn working hard to prove the conservative bias of the media<
>
I thought the best part of this thread was you jumping in 2 days late acting like you belong. <
>
<i></i>

Says the man whose first post on the thread is over 48 hours after the thread was started. <i></i>

Reading comprehension is your friend, Ark. Try it some time. <
>
<
>
My first,
ief, post was me expressing amusement at the possibility of Rove as a traitor. Admittedly, in
ief postings, it's easy to read what you want into them (and you're quite good at irrationally latching onto slippery things to defend what you must realize on some level is indefensible as you get more and more desperate waving your pom poms around all by your lonesome), but if you put the three posts of mine in context, the meaning of my
ief post is made clear. Here, let me help you by pointing out what you willfully ignore in subsequent posts by me that are less
ief:<
>
<
>
Quote:<
>
Since it's slowly playing out to possibly be true:<
>
<
>
<
>
Quote:<
>
We're just more than happy to agree with him in labeling Rove a traitor, should this prove to be true<
>
<
>
<
>
HTH. HAND. <i></i>

If you aren't one of the people jumping to the conslusions I stated, why respond? Reading ccmpreheniosn is my friend? Read what I wrote.<
>
<
>
<
>
As far as over 48 hours after, I did have prior engagements this holiday weekend, and I am sure Fribur did too, but for someone who claims to not re-post everytime I do, he sure does a damn good job of it. Is trying to call me out really going to be your first post, Fribur, or do you have something informative to add? OMGZLOLZ!!!ONE!!!11111ELEVEN! Arkayn is calling Liberal Media bias LOLZOLZOLZOLZ!!!1111<
>
Keep trying to convince yourself otherwise. Keep in mind,
o, I didn't make up the whole "liberal media bias" thing. I am just your friendly reminder. Consider me a public servant.<
>
<
>
<i></i>

Quote:<
>
If you aren't one of the people jumping to the conslusions I stated, why respond?<
>
<
>
<
>
Because 2 of your 4 quotes are from my 3 posts where you willfully ignore the "possibly" and "if" statements. Once again, reading comprehension is your friend.<
>
<
>
You're really losing it, Ark. Your pom poms are sagging a bit. Ever wonder why it's just you all alone, none of the usual crew there to back your yip yip yapping up? It's not for the reasons you probably tell yourself. <i></i>

It's because we know Rove is guilty as a motherfucker. Anyone with half a
ain knew he probably was when his name was first mentioned. Ark can't bear the idea that a conservative is completely in the wrong, so he'll continue to "wave his pom-poms." Lord Ssoth<
>
<
>
Their citizens (all of them counted as such) glorified the mythology of rights...<
>
and lost track of their duties. No nation, so constituted, can survive.<i></i>

_________________