Massassi Forums Logo

This is the static archive of the Massassi Forums. The forums are closed indefinitely. Thanks for all the memories!

You can also download Super Old Archived Message Boards from when Massassi first started.

"View" counts are as of the day the forums were archived, and will no longer increase.

ForumsDiscussion Forum → The Fall of Rove?
12
The Fall of Rove?
2005-07-15, 9:25 PM #41
Ictus, I'm sorry. I'm probably too tired but I didn't get where you contradicted anything. Maybe if you were more direct and to the point. I'm serious. Right now I have the attention span of a three year old.

kthxbye

*I always wanted to do that*
"I would rather claim to be an uneducated man than be mal-educated and claim to be otherwise." - Wookie 03:16

2005-07-15, 9:55 PM #42
Hilarious.

Since I'm having so much fun and it's a new page, why not.

From the official RNC talking points memo:
[http://img342.imageshack.us/img342/5540/talk9ze.gif]

From the transcript referred to above:
Quote:
WILSON: Well, look, it's absolutely true that neither the vice president nor Dr. Rice nor even George Tenet knew that I was traveling to Niger.

What they did, what the office of the vice president did, and, in fact, I believe now from Mr. Libby's statement, it was probably the vice president himself...

BLITZER: Scooter Libby is the chief of staff for the vice president.

WILSON: Scooter Libby.

They asked essentially that we follow up on this report -- that the agency follow up on the report. So it was a question that went to the CIA briefer from the Office of the Vice President. The CIA, at the operational level, made a determination that the best way to answer this serious question was to send somebody out there who knew something about both the uranium business and those Niger officials that were in office at the time these reported documents were executed.

Do you see now? The RNC insists that Wilson said "Vice President Cheney Sent Him To Niger", and, for support, quotes an ambigious statement from an interview. In that very interview, in the very sentence before the one quoted, Wilson says the exact opposite.
2005-07-15, 10:01 PM #43
Dude, Ictus, I really think as well the rabbit-hole goes deeper than we think, but as Freelancer said: there's no way anyone will ever get convicted.
■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■
enshu
2005-07-15, 10:37 PM #44
What interests me the most will be what Bush does if Rove is found guilty. Will he be true to his word?
"it is time to get a credit card to complete my financial independance" — Tibby, Aug. 2009
2005-07-19, 5:22 PM #45
He said anyone who committed a crime would be taken care of. Somehow some people erroneously believe he said he would fire somebody for leaking the information. At least in what I have heard I don't take it that way.

This story will likely die now as it was only really being fueled by Democrats and now they'll have to contend with the Supreme Court nominee. Since it's likely she and her husband are the one's responsible for her "outing" and nobody is breaking any laws except Judith Miller there will likely be no major coverage of any substantial revelations of this case.
"I would rather claim to be an uneducated man than be mal-educated and claim to be otherwise." - Wookie 03:16

2005-07-19, 11:30 PM #46
Un - believable
■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■
enshu
2005-07-19, 11:32 PM #47
Another Republican scam conveniently swept under the rug, eh Wookie?
"it is time to get a credit card to complete my financial independance" — Tibby, Aug. 2009
2005-07-19, 11:41 PM #48
Originally posted by Freelancer:
Another Republican scam conveniently swept under the rug, eh Wookie?


Yeah, and another democrat smearing campaing put in the spotlight!
■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■
enshu
2005-07-19, 11:47 PM #49
Quite the opposite. The allegation that Rove did anything wrong was so factually flawed which seems to be bearing out from the latest reports. Of course the investigation will substantiate that but this was really just a chance to say Bush was lying again since the press says he said he would fire anyone who leaked the information, which Rove didn't do and Bush never said that.

If the media and Democrats are smart they will simply drop the story and pick up the Supremem Court nominee to shift the focus away from themselves on the Plame story as they are the ones that are going to end up the most hurt by it.
"I would rather claim to be an uneducated man than be mal-educated and claim to be otherwise." - Wookie 03:16

2005-07-19, 11:58 PM #50
Originally posted by Ictus:
As for the talking points thing: Of course you didn't get the metaphorical memo. (I linked to it a couple posts ago, though. This is its cache.) The memo goes to Republican talking heads, who repeat the talking points ad nauseum on talk shows and place them prominently in the Limbaugh Letter or whatever, which filters down to you, who repeats them here. Some guy with a job like Rove's had the brilliant insight that people respond best to short statements hammered away at incessantly. Now Republican shills stay simple and stay on message, while Democratic shills are not nearly so catchy.

This is disturbing and heralds the death of our democracy.


Heh, side note: I've become less partisan when I started reading ****. In fact, I used to be completely Republican... now I'm probably at odds with Bush more often than not.

Wookie---Bush originally said that any leaker would be fired. He has changed his story because he doesn't want to fire Rove. (Hah, no warrant to back up my claim. Why do I need one? ) And why would he? Rove's strategy helped him win election again.

Even if it's true that Bush didn't say that: (this argument shouldn't be disregarded when you correctly point out that I have no research to back my claim that Bush did say he'd fire the leaker)

I think that if Rove leaked, he should be fired. I don't care if he goes to prison. If Bush wants to have the moral highground that he appeals to from time to time, he needs to stop being soft on his own administraton's mistakes. I'm tired of this partisan crap. No one is perfect and shouldn't feel that they have to be perfect. But everyone should feel the need to try to correct wrongs and to take responsibility for mistakes.
2005-07-20, 12:12 AM #51
Jedi Legend, I would concede that if Rove outed any CIA operation he should be fired but a reasonable person can't conclude he did so. At least not with the information thus far released. Hell, I heard today that Plame used her cover name and company to donate $1000 to Gore in 1999. link

And to the best of my knowledge his original statement on the issue, Bush's that is, is:

Quote:
"If there is a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is," the president told reporters back then. "And if the person has violated law, the person will be taken care of."


I don't see how this can be inferred as firing someone for leaking information. Here is a link to a conservative news site. The only one I know off hand that will quote the original statement. I imagine one could find the transcript at whitehouse.gov as well. link
"I would rather claim to be an uneducated man than be mal-educated and claim to be otherwise." - Wookie 03:16

2005-07-20, 1:42 AM #52
Dear God, my eyes!

Wookie: This story is about Fitzgerald's investigation, and always has been. It won't be over until the grand jury makes its decision in October, and, since Fitzgerald is awesome, there will probably be trials after that. Now, Rove happens to be a subject of that investigation, and with his incriminating actions, quotes, and general sliminess, the political points have already been won. Not to mention the general cluelessness/deceitfulness of the initial White House response have caused the public's faith in their claims of cooperation to plummet.

And there is no doubt in any reasonable person's mind that Rove leaked information. He was the source for dozens of journalists, if the widespread reports of him shopping Plame's identity to numerous media outlets are true. At minimum, he was sourced by Novak, who actually blew her cover.

Quote:
Hell, I heard today that Plame used her cover name and company to donate $1000 to Gore in 1999.
Um, Valerie Plame is her real name, and her cover company existed so that she and others wouldn't have to put down "CIA" under "Occupation", among other things. Good try working that in, though. Also, try going to the source for your talking points. The Wilsons' political affiliations were all the wingnut rage a couple years ago.
Quote:
I don't see how this can be inferred as firing someone for leaking information.
Bush and his press secretary made several statements after the one you quoted that muddied where the line was drawn. As in, completely contridictory statements.

By the way, I still can't decide if you're a troll or just a partisan. Congratulations either way. You walk that fine line.

Jedi Legend: Bush does that to a lot of Republicans, I've found. And your last paragraph there is spot on.
2005-07-20, 1:47 AM #53
...

Originally posted by www.1115.org:
The Past Does Not Exist. It Has Never Existed.
Posted by matt on July 18th, 2005 at 9:45 am
Scotty knows this:

White House press briefing 10/10/03:

Q: Scott, earlier this week you told us that neither Karl Rove, Elliot Abrams nor Lewis Libby disclosed any classified information with regard to the leak. I wondered if you could tell us more specifically whether any of them told any reporter that Valerie Plame worked for the CIA?

MR. McCLELLAN: Those individuals — I talked — I spoke with those individuals, as I pointed out, and those individuals assured me they were not involved in this. And that’s where it stands.

Washington Post 7/18/05:

In a conversation that same day, Rove told Time magazine’s Matthew Cooper that Wilson’s wife was in the CIA and authorized the mission to Niger; but he did not use her name. Afterwards, Rove e-mailed then-deputy national security adviser Stephen J. Hadley to tell him he had waved Cooper off Wilson’s claim.

A day later, Cheney’s top aide, I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, told Cooper he had heard the same thing about Plame, and a senior administration official flagged the role of Wilson’s wife, almost in passing, to The Washington Post’s Walter Pincus.

Telling a journalist = “not involved”?

The President too:

George W. Bush 6/10/04:

Q Given — given recent developments in the CIA leak case, particularly Vice President Cheney’s discussions with the investigators, do you still stand by what you said several months ago, a suggestion that it might be difficult to identify anybody who leaked the agent’s name?

THE PRESIDENT: That’s up to –

Q And, and, do you stand by your pledge to fire anyone found to have done so?

THE PRESIDENT: Yes.

George W. Bush 7/18/05:

“I would like this to end as quickly as possible. If someone committed a crime, they will no longer work in my administration.”

Sleight of hand at it’s finest.


[quote=Jim VandeHei and Mike Allen, Washington Post]
Jim VandeHei and Mike Allen write in The Washington Post: "After originally saying anyone involved in leaking the name of the covert CIA operative would be fired, Bush told reporters: 'If somebody committed a crime, they will no longer work in my administration.'

"This is a small, but potentially very significant, distinction, because details that have emerged from the leak investigation over the past week show that Karl Rove, Bush's top political aide, and I. Lewis 'Scooter' Libby, Vice President Cheney's chief of staff, discussed Plame with reporters before her name was revealed to the public. It is unclear whether either man committed a crime, according to lawyers familiar with the case."[/quote]
■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■
enshu
2005-07-20, 9:18 AM #54
You two can't possibly criticize me for reactions to media reports when you fall for stuff like that. The president only ever he would fire someone guilty of a crime. The reporter was mistaken if he believes that the president said otherwise. "Do you still stand by your pledge to fire anyone found to have done so?" Well, that means he must have a pledge on record. The only statement I am aware of is the one we have both quoted. Then the recent quote, “I would like this to end as quickly as possible. If someone committed a crime, they will no longer work in my administration," seems totally consistent with his stated position. The only person to muddy this was the reporter with the poorly asked question that the president failed to correct him on. But, like I said if Bush stands by his pledge, unless you have another quote, it certainly deals with a crime. And if Rove isn't guilty of a crime this is a a moot point.

This one really gets me:

Originally Posted by Jim VandeHei and Mike Allen, Washington Post
Jim VandeHei and Mike Allen write in The Washington Post: "After originally saying anyone involved in leaking the name of the covert CIA operative would be fired, Bush told reporters: 'If somebody committed a crime, they will no longer work in my administration.'

Where is a quote for the portion in bold? I've only ever heard reporters say that. I'd be interested to see the actual quote from the president.
"I would rather claim to be an uneducated man than be mal-educated and claim to be otherwise." - Wookie 03:16

2005-07-20, 12:15 PM #55
Haha. It must be some karmic cycle that has partisan Republicans desperately working semantic angles.
Quote:
McCLELLAN: The president has set high standards, the highest of standards for people in his administration. He's made it very clear to people in his administration that he expects them to adhere to the highest standards of conduct. If anyone in this administration was involved in it, they would no longer be in this administration.
...
Q: You continue to talk about the severity of this and if anyone has any information they should go forward to the Justice Department. But can you tell us, since it's so severe, would someone or a group of persons, lose their job in the White House?
McCLELLAN: At a minimum.
Q: At a minimum?
McCLELLAN: At a minimum.
From the White House
2005-07-20, 8:22 PM #56
Originally posted by Ictus:
Dear God, my eyes!

By the way, I still can't decide if you're a troll or just a partisan. Congratulations either way. You walk that fine line.


I totally agree. It's like he has partisan blinders on. Anything that would taint his party in the least it's like he doesn't even see it.

That or he's a troll.
"it is time to get a credit card to complete my financial independance" — Tibby, Aug. 2009
2005-07-21, 1:50 AM #57
Originally posted by Ictus:
.
From the White House


Liberal media
■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■
enshu
2005-07-22, 10:00 PM #58
Originally posted by Freelancer:
I totally agree. It's like he has partisan blinders on. Anything that would taint his party in the least it's like he doesn't even see it.

That or he's a troll.


I guess I'm a troll. I must be since I accurately quoted the president, unlike the media, and since I am reserving final judgement until the investigation is complete.
"I would rather claim to be an uneducated man than be mal-educated and claim to be otherwise." - Wookie 03:16

12

↑ Up to the top!