I mean, you have to conclude that someone responsible for the political and campaign dimension of the Bush administration not only had a tin ear when it came to internet-induced changes in the political dynamic, but also dropped the ball pretty badly when it came to Joe Wilson's little dramaturge. Who could that have been?
Now, perhaps I'm wrong and there would be no political penalty for firing Rove now... but it's hard for me to believe that. If an administration gets into the habit of merely reacting to allegations and insinuations based on appearances, just where does it stop? So, for the moment at least, I think George is stuck with this turkey. He ought to be fired at the first opportunity, but there's no telling when an opportunity may arise short of a finding that he actually did something illegal, such as lying to a grand jury or outing a clandestine agent. And if neither of those things proves to be true then the "scandal" will eventually die down, and Rove can be issued a normal pink slip for fundamental incomptence and strategic irrelevance.
1
Demosophist: You are so right! I felt throughout the entire 2004 campaign that someone in this administration was doing a very sloppy job of answering to any and all allegations thrown out by the left. And still, to this day, the same sloppiness prevails. They even sat idly by while the 9/11 commission discounted and poo-pooed even the most concrete intelligence about Iraq. I keep wondering - Are they on a self-destruct mission, or what? Because the left hangs on every omission or inadequately answered question which gives them and the MSM a free pass to come up with all manner of screwy ideas. And we, as just bloggers and regular people are left trying to straighten these lefties out.
I understand that Bush is a man of few words. But that is to his, and our, detriment.
Posted by: Oyster at July 13, 2005 04:01 PM (fl6E1)
2
Fire him for what? Plame's husband was telling the media that Cheney sent him to Sudan, so when a reporter asked Rove about it he told the reporter than no, Plame in the CIA sent him to Sudan-- not Cheney. That was the big "outing". Big fucking deal. This is just another "scandal" in a long list of Democrat scandals.
Posted by: Carlos at July 13, 2005 04:01 PM (8e/V4)
3
Dude,
Rove is an idiot. I kept thinking all through 2004, "How come there are no death penalty ads?" Being anti-death penalty is an automatic lose for a Pres candidate and yet most people thought Kerry was for it...
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford at July 13, 2005 04:14 PM (JQjhA)
4
There's no reason that campaign ought to have even been close, and I think the blogosphere did the yoeman's work of countering the viciously biased drumbeat ofthe mainstream press and that ultimately led to a Bush victory.
HAhahahahahahahhahahahahahahah-ick
That is just too rich. ROTFLMAO
Damn those liberuls at Fox
Posted by: Max at July 13, 2005 04:15 PM (HFKAk)
5
Don't know... I think that firing Rove at this point wouldn't serve the administration. Yah, he might have sprung a leak, but Plame wasn't a covert operative at the time, so Rove appears to be within the law. But enough armchair lawyering by me.
The fact is, this fiasco is keeping the eye off of alleged prisoner abuse or the war in Iraq. They're all too busy foaming at the mouth over a non-event. I like to think of these liberals as rabid little kittens, following a laser pointer on the wall. Let Karl entertain them some more, I say.
Posted by: RomeoDelta at July 13, 2005 04:30 PM (AHaCg)
6
Peanuts compared to when a SCOTUS nomination comes up. Pretty soon it'll be "Karl who?"
Posted by: Mad Dog Vinnie at July 13, 2005 04:48 PM (Kr6/f)
7
Max apparently thinks that even one conservative news outlet amounts to an unfair advantage for the Republicans. Pretty much made my point.
Rusty:
Yeah, I forgot about the death penalty thing. I had decided by election day that the Bush campaign had been handled so badly that Kerry was actually going to win. Thank God the old Copperhead counties in Ohio reversed their historic position.
Carlos:
If Plame wasn't a covert agent at the time then why the investigation? Wouldn't one have to justify such an expenditure on the grounds that some crime was committed? And if there's no crime in the first place...
Honestly, there's a lot about this that I just don't understand, especially since all the administration had to do to discredit Wilson was to simply point out that his report implied the opposite of what he was yapping about. What really makes me angry is that the Democrats are so foolish about the way they run their political opposition that mistakes made by a Republican administration are never actually vetted. I mean, we had the choice between someone who was doing the right thing, but may not have been doing it very well, and someone who not only was incompetent but was apparently dedicated to doing precisely the
wrong thing.
How in the world are we ever going to get an effective critique of the current policy and its implementation under those conditions?
Q: "Do you want to be shot in the head or the foot?"
A: "Well neither, now that you mention it. But if it comes right down to it, I guess I can tolerate walking with a limp."
Posted by: Demosophist at July 13, 2005 05:58 PM (IbWE6)
8
Ah, it is so refreshing to read someone who thinks Rove isn't such a genius. I think the 2004 campaign should have been won by 5-6 points easy. There was no push back on anything. The Bush campaign was so passive and Bush was so poorly prepared for the debates. I think Rove won't be missed, but I agree Bush should wait. It will just be more weakness.
Posted by: kate at July 13, 2005 07:07 PM (pKyrR)
9
>>>"If Plame wasn't a covert agent at the time then why the investigation? Wouldn't one have to justify such an expenditure on the grounds that some crime was committed? And if there's no crime in the first place..."
Demo,
I don't know if she was a covert operative, and this is a complex case and I think few people know all the details, but my understanding is that it was an innocent mistake. Joe Wilson was claiming Cheney had sent him to Sudan (a lie), so when asked about it by a reporter Rove told the reporter that, no, Wilson's wife sent him, and that she's in the CIA. This doesn't seem like an attempt to purposely "out" Plame as revenge. Rove probably covered up his innocent mistake because he's such a target-- and in D.C. the coverup is what gets you screwed.
Posted by: Carlos at July 13, 2005 09:43 PM (8e/V4)
Posted by: Carlos at July 13, 2005 09:45 PM (8e/V4)
11
Twenty children killed while getting candy for U.S. Soldiers.
52 killed and hundreds injured in Britain.
And the biggest thing on the moronic liberals minds is get Rove.
Assholes.
I could give a crap about any government employee, but some minds are truly warped if Rove should be the issue of the week when the slaughter continues. Friggin liberals need to get a life. Rove is small potatoes compared to the lives being lost.
Lost because liberal crybabies allow our troops to be picked off instead of stomping the shit out of the animals.
Posted by: greyrooster at July 13, 2005 09:51 PM (CBNGy)
12
greyrooster>
I'm with you man.
This Rove-Plame thing is a freaking joke.
Lets' get back to the war and let our guys kick some ass.
If the Dems. want to impeach Pres.Bush let them try.
That's right they almost tried that with that stupid Iraq hearing,the one that turned into a Joooo bashing seminar.
On one hand I wish they would STFU,on the otherI hope they keep ii up.
2006 wil be fun to watch.
Posted by: xtremewing at July 14, 2005 02:01 AM (PuXAX)
13
TODAYS LESSON: How To Say "Fuck Off" Diplomatically
MR. McCLELLAN: Again, we've been round and round on this for a couple of days now. I don't have anything to add to what I've said the previous two days.
Q That's a different question, and it's not round and round --
MR. McCLELLAN: You heard from the President earlier.
Q It has nothing to do with the investigation, Scott, and you know it.
MR. McCLELLAN: You heard from the President earlier today, and the President said he's not --
Q That's a dodge to my question. It has nothing to do with the investigation. Is it appropriate for a senior official to speak about a covert agent in any way, shape, or form without first finding out whether that person is working as a covert officer.
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, first of all, you're wrong. This is all relating to questions about an ongoing investigation, and I've been through this.
Q If I wanted to ask you about an ongoing investigation, I would ask you about the statute, and I'm not doing that.
MR. McCLELLAN: I think we've exhausted discussion on this the last couple of days.
Q You haven't even scratched the surface.
Q It hasn't started.
MR. McCLELLAN: I look forward to talking about it once the investigation is complete, as the President does, as well. And you heard from the President earlier today.
Posted by: greg at July 14, 2005 08:04 AM (0PbLu)
14
Oops, "today's"
Beat you to it this time, YBP.
Posted by: greg at July 14, 2005 09:01 AM (0PbLu)
Posted by: Downing Street Memo at July 14, 2005 09:02 AM (ScqM8)
16
Bush will nominate a couple of Supremes and nobody will care about "Rove" anymore-- just like all the other Dem "scandals".
Posted by: Carlos at July 14, 2005 09:34 AM (8e/V4)
17
"Rove is a traitor"
But if he's a traitor to Bush, that means you support him, right?
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at July 14, 2005 09:46 AM (x+5JB)
18
He's a traitor to the US, as is Bush.
Posted by: greg at July 14, 2005 09:50 AM (0PbLu)
19
>>>"He's a traitor to the US, as is Bush."
Then you should be their greatest fan.
Posted by: Carlos at July 14, 2005 10:02 AM (8e/V4)
20
The left once again shows how much it cares for the institutions of the American people by deciding that there is no need for a) further investigation into the matter; b) the filing of actual charges should the situation warrant it; or c) a trial by a jury of ones peers. You see, these things, which we would absolutely demand for ourselves, are a mere inconvenience when compared to the possibility of 'getting' Karl Rove or the Bush administration.
What's worse is that they don't think the American people will remember this when the next elections come around.
The thing that really pisses them off is that the prosecutor has stated already that it does not appear any crime, except perhaps perjury (by who he does not say), has been committed. Not that you would know that given the fact that the MSM doesn't like to bring up that fact while it desperately tries to relive it's glory days of Watergate.
Posted by: Defense Guy at July 14, 2005 10:24 AM (jPCiN)
21
McClellan, in Third Day of Stonewalling, Tells Press They Have Taken a Pound of His Flesh
By E&P Staff
Published: July 13, 2005 4:00 PM ET
NEW YORK In a third day of fencing with reporters at the daily briefing, White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan continued to stonewall on questions surrounding Karl Rove and the Plame case, but admitted. “It may not look like it, but there's a little flesh that's been taken out of me the past few days.”
I hope it was his genitalia, but then he would still owe 360 grams to make an even pound. At least that's the talk around the water fountain.
Posted by: greg at July 14, 2005 11:11 AM (Y6Yy8)
22
Greg hopes guys lose their balls so they can be like him.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at July 14, 2005 11:26 AM (0yYS2)
23
Gluteus,
You're a unick and piss through a quill, so that you can guard the king's harem without suspicion.
Posted by: greg at July 14, 2005 12:08 PM (Y6Yy8)
24
Greg: You ARE drunk!(Eunuch.)
Time for confession again.
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at July 14, 2005 12:30 PM (x+5JB)
25
I just HAD to share this comic involving Rove:
http://villagevoice.com/news/0528,tomorrow,65773,6.html
Posted by: osamabinhamburgler at July 14, 2005 01:27 PM (perrS)
26
Osama! The Village Voice!
And we had such hopes...
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at July 14, 2005 01:34 PM (x+5JB)
27
Yeah yeah, but did you actually read the comic? It should be damn funny regardless of your political leanings. I've been busy as hell around here, so I haven't been around to rant, debate or offend. Did I miss anything? Did Greg reveal that he's Jewish? Did you defy the Pope by reading Harry Potter books? Did Rusty reveal that he is in fact Rove? Hmmm...
Posted by: osamabeenthere at July 14, 2005 02:17 PM (1zM97)
28
Forgot to say: YBP: I wouldn't be a New Yorker if I didn't read the funnies in the VV.
Posted by: osamabeenthere at July 14, 2005 02:31 PM (1zM97)
29
I, Filthy Allah, Call on anyone, to smack the piss out of that Douche bag Former Ambassador Wilson.
The guy outed his own wife. What an ass.
Posted by: Filthy ALLAH at July 14, 2005 02:58 PM (yBHNA)
30
Filthy: I agree if Wilson could have kept his mouth shut Time would have never been looking into it. Rove would have never issued the warning. I suspect her motives as well. I find it interesting that time chose to pursue this issue and not performance of Wilson and his Wife who might have conspired to make the trip and manufacture this whole distraction from the real issues. No wonder they found nothing everyone and his brother knew she was a spook.
Posted by: Howie at July 14, 2005 03:13 PM (D3+20)
31
The VP did not send this ass monkey wilson on any trip as the ass monkey wilson claimed. Wilson never wrote up a report, never issued a report and on top of it, has a fab history of drinking way too much and making himself out to be quite an important fellow.
All Wilson is doing is covering up for his own lies and mistakes. What an asshole.
Dear Lord: Please send a blood clot to this POS Wilson and turn him into a tard. Then, while he is in the hospital, please send a young but hairy janitor to his room and have the janitor ass rape this former Ambassador.
Posted by: Filthy Allah at July 14, 2005 03:41 PM (yBHNA)
32
Osama: I will check out the comic.
And I would never defy the Pope.
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at July 14, 2005 06:35 PM (zL3KD)
33
YBP, you gotta. It's damn good. FILTHY! Never send a young janitor to do a chimp's job. Anyway, what is all the fuss about with Wilson? We all know whistle blowers get the shaft. I doubt he lied at all...why would he? You think he was that eager to get smeared? Come on guys...
Posted by: osamabinhamburgler at July 14, 2005 08:01 PM (perrS)
34
I doubt he lied at all...why would he? You think he was that eager to get smeared? Come on guys...
Simply put, every time he opened his yap it was to complain that "his conclusion, after peronally investigating the Niger situation" was that "there was no evidence that implied that they intended to sell uranium to the Iraqis.
His report, on the other hand, indicates something quite different. From
Pejmanesque:
In other words, while the
Post story states that Wilson's findings buttressed the belief that Iraq sought to find uranium, even if we take Marshall's finding that Iraq was never mentioned in the report by Wilson and that Iran was mentioned instead, we still have the British to verify through an independent inquiry that Iraq did indeed try to buy uranium. Wilson may not have reported as much, contra Schmidt's story. But at the very least, he appears to have completely missed the story that the Butler inquiry in Britain found, and that British intelligence has stuck with from the outset.
Maybe if Wilson didn't spend so much time drinking sweet mint tea, he would have found out that information as well. In any event, he is either incompetent, per the Butler report's findings, or a liar per Schmidt's. Either scenario appears to vindicate the finding that Iraq sought uranium from Niger, and validation regarding America's casus belli insofar as the Niger/uranium issue is concerned.
In other words, at the very least the text of Wilson's report found that there was evidence that Iran had sought to buy uranium from Niger, which suggests that they were suppliers of such material. If the country mentioned in the report was, in fact, Iran rather than Iraq, then
Iraq wasn't mentioned at all. If it was his mission to find out Iraq's aspirations, why the deuce wouldn't he mention Iraq? Why would the report mention Iran, and simply make no mention of Iraq? And that's the most
Wilson-generous interpretation of the matter.
I haven't any clear idea of what's going on. If Wilson wrote a report that bolsters the notion that Niger was selling yellow-cake uranium to nations in the Gulf, why didn't the Bush administration simply mention this to bolster their case and discredit Wilson? There is something about this story that just doen't add up, no matter how many fingers you use to do the counting. It's not as though there's any interpretation that credits the possibility that Wilson was telling the truth either. I mean, we know he lied. What we don't know is why the Bush administration didn't "out" him. And I just have no explanation for that. None.
Posted by: Demosophist at July 14, 2005 08:53 PM (IbWE6)
35
Osama: I checked it out!
They're maligning Lizzie, who was NEVER convicted! (Maybe she was a Republican?)
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at July 15, 2005 06:39 AM (x+5JB)
36
What do you think now that the NYTimes has exonerated Rove?
http://strata-sphere.com/blog/index.php/archives/316
Not trying to pick at you in the least, but don't you feel like you surrendered to the MSM/Lib smear machine too early? One nice thing about riding it out is the backlash in their credibility when it goes to the end and they have so much egg on their face is it ends up being a boost for the right.
But you have to weather the storm to get the lift at the end.
Posted by: AJStrata at July 15, 2005 03:56 PM (67DAA)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
