OK, correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Scooter Libby get indicted for perjury because they didn't have any proof that Valerie Plame was "outed?" At least that was the impression that I got. Because if you could actually prove the charges you were investigating, you would have indicted for them instead of some other thing that you just happen to think you might have found.

Yet, with that in mind, MSNBC runs a story today that not only says that Scooter Libby is guilty *before trial* of things that he hasn't been charged with, but goes on to say that people have come forth to testify that it actually was Karl Rove that leaked Valerie Plame's name to the press. They don't just indicate that this might be or that "rumors have it..." They come right out and say Rove is guilty and his security clearance should be removed. And strongly indicate that the Bush presidency can go nowhere until Rove is fired. Proof, you say?

...a person identified as “Official A” held conversations with reporters about Plame’s identity as an undercover CIA operative, information that was classified. News accounts subsequently confirmed that that official was Rove.

News accounts. I wonder if those news accounts (which I haven't seen or heard) are as trustworthy as this one. I also wonder why, if this is the case and they have such rock-solid evidence of a crime, the special prosecuter hasn't handed down an indictment on Rove? After all, he had plenty of opportunity. And he never once indicated in his press conference after Libby's indictment that he was looking for or at anyone else. As a matter of fact, he seemed to believe that Libby was completly guilty of the whole matter.

And with the cries of outrage coming from MSNBC today, one has to wonder what happened to their voice on April 12, 2005 when the Washington Post reports that:

During a hearing on John R. Bolton's nomination to be ambassador to the United Nations, Bolton and members of the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee referred to the analyst as "Mr. Smith." They were discussing one of the officials involved in a dispute over what Democrats said was Bolton's inappropriate treatment of an intelligence analyst who disagreed with him.

But the committee chairman, Richard G. Lugar (R-Ind.), and Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) mentioned a name that had not previously come up in public accounts of the intelligence flap.

"Did Otto Reich share his belief that [the person in question] should be removed from his position? The answer is yes," Kerry said, characterizing one interview. "Did John Bolton share that view?" Kerry asked. Again, he said the answer was yes.

The CIA had repeatedly asked, even in writing, that the identity of this person not be mentioned in these public hearings. That is why everyone else was referring to him as Mr. Smith. But the esteemed Senator from Massachusetts just couldn't seem to help himself as he "outed" this agent. Where was the outcry? Where were the calls for indictment? Wasn't this a crime of terrible proportions? Didn't this, in the words of special prosecuter Fitzgerald "create a terrible danger for all Americans?" And if not, then why is it so much more horrible for Libby? Of course I think we all know the answer to that question.

Update: kimsch of Musing Minds believes that the "sources" quoted above are actually Howard Dean on Hannity & Colmes. Reading through the transcript (posted at the link above), this could certainly be the truth. Some excerpts:

Alan Colmes: WhatÂ’s your reaction to the nomination of Alito?

Howard Dean: Ah, a couple of reactions. First of all I think it shows the PresidentÂ’s weakness. The extreme right of the party seems to be driving the judicial nominations process and I think thatÂ’s unfortunate. Secondly, we still wonder when the PresidentÂ’s going to ask Karl Rove to resign since heÂ’s now been identified by the special prosecutor as the person who leaked the name. So, this all comes, uh, as kind of a, at kind of a difficult time. Uh, I donÂ’t. I think the PresidentÂ’s really using this as a distraction right now to get away from his ethical troubles. (emphasis mine)

One has to wonder where Dean is getting his information. Certainly not from the special prosecuter as he hasn't said anything about Rove. Of course one also has to wonder what that has to do with Alito as well. But no one ever accused the Democrats (especially Dean) of making sense.

Alan Colmes: Is it your belief that the President chose today to make this choice as a distraction from the indictment news?

Howard Dean: Oh sure. But the indictment is not going to go away. The President promised he would fire anyone who leaked. Karl Rove has now been shown to have leaked, even though he wasnÂ’t charged with a crime. This is a big ethical problem for the President. The President gave us his word that he would fire anyone who leaked. So far he hasnÂ’t done that. WeÂ’re waiting to see if the President will keep his word.

Alan Colmes: Well, there have been three different standards. First, McClellan said anybody involved in, then he said if anybody leaked, then if anybody committed a crime. Are you calling for the resignation of Karl Rove?

Howard Dean: Absolutely. Karl Rove has no business having a security clearance having now been established as a leaker by the special prosecutor. As I say, he wasnÂ’t charged with a crime, what he did was, not, certainly unethical. And he ought not to have a security clearance and he ought not to be working and being paid for by the taxpayersÂ’ money. (emphasis mine)

Dean then switches horses in midstream and claims that instead of Rove being the leak, it's now Cheney.

Howard Dean: Well, I'm not so sure about that although if there is such a thing, it'll be in the Vice President's office. And I do think there needs to be more investigation in the Vice President's office. One of the things established by the special prosecutor in the indictment is that Vice President Cheney was the source of Scooter Libbity's, Libby's knowledge about who the CIA agent was.

Alan Colmes: Are you calling for a broader investigation of the Vice President?

Howard Dean: Oh, I think there should be. I suspect strongly that, frankly that the prosecutor's already doing that because he, himself identified the Vice President as a source of some of the information that got leaked.

And just to make sure, I checked the special prosecutor's website again today (again, thanks to Musing Minds). No mention of Rove or Cheney. But we all knew that, didn't we? Heck, a full search of Libby's Indictment press release doesn't even mention Rove or Cheney. Even the indictment itself has no mention of either of them.

Posted by: Drew at 07:37 AM | Comments (13) | Add Comment
Post contains 1157 words, total size 7 kb.