Leak Scandal Goes To The Top

What did the President know and when did he know it? Yesterday, the New
York Daily News reported that, according to a "presidential counselor,"
an "angry President Bush rebuked chief political guru Karl Rove two
years ago for his role in the Valerie Plame affair." According to the
article, the run-in occurred "shortly after the Justice Department
informed the White House in September 2003 that a criminal
investigation had been launched." If the report is true, it raises
serious questions about the integrity of President Bush's statements
about the investigation. (At yesterday's press conference, White House
spokesman Scott McClellan refused to dispute the specifics of the
article.) The report also suggests that testimony provided to the
special prosecutor by Bush and Rove may have been inaccurate.

DID BUSH KNOW WHEN HE SAID HE DIDN'T KNOW? Josh Marshall notes that on
October 7, 2003 -- around the same time as Bush's alleged rebuke of
Rove -- Bush said, "I mean this town is a -- is a town full of people
who like to leak information. And I don't know if we're going to find
out the senior administration official." Bush added, "[T]his is a large
administration, and there's a lot of senior officials. I don't have any
idea. I'd like to. I want to know the truth." The New York Daily News
article suggests that Bush already knew the truth: one of the leakers
was Karl Rove.

DID BUSH TELL PROSECUTORS ROVE DENIED ANY INVOLVEMENT? National Journal
investigative reporter Murray Waas reported on 10/7/05, "In his own
interview with prosecutors on June 24, 2004, Bush also testified that
Rove assured him he had not disclosed Plame as a CIA employee and had
said nothing to the press to discredit Wilson." Apparently, Rove has
been telling a similar story. The AP reported that "Rove told President
Bush and others that he never engaged in an effort to disclose a CIA
operative's identity to discredit her husband's criticism of the
administration's Iraq policy, according to people with knowledge of
Rove's account in the probe." These accounts, if true, are completely
inconsistent with the facts reported in yesterday's New York Daily
News. Although Bush was not under oath, making false statements to a
federal agent is still against the law.

EVIDENCE OF A CONSPIRACY: Today, the AP reports that "Rove and I. Lewis
'Scooter' Libby discussed their contacts with reporters about an
undercover CIA officer in the days before her identity was published."
The conversations are "the first known intersection between two central
figures in the criminal leak investigation." According to people
familiar with Rove's testimony, "Rove told grand jurors it was possible
he first heard in the White House that Valerie Plame, wife of Bush
administration Joseph Wilson, worked for the CIA from Libby's
recounting of a conversation with a journalist." (Rove has also
testified that "he probably first heard of Wilson's wife in a casual
social setting outside the White House in the spring of 2003 but could
not remember who provided the information.") The coordination between
Rove and Libby lends credence to the report that "Fitzgerald may be
edging closer to a blockbuster conspiracy charge."

Doesn't matter. He can't be impeached. They're almost out of season in most
of the country.


Border relations between Canada and Mexico have never been better.
-- In press conference with Canadian PM, and apparently forgetting about the
country wedged between Canada and Mexico, Washington, D.C., Sep. 24, 2001

On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 09:43:52 -0700, Tamaroak wrote:

Are we surprised that bush has something to do with this? What a lying,
chickenhawk scumbag.

And why hasn't he sent his daughters off to fight in Iraq, now that I'm
on the subject? This would be a great message to our troops and to the
nation. They could stand in for him, make up for his deserter status
back in 1972 when many of us were honorably serving.

Capt. Jeff

I'm surprised you'd find credibility in a cut'n'paste by Kevin, without the
source.

--
John H

"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant:
It's just that they know so much that isn't so."

Ronald Reagan

Harry,
Why don't you tell us about playing Rugby at U of Kansas?


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
PocoLoco wrote:
On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 09:43:52 -0700, Tamaroak wrote:

Are we surprised that bush has something to do with this? What a lying,
chickenhawk scumbag.

And why hasn't he sent his daughters off to fight in Iraq, now that I'm
on the subject? This would be a great message to our troops and to the
nation. They could stand in for him, make up for his deserter status
back in 1972 when many of us were honorably serving.

Capt. Jeff

I'm surprised you'd find credibility in a cut'n'paste by Kevin, without
the
source.

--
John H

John tries so very hard, and I'm sure he's convinced Hertvik, Robbins,
Smithers, Jackoff, and the rest of the right-wing, third-string
congregation.

Are we surprised that bush has something to do with this? What a lying,
chickenhawk scumbag.

And why hasn't he sent his daughters off to fight in Iraq, now that I'm
on the subject? This would be a great message to our troops and to the
nation. They could stand in for him, make up for his deserter status
back in 1972 when many of us were honorably serving.

Capt. Jeff

Not in '69 when I was drafted!

Capt. Jeff