Skip to comments.MSNBC Analyst Says Cooper Documents Reveal Karl Rove as Source in Plame Case
Posted on 07/02/2005 9:42:39 AM PDT by TShaunK
MSNBC Analyst Says Cooper Documents Reveal Karl Rove as Source in Plame Case
By E&P Staff
Published: July 01, 2005 11:30 PM ET
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. Tonight, 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.
Here is the transcript of O'Donnell's remarks:
"What we're going to go to now in the next stage, when Matt Cooper's e-mails, within Time Magazine, are handed over to the grand jury, the ultimate revelation, probably within the week of who his source is.
"And I know I'm going to get pulled into the grand jury for saying this but the source of...for Matt Cooper was Karl Rove, and that will be revealed in this document dump that Time magazine's going to do with the grand jury."
Other panelists then joined in discussing whether, if true, this would suggest a perjury rap for Rove, if he told the grand jury he did not leak to Cooper.
Cooper and New York Times reporter Judith Miller, held in contempt for refusing to name sources, tried Friday to stay out of jail by arguing for home detention instead after Time Inc. surrendered its reporter's notes to a prosecutor.
Meanwhile, on Capitol Hill, Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., said Friday that several unidentified Senate Republicans had placed a hold on a proposed resolution declaring support for Miller and Cooper.
``Cowards!'' Lautenberg said of the Republicans. ``Under the rules, they have a right to refuse to reveal who they are. Sound familiar?''
Lautenberg's resolution is co-sponsored by Sens. Richard Lugar (R-Ind.) and Christopher Dodd (D-Conn.) It says no purpose is served by imprisoning Miller and Cooper and that the First Amendment guarantees freedom of the press.
If true, then it demonstrates what a bunch of hypocrites reporters are. They claim that they can't reveal their sources, but they apparently DO reveal their sources to people who they want to, and in this case, Cooper apparently revealed his source to O'Donnell.
What I don't get is why is this guy shooting his mouth off.Its almost like he is signaling to Judith Miller (hey this where were going)
And what are you saying should happen to Rove if he is guilty?
It's MSNBC! These jokers don't even know who won WWII.
Even so...If Rove's name was found in this guy's "notes", knowing the party affiliation of most jurnos...it would/should be met with a great, great, deal of skepticism.
O'Donnel is a Democrat who was employed by Democratic committees in the Senate along with Democrats like Pat Monighan.
Seems to me if the MSM could have fingered Rove in this they would have gleefully done it a long long time ago.
Its an awfully big chance they are taking.
If it were Rove, he would've been outed a long time ago. Would've been too valuable ammo for the election. O'donnell is a rabid moonbat idiot.
If it were true, I suspect the prosecutors would have already done something about it. Rather than wait for Laurence O'Donnell to handle the case on national tv.
Let's give the benefit of the doubt to Rove, rather than indict him based upon a raving lunatic like O'Donnell.
Think DURBIN!! To much heat on DURBIN!! and the Dems. With Hildabeast and Dean opening their big mouths trying to turn the tide against Durbin, another talking head of the MSM is just adding logs to the fire!!
It would depend on the intent and and the context on how and if it was leaked by KR.
No, because Wilson tried to point to Rove from the very beginning (remember the "frog-march" business?).
This is just the usual refashioning of the original charge that the dems resort to time and again.
Rove was a source after Novak's column, no doubt, and that will show in Cooper's notes. Everyone needs to understand that is different than being the source for Novak's column.
Two other threads on this (with my analysis on each):
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.