Posted on 07/12/2005 12:34:34 PM PDT by RWR8189
I sincerely believe this tactic is used with many authors suffering from a sales slump or those attempting to show inflated figures. Copies of Johnny Cochran's book are housed in a local storage facility - in every unit of the warehouse but one - I'm renting that one and was asked to vacate as Mr. Cochran needed the additional space. Obviously this story is over a year old and I have no idea if his estate is still paying the fees.
I followed the link and signed the petition with a phony name under a stealth email that I use for such nefarious purposes. If anyone would like to know the name I used for it, FReepMail me and I'll tell ya.
but isnt suspicion of collusion at the heart of this, no matter what side of the fence youre on? isnt there a concern over corporate bias from "the other side?"
the liberals are looking to get a grip on something, and theyre going to keep grabbing until they do.
you can call me what you will, but ideologues are fallable, no matter which side you stand on
So far, there is no proof that Rove mentioned Plame by name, or that he was motivated by a sense to "punish" Wilson. He was merely setting the facts straight, countering false media reports that Dick Cheney had recruited Wilson for the Niger trip. If anyone in this scenario has repeatedly been found to be lying, it is Joseph Wilson.
It MAY be Rove??? The media is bending over backwards to parse everything to make it sound that way. That tells me that they know it ISN'T Rove.
It was mentioned on Fox News this morning that Rove's email to Cooper was dated after Novak's Plame/Wilson/Niger column was printed. The timing makes the Rove "controversy" and your consistency statements moot. Oh, and welcome to Free Republic.
The story you linked to had nothing to do with Plame. Or didn't you notice that? This is the kind of crap DU folks do all the time, refrence "evidence" that has nothing to do with what's being discussed. So please tell me and everyone here what your link has to do with Rove. Inquiring minds want to know.
Oh, nevermind, just STFU Troll.
As far as Rove is concerned, here is what seems to have happened: There were media reports that Dick Cheney had commissioned Joe Wilson's Niger trip, and that Cheney had disregarded Wilson's report because it undermined administration claims about Iraq seeking uranium from Niger. Cooper called Rove to ask about this, and Rove said it was false: Cheney had not authorized the trip - it was dreamed up by a CIA group who recruited Wilson at the suggestion of his wife, a CIA employee. Moreover, Cheney did not know Wilson, had never met him, and had never seen his report. Now, if you see criminal wrongdoing on the part of Rove in any of this, I'd like you to tell me what it was that he did wrong.
It was amazing to watch David Gregory go after Scott McClelland tooth and fang. He looked like a rabid dog. I understand why the dems are trying to make chicken salad out of chicken shit, but the MSM should be capable of seeing the way the wind is blowing, yet they try to hold the party line. They will be made to look very, very foolish and will result in further marginalizing the MSM. Have they not heard of internet bloggers? They are the compass as the story gets directed off course. There is discussion and there are instantly thousands, tens of thousands of editors, some extremely well informed. Yet they keep up their trash talk.
What you didn't mention about minnesotared's link is that it pointed to a story describing how the New York Times had blown the cover of a CIA operative who was providng valuable information about Al Quaeda. That's quite a strange link for minnesotared to cite as an argument against Rove. lol
Don't forget Cooper.
To paraphrase the song, "The media has their story and they're sticking to it." They will not let facts get in the way of a good story - how did CBS put it? - "false but accurate"?
Go back to the DU troll.
youre now asking me to take the side of attempting to explain what Rove did wrong?
i aint gonna do that.
i think all the fury is trying to get at the false claims to go to war. i think that the fury is about wanting to hold the President to statements he made about how anyone in his admin connected to this - leaked this, would be fired. i also think there is a fury to make this heated and of the essence.
at the root, there isnt much to stand on.
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.