Skip to comments.Karl Rove, the New York Times, and the Fifth "Why"
Posted on 07/12/2005 1:14:59 PM PDT by hipaatwo
The 5 Whys is a technique used in the Analyze phase of the Six Sigma DMAIC methodology, a tool for improving the quality of various processes. By repeatedly asking the question "Why", you can peel away the layers of symptoms which can lead to the root cause of a problem.
In observing the media go after Karl Rove like a pack of sharks in a feeding frenzy, it becomes apparent that no one has done this. There are several more "whys" to be asked, and no one is asking them.
This all started on July 6, 2003, when Joseph Wilson published an op-ed in the New York Times concerning the famous "Sixteen Words" used by President Bush in his State of the Union address that year. Mr. Wilson suggested that the White House should have known that the Sixteen Words were not true, because he himself had traveled to the African state of Niger at the request of the CIA a year before the speech and debunked the intelligence. Mr. Wilson also appeared on Meet the Press that day, and was the subject of an article by Richard Leiby and Walter Pincus in the Washington Post. His "revelation" caused quite a stir.
(Excerpt) Read more at redstate.org ...
That leaves us with one unanswered Why.
Why would the New York Times stonewall the special prosecutor they themselves asked for, to the point that Judith Miller would go to jail before revealing who told her about Wilson, Plame, and the CIA? Judith Miller never even wrote an article; what the New York Times ran was an op-ed written by Wilson himself. Can it be that the person she talked to wasn't an "Administration Official" at all, but a Democratic political operative setting up a "media hit" on Bush?
Wilson, a former ambassador to Gabon who served as an Africa expert in the second Clinton administration, has long been friendly with leading Democrats." Writing in the Washington Times, Helle Dale quotes Wilson as saying, "Neo-conservatives and religious conservatives have hijacked this administration, and I consider myself on a personal mission to destroy both.
The media spent the last year arguing that since it was clear that no crime was committed, they should not be required to respond to a grand jury. Now they claim that Rove is implicated in this non-existent crime, and should therefore resign.
Has anyone asked why Matt Cooper's bosses gave up his emails? Is it because it was Karl Rove whose name was mentioned. If it were a prominent Democrat would they have given in so easily?
I'm usually the first person to mock this kind of conspiracy, but man, the pieces are all right there--two married Gore supporters, one in the CIA, who hate the administration; one of them appoints the other to investigate something that can discredit the administration; later, his data is proven to be false, and the story is about the "leak"?? Hmmm...
I think Mr. Wilson got an inferiority complex from watching too many "Dennis the Menace" episodes as a child.
It can't be stressed enough that almost nothing Wilson said was true. This became a story when Wilson signed on to the Kerry campaign. This is DNC foul play, and nothing more.
Wilson wasn't sent by anyone in authority at the CIA, he didn't report back to anyone. He didn't investigate anything, he never even went out to the mine sites. He didn't do anything he couldn't have done over the phone from his apartment in the US.
All he did was ask government and mine officials if they were making any illegal uranium sales, and then repeat their denials. We have since learned that they were selling uranium off the books to Libya, which makes his assertion that "France and Niger are US allies... they wouldn't do that..." laughable.
Besides which, Iraq's mission to Niger is public knowledge, and Niger officials mentioned it to Wilson... but Wilson failed to make mention of it in his op-ed piece, because it didn't fit his case.
Wilson's claim that illegal sales couldn't happen because the mines were monitored by the IAEA is also laughable, because they weren't. The IAEA asked the Niger government to permit such inspections but such permission had never been granted. Not that IAEA inspections would have meant anything, since North Korea's nuclear program was carried out right under the noses of the inspectors, who saw nothing for 8 years.
Wilson is a liar, and a Kerry operative. His lies are simple to pick out by anyone with above-zero curiosity levels.
" I'm usually the first person to mock this kind of conspiracy, but man, the pieces are all right there-two married Gore supporters "
Speaking of spouses- Cooper is married to Mandy Grunwald, former Clinton advisor.
Can't you just see Cooper, if he didn't know already , hanging up the phone and saying
" Honey, what's Joe Wilson's wife's name ? "
Grunwald's sister Lisa, was at one time considered to be the author of Primary Colors.
These people are all plugged in and I believe that the media frenzy is to provide cover for the real leakers, especially if no indictments or reports are returned from the GJ.
The media is Richard Jewelling Karl Rove.
The biggest scandal, IMHO, is who at the CIA signed off on sending a diplomat, rather than a seasoned investigator to pursue such a sensitive intelligence issue.
I also noted that Cooper used the word " apparently," in describing what Rove said to him,
" KR said, wilson's wife, who apparently works at the agency on wmd issues "
Sounds like Rove wasn't even sure if she worked there.
Well, well, well. What have we here...???
Does anyone believe that Judith Miller would be in jail to protect Rove if he were the leaker? They would have given this information up within days of the story if the leaker was Rove.
Since they didn't divulge Rove as the leaker, he couldn't be the leaker.
The only solution that makes sense is that the reporters are covering for a Dem who is the leaker, most likely Wilson himself.
What we have here is RatherGate II, or III, or IV. IMO, this is just a leftover from the 2004 Campaign. There's no doubt that the RATS and MSM colluded on inventing phony stories in their attempt to bring down Dubya. The reason they're hanging onto this one is to bring down the best GOP operative since Lee Atwater ahead of next year's elections.
It also helps distract attention from the fact they have no ideas, or strategy aside from obstruction and pretending they're still relevant.
For me, this raises another "why": why did the Democratic operative's media hit on Bush dovetail with French intelligence's attempt to plant the phony Niger documents on British and American intelligence?
This whole mess has made me see the light-- No way I'm voting for Karl Rove in 2008. The GOP will have to put up another candidate for President if they want my vote.
As Rush would say, you swerved into it -- the real story.
There have been reports of a Democrat Senatorial Policy Committee meeting in January, 2003, held at one of the Senator's homes. In the wake of the November, 2002 election, it was resolved that the Democrats had to undertake "a plan to undermine the President's credibility".
Among the invited guests at this meeting were Nicholas Kristof (of the NYTimes), Walter Pincus (of the WaPo)...and Joseph C. Wilson IV (whether representing himself, the Saudis or dissident elements in the CIA is unclear).
It is intriguing, is it not, that the first identifiable leaks of Wilson's "mission" came from Kristof's column and Pincus' reporting. Plus, an account reported by BBC attributed to "a CIA operative" (i.e., likely Plame herself)?
This whole affair was a cynical set-up orchestrated by the liberal Democrats and their fellow travellers in the media and the bureaucracy.
Maybe her source was Mrs. Plame...
Could it have had anything to do with Wilson's second wife -- Jacqueline? She was a cultural attache for the French diplomatic corps -- a common cover for intelligence postings.
Or, perhaps, a member of the Democrat Senatorial Policy Committee had especially good contacts within DGSE and was able to ask a "favor"?
Or were the French merely covering their own ass with respect to an ongoing smuggling operation supplying yellowcake to rogue regimes?
Personally, I would be inclined toward the latter...
Considering what we now know, which is that most of Libya's uranium came from Niger, off the books, I would agree with you.
French intel paid to have the documents prepared, the documents were prepared by people at the Niger embassy, and then French intel passed them to US intelligence. They were then exposed by a French member of the IAEA.
The exposure of these docs was used to discredit the idea that Niger and France were involved in contraband sales of uranium, something we now know to be true.
By the way, anyone else remember that US Navy intel reported contraband uranium being held in a warehouse at the port where Niger's ore ships out; they reported it to CIA, who waited a month to check it out. No, nothing there, they reported.