Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Rove Case May Test Bush's Loyalty to His Closest Aides -Attacking Hard...
NYT ^ | 7/13/05 | DAVID E. SANGER

Posted on 07/13/2005 6:08:10 AM PDT by Tumbleweed_Connection

Loyalty has long been the most hallowed virtue in the Bush White House, but rarely has it been tested the way it has this week.

No one has been closer to the president longer, or bailed him out of more tight spots, than Karl Rove, his chief political adviser. Now the question is whether President Bush can protect Mr. Rove from a gathering political storm, no matter how furious it becomes.

Current and former White House officials who know both men say they have no doubt that as long as Mr. Rove faces no serious legal charges - and so far he has yet to be charged with anything, and may never be - Mr. Bush will defend him. They point to the words Mr. Bush used to silence conservative critics of Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales last week, warning them curtly, "I'm loyal to my friends."

Mr. Bush, who once said he would fire anyone on his staff who had knowingly leaked the name of a C.I.A. operative, Valerie Wilson, also known by her maiden name, Valerie Plame, ignored a question about Mr. Rove posed to him on Tuesday by a reporter on the edges of an Oval Office meeting with the prime minister of Singapore.

But hours later, Scott McClellan, the White House press secretary, who on Monday declined to answer any questions about the matter, broke briefly out of no-comment mode to come to Mr. Rove's defense. He noted that reporters had asked whether the president still had "confidence in particular individuals, specifically Karl Rove." He answered his own question, saying, "Any individual who works here at the White House has the confidence of the president. They wouldn't be working here at the White House if they didn't."

Mr. Bush's loyalty has limits....

(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...


TOPICS: Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: americahate; cialeak; liberals
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-83 next last
To: Tumbleweed_Connection

The media moved on and the Republicans didn't attack. Ongoing investigation means there is nothing there until it is over but some on here cannot seem to grasp that! :)


41 posted on 07/13/2005 6:40:33 AM PDT by PhiKapMom (AOII Mom -- J.C. for OK Governor in '06; Allen/Watts in 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom

Three major senators have asked for Rove's head and Bush remains silent. That's a bit more than a rumor.

The RINO's will turn on Rove next. It won't be long until the Bushbots claim that Rove is a liability. Bush needs to step up.


42 posted on 07/13/2005 6:42:35 AM PDT by AppyPappy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection

Remember: Downing Street Memo = Impeachment Proceedings. This is just another thing to keep the loyal opposition money machine excited.


43 posted on 07/13/2005 6:46:36 AM PDT by BallyBill (..the only quagmire I see is the one the Media is stuck in..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AppyPappy

He has to wait until the Grand Jury is over -- then Novak writes his tell all and the media goes into hiding. I know around me when Ms. Clinton starts yelling, the people know why is lying.

The President cannot give these reports by the NY Times and others credibility. I would bet there is a plan how to handle this because Rove never goes without one and some members of the media are going to wish they had never tangled with him and this President when all the facts come out.

When the special prosecutor asked Rove to stay silent, I think this investigation goes farther than outing Wilson's wife. They may be after those leaks at the CIA which they could have uncovered through this investigation. When a Grand Jury is seated in a case like this, you cannot be sure where it is going. I think NY Times found out their reporter or someone else they protect is a target of the investigation and now are going full throttle to put the pressure on Rove knowing full well he was asked not to speak.

RATs have gone out on a limb calling for his resignation -- I can still remember Ms. Clinton waving that NY rag around on the floor of the Senate that asked of Pres Bush -- "What did he know and when did he know it" -- made her look like the idiot she was when the facts came out and gave my Senator and others a chance to go on the floor and blast her.

Stay tuned for the next chapter. Being in flyover country with a conservative newspaper that takes the position of the WSJ not the NY Times gives a total different perspective -- out here Ms. Clinton speaks out and they most likely will take the opposite view. :)


44 posted on 07/13/2005 6:47:43 AM PDT by PhiKapMom (AOII Mom -- J.C. for OK Governor in '06; Allen/Watts in 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection

Gotta like that final quote in the article:

A former official who has worked for Mr. Bush said: "This president is Mr. Alamo. He sees the hordes coming over the hill and he heads for the barricades. And not to raise a white flag."

And that's probably the most difficult aspect of the
Bush personality for the Democrats to overcome.


45 posted on 07/13/2005 6:54:58 AM PDT by Grendel9 (uick)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Yardstick

Exactly.


46 posted on 07/13/2005 6:56:01 AM PDT by jveritas (The left cannot win a national election ever again and never will the Buchananites and 3rd parties)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant

You're wrong. Only if he's convicted should he be fired. The indictment would look bad, but it isn't anywhere near sufficient as proof of guilt.

Firing him because it would look bad would hand the mainstream media a victory. Especially since this scandal is manufactured.


47 posted on 07/13/2005 6:57:12 AM PDT by coconutt2000 (NO MORE PEACE FOR OIL!!! DOWN WITH TYRANTS, TERRORISTS, AND TIMIDCRATS!!!! (3-T's For World Peace))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: KenmcG414
My bet is someone will get indicted and it won't be Rove.
48 posted on 07/13/2005 6:58:10 AM PDT by Dave S
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: HamiltonJay
How does one LEAK something that was already public knowledge?? I still can't figure this "scandal" out.

The media is screaming SCANDAL! SCANDAL! and hoping that someone reading the news will remember the big headlines, and not pay attention when it turns out to be a mistake.

49 posted on 07/13/2005 6:58:53 AM PDT by coconutt2000 (NO MORE PEACE FOR OIL!!! DOWN WITH TYRANTS, TERRORISTS, AND TIMIDCRATS!!!! (3-T's For World Peace))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: KenmcG414
My bet is someone will get indicted and it won't be Rove.

My bet is no one gets indicted unless it's for perjury.

50 posted on 07/13/2005 7:00:38 AM PDT by Dave S
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: gaspar

The actual source is going to turn out to be a big disappointing nobody, and the press is going to bury the exoneration of Rove on the back pages, and hope that everybody remembers that there was a scandal and that Rove's name was attached to it, and that there was no exoneration.

Typical MSM deception.


51 posted on 07/13/2005 7:01:51 AM PDT by coconutt2000 (NO MORE PEACE FOR OIL!!! DOWN WITH TYRANTS, TERRORISTS, AND TIMIDCRATS!!!! (3-T's For World Peace))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: coconutt2000

I guarantee you that Bush is not going to have a deputy chief of staff who's under indictment.


52 posted on 07/13/2005 7:06:28 AM PDT by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom

Think about this for a minute, and believe me I love the game. The premise these clowns are working from is that the media has the power to provide the means by which to dismiss Rove. I post this crap not only to demonstrate their frenzy, but to enjoy the reactions.


53 posted on 07/13/2005 7:06:56 AM PDT by Tumbleweed_Connection (http://hour9.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection

Shhesh, if the NYT ever goes under, their writers will find gainful employment becoming afternoon soap opera writers.


54 posted on 07/13/2005 7:09:14 AM PDT by Dane ( anyone who believes hillary would do something to stop illegal immigration is believing gibberish)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AppyPappy
Silence means approval.

Couldn't disagree more. Bush is skilled at playing hard ball politics...even as his detractors continue to underestimate him.

It's my guess that his silence sends a signal that he knows more than they do and that he is simply allowing the Dems and the press sufficient rope to hang themselves.

Rove has testified several times before the Grand Jury and has been told that he is not a subject of the investigation. Moreover, isn't it curious that while Rove released his reporter from any confidentiality requirement the other reporter, who now sits in jail, could not get such relief and has refused to reveal her source?

There's blood in the water and the press is circling, but it's not Rove's.

55 posted on 07/13/2005 7:09:23 AM PDT by O6ret ("Experts" can be paid to say anything)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: AppyPappy
Speaking as a proud Bushbot, it will be a cold day in hell when I ask the President to get rid of Karl Rove. As far as I am concerned, Senators Kerry, Clinton, and Reid, KNOWN LIARS AND CROOKS, can go pound sand.

And the President doesn't need to say anything. We can ALL remember how well answering the media worked with the ANG controversy, can't we. He gave them ALL the records, and it wasn't enough to shut them up. In fact, they even MADE UP records, and if it weren't for a few Freepers calling attention to the forgery very quickly, it would have been a disaster.

No comments to the press are needed. After seeing the White House press corps in action, I am inclined to think Bush should just close down the press room and let them sit outside on the lawn.

56 posted on 07/13/2005 7:13:46 AM PDT by Miss Marple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant

Unless your initials are GWB, I'm inclined to disagree and consider this conflict of opinions unresolvable because the indictment will not occur.


57 posted on 07/13/2005 7:15:10 AM PDT by coconutt2000 (NO MORE PEACE FOR OIL!!! DOWN WITH TYRANTS, TERRORISTS, AND TIMIDCRATS!!!! (3-T's For World Peace))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: O6ret

That's just it. They DON'T hang themselves. If Rove is cleared, they will just move on. There will be no political fallout. The media controls the medium. The media is not going to beat themselves up if they were wrong. If the Democrats can condemn Rove, why can't Bush defend him?

If you were accused of being a pedophile and were villified in the media for weeks, one little article clearing you will not get your reputation back. I doubt Rove even gets that.


58 posted on 07/13/2005 7:18:45 AM PDT by AppyPappy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
The reports are all over the place... but here is a tidbit via Newsmax citing Novak......

The Washington press corps and their Democratic friends have been too busy this week chasing down Karl Rove to notice that columnist Robert Novak has offered a tantalizing clue about the identity of just who it was who leaked Valerie Plame's name to him back in July 2003.

And judging from Novak's revelation - it wasn't Karl Rove.

Apparently it's been a while since any of the big media's newshounds bothered to read Novak's follow-up column on the Plame case on Oct. 1, 2003, where he talked about the man (woman?) who spilled Plame's name and thereby, according to Dems, committed the crime of the century.

"During a long conversation with a senior administration official," he wrote, "I asked why Wilson was assigned the mission to Niger. He said Wilson had been sent by the CIA's counterproliferation section at the suggestion of one of its employees, his wife. It was an offhand revelation from this official, who is no partisan gunslinger."


59 posted on 07/13/2005 7:18:53 AM PDT by deport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant

>>>In fact, he did not even know she was a covert agent.

Was she a 'covert agent' or just 'work for the CIA'? There is a big difference.


60 posted on 07/13/2005 7:19:56 AM PDT by sandbar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-83 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson