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

Skip to comments.

A little birdie told me what the Rove thing is all about.

Posted on 07/14/2005 1:50:45 PM PDT by Pukin Dog

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 621-629 next last
To: Pukin Dog

Miller makes some sense, actually. She was a journalist specializing in WMD. Plame worked in WMD. Washington is not that big a World, particularly in special areas like this. She could have known Plame, or known of Plame. Miller wouldn't want to reveal herself as the source..


121 posted on 07/14/2005 2:24:43 PM PDT by popdonnelly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: Darkwolf377; Pukin Dog
I take Pukin Dog at his word. . .the man has credibility in my book. I trust him. You don't have to.
122 posted on 07/14/2005 2:24:46 PM PDT by Gunrunner2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Pukin Dog; knowtherules
PD...you are correct, it was Miller. Read on:

It was reported by a Freeper that Brit Hume said the word from the Rove camp is that Rove learned where Joe Wilson's wife worked because a reporter told him. Cheney's chief of staff, Lewis Libby, also has testified that he learned it from a journalist. Here is an article I found recently:

Something doesn't add up about why Judith Miller went to jail. The New York Times reporter didn't write a story about the Valerie Plame case and had a waiver from her source in order to talk about it to the grand jury. But she insisted on going to jail anyway. Speculation is mounting that Miller is protecting herself, that Miller was herself a source of information about Plame that made it to several Bush administration officials and was then recycled to columnist Robert Novak. He, then, disclosed Plame's employment by the CIA and her role in arranging for her husband Joe Wilson's mission to Africa to investigate the Iraq-uranium link.

This would help explain why Miller didn't write a story about the case. It would be difficult for Miller to write a story when she was so deeply involved in how it developed. Disclosure of her role then or now would be extremely embarrassing.

The more likely explanation is that Miller is protecting private discussions with administration officials, and that during those discussions she provided or confirmed information about Plame's identity. This would make sense. Both Miller and Plame covered the subject of weapons of mass destruction and it was likely that they knew one another, or at least were aware of each other's work in this field.

Source

This scenario was also backed up by the Washington Post:

Sources close to the investigation say there is evidence in some instances that some reporters may have told government officials -- not the other way around -- that Wilson was married to Plame, a CIA employee.

Washington Post


123 posted on 07/14/2005 2:25:26 PM PDT by ravingnutter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Eagles Talon IV
I think Miller told Rove. I think that might be why she never wrote her story after doing the research. Let me be clear, that is MY OPINION only.
124 posted on 07/14/2005 2:25:45 PM PDT by Pukin Dog (Sans Reproache)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: PFC

>>Bush said he would fire whoever was responsible.<<

Really. . .please provide the quote and source.


125 posted on 07/14/2005 2:26:14 PM PDT by Gunrunner2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Pukin Dog
"Bush, by telling Republicans to shut up about his choice, has set precedent for when he tells (by his Supreme Court selections) the Democrats the same thing. If he ignores both sides, he can just choose who he wants, and that is exactly what he will do."

I hope Bush isn't going to play Ceasar and appoint Gonzales.

126 posted on 07/14/2005 2:26:58 PM PDT by spunkets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BoBToMatoE

It's extremely interesting, since they claim that Rove is guilty of such high crimes that he should be fired. In the court briefs they claimed that no crime had been committed and that the investigation should be dropped.


127 posted on 07/14/2005 2:27:12 PM PDT by Eva
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: PFC

You are very badly misinformed. Bush said there must be an illlegal action and there was none. There was no leak. There was an attempt to set a misguided soul on the correct path.


128 posted on 07/14/2005 2:27:23 PM PDT by bert (K.E. N.P . The wild winds of fortune will carry us onward)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: popdonnelly
Miller knows more about the Yellow Cake affair than any other living person.
129 posted on 07/14/2005 2:27:32 PM PDT by Pukin Dog (Sans Reproache)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: Pukin Dog
Expect editorials next week, arguing whether or not it is fair for a president who “stole the first election” and won the second election by the “smallest margin of any incumbent President” who is “embroiled in a National Security Scandal” to be deciding on the makeup of the Supreme Court. At the same time, Liberal Senators will begin to suggest that Conformation hearings on anyone Bush selects should be postponed until the investigations are over.

You may have a source for this, but if the RATS think this will work they are nuts.

130 posted on 07/14/2005 2:27:57 PM PDT by finnman69 (cum puella incedit minore medio corpore sub quo manifestus globus, inflammare animos)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PFC
I'm sorry folks but Rove screwed up. And he put Bush in an embarrassing situation because Bush said he would fire whoever was responsible. Ditch him. Move on and get back to the real business.

Don't be silly. Even if there were anything to this whole manufactured "scandal", the last thing the White House should be doing is rolling over for these whiny Democrats. Let them scream and cry and tell them to go to hell.
131 posted on 07/14/2005 2:28:12 PM PDT by fr_freak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Darkwolf377

It's not your business.
Either post something relevant to the subject, or move along.


132 posted on 07/14/2005 2:28:13 PM PDT by mabelkitty (Lurk forever, but once you post, your newbness shines like a new pair of shoes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Pukin Dog

"Don’t expect to hear much from Bush on Rove, or the Courts after he makes his selections"

Of course not. that's understandable. Rove is under investigation, and after Bush makes his pics for the court, its up to the conservative, elected officials to see it through.

But remember, Sherman Adams, Eisenhowers' chief of staff who virtually ran the white house also became a liability because of some a contentious issue. And the battle with his political enemies wouldn't let it go. The dems have nothing else. Regardless of how Eisenhower felt about him and would continually publicly came out in support of him, Eisenhower began to understand that his legislative legacy" was going to be threatened by continuing to publicly support Adams as part of his administration. Adams resigned. I happened to cover this in my master's thesis.

Bush is in his second term. He wants to ensure that his influence of his presidency continues. Rove has done a wonderful job for Bush, but the Bush administration is bigger than any one man. If, and only if, Rove is found to outed Wilson's wife, and understood, or didn't understand the lawful implications, he should resign. Bush can then focus on upcoming elections, his court nominations, and the war on terror. Rove can then focus on ensuring other conservatives are elected.


133 posted on 07/14/2005 2:28:22 PM PDT by Tulsa Ramjet (home of the free because of the brave.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: ravingnutter
Nothing to add. You said it all.
134 posted on 07/14/2005 2:28:35 PM PDT by Pukin Dog (Sans Reproache)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: RobFromGa

LOL! Now THAT is funny!


135 posted on 07/14/2005 2:29:00 PM PDT by McGavin999
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Pukin Dog

Sounds like a reliable bird to me.


136 posted on 07/14/2005 2:29:18 PM PDT by lexington minuteman 1775
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory
The fact that Bush can even FIND a conservative judicial candidate is a minor miracle.

Not really. With age comes wisdom!

137 posted on 07/14/2005 2:30:24 PM PDT by houeto ("Mr. President , close our borders now!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: Eva

It's extremely interesting, since they claim that Rove is guilty of such high crimes that he should be fired. In the court briefs they claimed that no crime had been committed and that the investigation should be dropped.

--

Where are those court briefs and why have not our big guns talked about this. This is key in the double standard? Got the link? I would love to use it on my blog. I believe we need to use that in our talking points.. you know..

"If this case is so important, they why did your companies ask for the case to be dismissed?"

I really have a feeling that Rush was right and that Schumer is nothing more than a handler - that this is a REAL conspiracy to take down Bush and do as much damage to the GOP as possible.

The question is, do other GOP senators and reps get how important of a fight this is?

I mean, to me, I am not really scared of what they are saying because its weak. Notice how the msm and dems are moving off of their core/beginning talking points and are going on to others.. We must confront this and take care of it.


138 posted on 07/14/2005 2:30:33 PM PDT by BoBToMatoE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: Tulsa Ramjet
If Rove had anything to worry about, he would not have signed an unconditional release to everyone he spoke to. Cooper wimped out because his wife told him too. Miller has bigger balls.
139 posted on 07/14/2005 2:30:52 PM PDT by Pukin Dog (Sans Reproache)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: Cosmo
Rush played Bush's quote on the subject and it read something along the lines of "if someone in his administration "broke the law" they would be dealt with.

The MSM has been all over the place mis-representing Bush's quote on this. I saw the original wording this morning, but can't find it right now.

It goes something like "I will deal with whoever leaked this, whoever broke the law". The MSM has been quoting the first part and leaving out the second.

Typical.

140 posted on 07/14/2005 2:31:06 PM PDT by narby (There are Bloggers, and then there are Freepers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 621-629 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