Skip to comments.Joseph Wilson's Amazing Left-Wing Dreamland
Posted on 07/23/2005 8:44:08 AM PDT by macsmind76
AS THE SEEMINGLY ENDLESS SPIDERWEB OF LIES SPUN BY former Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV unravels, the media has gone out of its way to question the credibility of
Karl Rove. Despite Roves demonstrable non-leak of Valerie Plames non-secret identity, the dogs continue to gather, hungry for a second term scandal, while the Wilsons blatant self-promotion erodes whatever basis they had for a story in the first place. Perhaps Joe Wilsons two biggest whoppers were his claim to have spoken out because of his deep, non-partisan commitment to truth, and his inconsolable remorse that his wifes closely guarded anonymity had become collateral damage in the Bush administrations war against him. What is at risk of being lost in the media hype of Karl Roves leak is that Plame and Wilson had deep-seated ideological opposition to the Niger trip they set up, Plame apparently spiked that trip in advance, and she had long ago blown her status as a secret CIA agent.
(Excerpt) Read more at frontpagemag.com ...
Joseph Wilson discredited reliable reports from MI6 for the sole purpose of scoring a cheap political point off of President Bush.
I don't know what to do with that kind of selfishness and stupidity. Perhaps some of your Texans do.
Know your enemy!!
These jerks are desperate and will stoop to anything to take over this country! They have no bottom, they have no honor!
Magicians are masters of illusion - Leftists are the best Magicians!! (As are Islampires)!!!
Biggest whoppers? Then if what he said about Niger was mostly true, then there are a lot of whoppers around????
My wife's name is Mrs. Joseph Wilson. It is Mrs.Valerie Wilson.
Plame was just her "Nom de Plume." I think the only legitimate target here is the way Wilson was using the press (the Nicholas Kristof column of NYT 5/6/03) to disseminate a slanted anti-Bush version just weeks into the war. This was long before the famed Op-Ed piece he wrote.
Joseph Wilson also lied about his Niger yellowcake report. All of which is enough to make him a hero for a certain type of liberal.
Wilson also lied about the content of his Niger yellowcake report. Those two facts alone are enough to make him a hero to a certain type of liberal.
I just thought I would point out...to believe that Karl Rove did absolutely nothing wrong...you have to believe there is conspiracy by the CIA, the democrats, and the overwhelming majority of the mainstream press, and of course Mr. Wilson and Mrs. Plame are involved too. You have to believe all three of these groups on conspiring together..to believe that Karl Rove is totally innocent.
Doesnt anybody find this scenario bit tinfoil hattish?
...to believe that Karl Rove did absolutely nothing wrong...
Well, gee. We all do know that the mainstream media is just an arm of the Republican Party.
You are not good with facts, are you?
Ivan, read my post #6 - it's about leftist illusion.
This is one of the most concise stories I have ready on this matter. Thanks for posting!
Ever occur to you that things may be just be in a heap?
"Ever occur to you that things may be just be in a heap?"
Care to elaborate what you mean by "heap"?
"These facts are well-known to the media. Thirty-six mainstream media organizations including the White House Correspondents filed an amici curiae brief on behalf of Judith Miller pointing all these facts out. Yet they continue howling for Karl Roves head. Like George W. Bushs non-scandal at the National Guard, this is becoming the non-story that refuses to go away.
The media is very good at conspiring with the democrats. They've been caught before...Remember Rathergate?
You touched on an issue that at best appears complex, I call it a heap!
I don't know much about the Judith Miller affair, it appears confusing, though.
well first off..two group conspiring versus THREE groups conspiring is alot different.
Second of all Rathergate was no conspiracy..CBS didnt know the memo was forged..they were sloppy and didnt pick up on the forgery.
And do you know why they didnt pick up on the forgery, the reason is because quite frankly the forged memo was a small part of there story..the had loads of corraborating evidence that corroborated the content of the memo.
It be similar to faking a DNA test on a crime scene when u have 4 other pieces of evidence supporting the crime was committed by Mr. X. If you have 4 other piece of evidence, your not likely to ask yourself, I wonder if the crimelab faked the DNA test.
It doesn't have to rise to the level of a "CIA conspiracy". I leave that to Oliver Stone. But I have no doubt that some CIA employees, whether present or former, dislike and distrust the Bush Administration. Some of these showed up yesterday for the Democrats' "hearing". And I have no doubt that one or more of these were probably leaking information to the press. As for the Wilson-Plames, they are both Democrats, and Wilson was working for the Kerry campaign when he wrote his Times article. These people don't have to be "conspiring" to be all working toward the same general goal. In fact, they're not conspiring. They're merely all rowing the same boat.
One thing is very clear, she's not covering up for Karl Rove.
So what pieces of evidence make it clear that Judith Miller is not simpy doing what she thinks she is bound to due by Journalist ethics, and not reveal her source(s)???
And why is it clear that her source isnt Karl Rove?
Did you stray from Dummie Land?
That whole story was a non-story with nothing to back it up. And I wouldn't call mary mapes contacts with the kerry campaign a non-conspiracy LOL!!
I'll just have to read up about it. BTW read your tagline - having a look!
But do you really believe there are so few honest people in the CIA and in the Media..that they would be able to broadcast such a big lie.
And it doesnt irke you that Karl Rove told the public that he was in no way involved at all. And now it turnouts that at minimum he was involved in some way. That doesnt set off your BS alarm? that doesnt make u think there must be something he is trying to cover up?
The fact that Karl Rove signed a legal waver some 18 months ago that gave anyone he spoke with the right to tell the court what his conversations with them were. So she's not setting in jail to protect Karl Rove.
"The fact that Karl Rove signed a legal waver some 18 months ago that gave anyone he spoke with the right to tell the court what his conversations with them were. So she's not setting in jail to protect Karl Rove."
Plus Time and Cooper requested and received a specific waiver from Rove.
I thought that myself about zeeeeeeee...
What's that old saying? Great minds think alike LOL!!
and you know why Time and Cooper requested that specific waiver? because they knew Journalistic ethics didnt consider a general waiver as a legit waiver.
And actually its deeper than that..do you know why rove granted the request, because Cooper basically decided he wasnt going to jail for roves scummy behaviour..and decided to testify even if rove didnt give him the waiver. So rove essentially had no choice.
BTW, while browsing through the website you refer to in your tagline - I saw a song titled: 'Act Like Troll' - suits zeeeee, don't it!
Are you getting your information straight from the "This is your brain on drugs" crowd talking points over at Dummy Land?
Sure seems like it.
"And actually its deeper than that..do you know why rove granted the request, because Cooper basically decided he wasnt going to jail for roves scummy behaviour..and decided to testify even if rove didnt give him the waiver. So rove essentially had no choice."
Which is why Miller could make the same request to Rove if he was her source. Rove would give her specific release also.
calling me a dummy doenst change the facts.
"But do you really believe there are so few honest people in the CIA and in the Media..that they would be able to broadcast such a big lie.
"And it doesnt irke you that Karl Rove told the public that he was in no way involved at all. And now it turnouts that at minimum he was involved in some way. That doesnt set off your BS alarm? that doesnt make u think there must be something he is trying to cover up?"
I would imagine most people currently in the CIA are keeping quiet about this whole thing. Most of the CIA people going after Rove are retired and support the Democrat party.
It does concern me that Rove is reported to have originally told the press secretary he was not involved. Does anybody have any thoughts on that?
Yes it does! LOL!!!
Yea but rove would deny the request, unless Millers lawyer tried to bully Rove, the way Coopers lawyer Bullied Rove.
But Bully your source into giving you a waiver, doenst really qualify as following journalistic ethics.
Plus Miller is doing this as a publicity stundt(is my personal hunch) Shes tryin to earn street Cred with the world of reporters and sources..cause she lost so much street Cred with all the articles she wrote about WMD's in Iraq before the war, that the NY Times had to later apologize for because they were all inaccurate.
"Are you getting your information straight from the "This is your brain on drugs" crowd talking points over at Dummy Land?"
Well if Dummyland is your term for the mainstream media, then the answer is yes.
Not at all true.
Both Cooper and Miller as well as other witness all received waivers issued by Fitzgerald's office a full 18 months prior to Cooper coming forward.
When Cooper's attorney went to Rove's attorney Luskin, for "another waiver", Luskin was like, "You already have a waiver??"
The question is "Why did Cooper wait 18 months?"....and don't forget, Cooper and his wife Mandy are frequent dinner guests of "The Senator from New York".
Dummy Land is the term I use for the democratic underground.
You know, that place where all your troll "This is your brain on drugs" crowd friends hang out.
yea I know thats what Luskin claimed..but then luskin also claimed that Cooper burned Rove. But even if you accept luskin account as true.
I would ask the question in reverse. I am source, I know that a reporter might goto jail cause he refuses to reveal me, but I dont really care if he reveals me or not. Why don't I approach him and just tell him, hey buddy if i am the source you are protecting don't sweat it, you can testify about me.
well if by democraticunderground, you are referring to DU? then the answer is no..the few times ive visited that site they seemed like idiots to me. If you mean democratic blogs in general such as dailykos, then sure some of the info i have learned has been from dailykos, but the majority of the info i have learned is from mainstream media.
"Yea but rove would deny the request, unless Millers lawyer tried to bully Rove, the way Coopers lawyer Bullied Rove
"But Bully your source into giving you a waiver, doenst really qualify as following journalistic ethics."
Wait a minute, back up. You said before that Time and Cooper requested the specific waiver due to journalistic ethics. Why would they then turn around and violate journalistic ethics by bullying Rove?
It's not "Luskins" claim, the fact that Cooper had a waiver for the last 18 months, came from the Prosecutors Office. It is actually standard procedure to help witnesses testify.
In fact the actual waiver was drafted by Fitzgerald's office.
Again, that's why Luskin, and quite frankly a lot of legal experts are asking the same question. What in the heck did he need another one for?
I need to point out that the prosecutor's office both authored and issued the original waivers - not Luskin. The source of that information IS the prosecutors office.
Luskin was merely surprised, as a lot of legal experts are, that Cooper would ask for another. The first was sufficient.
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.