Quote:

Matter-eater Man said:
Quote:

Wonder Boy said:...

As I said earlier in the topic, that's yet to be proven, that Rove is the leaker.

Libby has been indicted, but again, not yet proven guilty.


That is a legal determination. I think it's fair to say you don't need a legal determination to make a nonlegal judgement that Libby & Rove lied.



But a lie is not a crime.

I could point to any number of incidents where Democrats such Gore, Kerry, Feinstein, etc., have lied.
And Republicans as well.

It's a fact of life that politicians on both sides bend the truth. Or outright distort and fabricate their own truth to suit their political ends.
I wish there were laws against lying, that would eliminate the partisan bickering on both sides and force our leaders to limit their rhetoric to the facts, to tone down the anger to the point that real core issues could be discussed and actually resolved.

But as it stands, a lie is not a crime.

Quote:

MAtter Eater Man said:
Quote:

Wonder Boy said:

In any case, this is not comparable to leaking missile technology to the Russians or Chinese.



According to the CIA, Plame was a NOC. [You're] making an assumption that she never worked on anything important.



No, that's your misrepresentation of what I said. Her work was no doubt very important. But she was not a field agent or spy.

And even if she was a spy at some point in the past, her work was already 6 years in the past, 6 years beyond the statute of limitations where it would be a crime to reveal her covert activity, IF SHE EVER WAS a covert agent, when Rove allegedly exposed her.
(Although it appears now it was actually Richard Armitage, and not Rove.)

Quote:

Matter Eater Man said:
Quote:

Wonder Boy said:

In the worst case scenario --assuming that Rove and Libby actually did reveal secrets to the media, which is not proven-- even if they did:

1) Joe Wilson already made revelation of Valerie Plame's CIA employment inevitable. His editorial alone, regardless of what Rove, Libby, Armitage, or any other Republican did alone created the spotlight in the Niger mission that would have outed Plame as Wilson's spouse.


The obvious flaw to your logic there is that if it was truly inevitable, Libby & Rove would never have had to bring it up when speaking to reporters. I actually doubt any reporter would have been able to find out that Plame suggested sending her husband to Niger beyond a gov't official with enough clearence willing to leak classified information.



Again: Richard Armitage is the apparent leaker, not Rove.

As G-man said above.



Quote:

Matter Eater Man said:
Quote:

Wonder Boy said:

2) again, it is still a source of debate whether she was even a covert agent !

Considering that the CIA & Fitzgerald say she was, I'm not sure what more could be offered.



I've seen any number of higher-ups in the CIA appear on PBS NEWS Hour and various Sunday morning talk shows who dispute that Plame was ever a field agent.


Quote:

Matter Eater Man said:
Quote:

Wonder Boy said:
3) Regardless of whether Valerie Plame was a field agent or not, she is well beyond the number of years after which her covert CIA status can legally be revealed to the public.
For her CIA work to be so many years ago, so far beyond the statute of limitations of being "top secret", makes clear the falseness that her outing allegedly "jeapordizes national security" , as liberals hyperbolically wail.


This was posted before & according to the CIA it wasn't true at the time. At this point I'm guessing it's no longer a lie but only because a couple of years have now passed.



So it's not a lie, and not a crime on Rove's part.

Quote:

Matter Eater Man said:
Quote:

Wonder Boy said:
and

4) Again, as discussed earlier, Rove's conversation with reporter Robert Novak was just a conversation between two friends who happen to be Washington insiders, chatting about the latest Beltway gossip.
It was Novak who mentioned to Rove (not Rove passing info to Novak) a rumor that Wilson's wife worked for the CIA and had Joseph Wilson recruited by the CIA for the Niger yellow-cake investigation.
Novak said "I heard..."
And Rove responded (neither confirming nor denying the rumor) "Yeah, I heard that too."


Rove had also talked with Cooper where he outed Plame. Novak learned about Plame from Libby. You seem to be picking the one conversation that supports what [you're] saying but ignoring everything else.



Cooper has his own credibility issues about being forthcoming with what he knew.

And likewise, Washington Post reporter Bob Woodward also has a credibility issue, where he apparently knew for months where the leak came from, but disclosed to no one while denying he knew.


Quote:

Matter Eater Man said:
Quote:

Wonder Boy said:
5) Finally, nothing surprises me in Washington.
Well, not too often.
Monica Lewinsky and the semen-stained dress surprised me.

Rove and Libby used what leverage they had politically to spin things in their favor, just like Pelosi, Daschle, Reid, Gore, Hilary, Bill Clinton, Kennedy and the rest all do.


I'm unaware of any of them running around Washington outing NOC agents to reporters.



Again, it's not proven that Plame was even a field agent, to be "outed".
And even if Plame was a field agent, her covert status was at least 6 years in the past, well past the point where her potential covert actions would be considered a security risk, and be protected from public disclosure by federal law.

Quote:

Matter Eater Man said:
Quote:

Wonder Boy said:
But it amuses me to see these lifelong anti-war pacifists and leftists wrap themselves in the flag and allege that Rove and the Bush White House defending themselves against Wilson's allegations, that these Republicans-on-the-defensive, and not Wilson himself, are responsible for the spotlight being shined on his wife's CIA role.

I don't see mentioning that Wilson's wife sent him on the Niger mission as the most high-road tactic by Republicans. But it is relevant in spotlighting that Wilson was picked for the Niger mission for reasons other than his qualifications. And also spotlights that perhaps he wasn't the most informed source to write a New York Times editorial accusing President Bush of being a liar.


I never understood how it mattered to partisan Republicans that Plame suggested sending her husband to Niger. The CIA still approved his credentials. The documents still would have been fakes.



Because Joseph Wilson's trip to Niger was far from a full and thorough investigation.

Wilson stayed at some plush hotel in Niger , made a few phone calls, and was visited by a few businessmen and diplomats.

A conclusive investigation by someone truly seeking absolute certainty on whether there was yellow-cake uranium solicited and/or sold to Saddam would have required a far more thorough investigation.



Quote:

Matter Eater Man said:
Quote:

Wonder Boy said:
I've seen far more sleazy, underhanded, and outright treasonous actions from the Democrat party, and I've highlighted many of them in various topics here.


I can remember when treason wasn't a term that was hastily & casually thrown out by some Republicans. It was reserved for those that did evil things... like telling our nation's enemies who our spies were.



As already answered above, Plame, if she ever was a covert agent, was already 6 years past being a covert agent, and beyond the statute where her activities were considered top secret and banned from public disclosure.


Quote:

Matter Eater Man said:
Quote:

Wonder Boy said:
But Republican or Democrat, politics is politics. Each time you say: "How DARE they...", I can show you an example where the Democrats have done the same, if not exceeded the alleged underhandedness of Rove and the other conservative puppetmasters. Democrats pull their own strings, and don't always put on a classy show.


If somebody does something wrong, it's not less wrong because you feel somebody else did the same thing.



As I made clear above, Rove has not clearly done anything wrong. He has not broken laws, or he would have been indicted with Libby.

And even Libby may be found innocent. As G-man said earlier in the topic, to prove a case against Libby will be very difficult.

There's a lot of rhetoric coming from both sides, that while legally and morally permitted, is in questionable judgement and taste.

John Kerry mentioning Dick Cheney's daughter is a lesbian during a presidential debate, for example.

Senator Dick Durbin, for example. Comparing American soldiers in Iraq to "Nazi storm troopers, Soviet Gulags and the Pol Pot regime", giving pre-packaged distorted rhetoric to the Arab media, which arguably increases danger and violence against our soldiers stationed in Iraq and Afghanistan.

DNC Chairman Howard Dean, for example, saying there's "No Way we can win in Iraq." Undermining the morale of our troops with defeatist rhetoric, and emboldening insurgents to attack U.S. forces.

Legally permitted. But in questionable judgement and taste.

  • from Do Racists have lower IQ's...

    Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.

    EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.