Comments on: What Did Rove Know And When Did He Know It?

By: MarkH

MarkH — Mon, 19 Feb 2007 04:19:07 +0000

Isn’t it terrific when all the information comes out?

Wouldn’t it be neat if our commercially provided media journalism could get ‘er done?

When the Rich corporate interests aren’t so apparent to the public then we just suffer, but when their interests become publicly known and we’re suffering, then somebody oughta pay … big time.

——

I think the CIA guy who talked to Novak didn’t ‘out’ Plame because she had worked in another capacity at the Agency which was NOT covert. Telling someone she worked there wasn’t a problem at all. And, telling Novak she didn’t send her husband was no big deal either. It’s only her covert role and purpose which the Bush admin apparently divulged and then when they learned Novak was going to write about it they also apparently did not inform the Agency of this breach of secrecy, and that’s probably a crime too.

They are deep in turd blossoms.

By: The Oracle

The Oracle — Mon, 19 Feb 2007 02:58:35 +0000

I wonder if Hohlt got a preview of Novak’s subsequent column in which Novak disclosed the identity of the CIA front company used by covert non-official-cover CIA operatives, like Valerie Wilson, in their intelligence gathering activities overseas? And Rove, did he also get a preview of this additional “leaked” information Novak was going to reveal, further compromising our national security by outing a CIA intelligence gathering network?

What a tangled web the neo-con traitors have spun.

Hopefully, Patrick Fitzgerald will be able to unravel it all and bring all the ones responsible to justice. All of our CIA operatives, and their families, as well as everyone else in our intelligence communities need some type of assurance that all the guilty parties in the Bush administration are held accountable, and removed, so they don’t do anymore damage, or endanger anymore of our intelligence operatives, who lay their lives daily on the line to keep our nation safe.

By: Christy Hardin Smith

Christy Hardin Smith — Mon, 19 Feb 2007 02:00:17 +0000

karl at 85 — Neither Armitage nor Harlow still work for the US government in official positions. Karl Rove continues to work as President Bush’s top advisor. But I would hope that Richard Armitage will never again be given a top level security clearance, just for the record. Nor anyone else who blabbed classified information in this matter.

By: makesenseofit

makesenseofit — Sun, 18 Feb 2007 22:50:14 +0000

I am tired of the jibberish day in and day out … with no answers to anything … and while the talk continues the action continues by the same ones the talk is about.

By: Slothrop

Slothrop — Sun, 18 Feb 2007 20:11:16 +0000

Let me see if I’ve got this right:

Rove knew in advance of publication that Novak was about to reveal a national security secret — the status of Valerie Plame’s CIA role — and he failed to take action to prevent it and that’s a crime.

Right?

By: squiddy

squiddy — Sun, 18 Feb 2007 19:25:53 +0000

I’m reminded of that “Kids In The Hall” skit where Dave Foley is on the stand, brashly lying through his grinning teeth to questions from the prosecutor, then saying “This is SO easy!!!”

http://youtube.com/watch?v=5zD20gbHF8s

When did it become an inside joke for multimillionaire neoconservatives to violate an oath to tell the truth? What is it about a Grand Jury investigation that makes it harmlessly funny to lie to them?

If Libby or any of these guys gets pardoned, then we’re really no better than any third-rate monarchy, and have been kidding ourselves all along.

By: karl

karl — Sun, 18 Feb 2007 18:34:54 +0000

But it still does not absolve Rove from his affirmative duties in this regard. And it still doesn’t explain why the man still has a security clearance

Does Armitage still have his security clearances? Harlow?

By: share

share — Sun, 18 Feb 2007 18:33:49 +0000

And why is rumsfeld still allowed his top security clearance and taxpayer funded flunkies to help rumsfeld destroy evidence of his crimes and complicity in the destruction of our armed forces and murder of our soldiers?

By: mudkitty

mudkitty — Sun, 18 Feb 2007 18:24:23 +0000

Rove has immunity from further prosecution, does he not? So why not give him clearance? Only public pressure could take away his “clearance” at this point.

By: Christy Hardin Smith

Christy Hardin Smith — Sun, 18 Feb 2007 18:12:09 +0000

karl at 81 — Agreed that the correct response from Harlow ought to have been “no comment.” But it still does not absolve Rove from his affirmative duties in this regard. And it still doesn’t explain why the man still has a security clearance. One does not negate the other — they are separate and apart in terms of facts and obligations.