This is the Archive site for Firedoglake. To go to the main site please click on the following link

Sunday, July 10, 2005

Eat Me

Without taking time off from their "A" job of carrying water for BushCo., Newsweek confirms that Rove was, indeed, Matt Cooper's source (just as Lawrence O'Donnell said). Remember these oldies but goodies?

October 10, 2003:
Q Scott, earlier this week you told us that neither Karl Rove, Elliot Abrams nor Lewis Libby disclosed any classified information with regard to the leak. I wondered if you could tell us more specifically whether any of them told any reporter that Valerie Plame worked for the CIA?

MR. McCLELLAN: Those individuals -- I talked -- I spoke with those individuals, as I pointed out, and those individuals assured me they were not involved in this. And that's where it stands.
Wee Mickey:
[Lawrence O'Donnell] is almost always wrong. Which is why I'll believe his report that "Karl Rove was Matt Cooper's source"--headlined "Rove Blew CIA Agent's Cover"--when it's confirmed elsewhere. ... Which it pointedly isn't, quite, in Newsweek ...


If, as Rove's lawyer told told Newsweek, Rove "signed a waiver authorizing reporters to testify about their conversations with him," how could he be "the" source Cooper was "protecting" at risk of going to jail?
Ankle Biting Pundits:
Rove has gone from “Matt Cooper’s source” to “one of the secret sources Matt Cooper has been protecting for the last two years.” If O’Donnell downgrades Rove any more, O’Donnell will officially be branded a liar in this affair.
Many people have doubts about the reliability of Lawrence O'Donnell as a source. We'll find out, I suppose.
So Lawrence O'Donnell's breathless allegations were all much ado about nothing.

Of course, this isn't likely to stop the leftist-driven media storm over the accusation that Rove was the leaker.


The fact that O'Donnell and others are asking Rove to defend himself only proves that they have no really convincing proof. Otherwise they would have made it public by now.
Mark in Mexico:
Why hasn't Karl Rove come forward, in person, to tell his side? He's having too much fun watching morons like Lawrence O'Donnell self-immolate just like Dan Rather did.
I don’t condone the “outing” even if it was not malicious, because it is possible that anyone that dealt with Plame that is still in the field, in our country or others, was potentially put in danger by the revelation.
Well fuck me silly. A conservative who's actually sincere about all that "national security" stuff. Wow. Who woulda thunk.

Oh and while we're at it, how about some fodder for future crow, today from the not so subtly homoerotic Powertools:
It is doubtful whether Rove or any other administration source knew of Plame's affiliation with the CIA through access to classified materials; it is further questionable whether Rove or any other source knew that she was a "covert" employee, or that the government was making an effort to keep her affiliation with the Agency a secret. (In fact, it is unclear whether the Agency did make such an effort.) As to the third situation covered by the statute, neither Rove nor any other administration source identified Plame as part of a "pattern of activities intended to identify or expose covert agents" for the purpose of impairing national security.

It is hard to see how Rove could be indicted for violation of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act, and it is very unlikely that he would have been foolish enough to testify falsely before the grand jury about his conversations with journalists.
Keep 'em coming, boys and girls. I got a long memory.

(photo courtesy stock.xchng)