Wednesday, July 13, 2005

A matter of security and petty pay-back

It's fascinating to watch Rove and the GOP (e.g. FOX) spin the facts: "I didn't know her name. I didn't leak her name," Rove told CNN last year. However, as the email shows he knew that covert CIA operative and WMD expert Valerie Plame was the person who suggest her husband, former Ambassador, Joe Wilson go on a fact finding mission to Africa regarding the accusation that Iraq was trying to buy yellow-cake from Niger. Rove also knew that leaking "Wilson's wife's" identify would help to discredit the former Ambassador's reputation... So what if he had to expose a covert CIA operatives identity to the press? Isn't protecting the case for war more important?

This administration's record of attempting to discredit PEOPLE instead of their data or arguments is what's most disconcerting about its behavior. Arguing that Wilson's report was in error was a lot more difficult than casting doubt on his qualifications and the reason he was chosen. Somehow, the FACT that his main assertion was correct (Iraq did NOT try to buy yellow-cake from Iraq) gets lost in the fray -- the exact result the White House wanted.

This is the same trick they used to discredit Richard Clarke -- who testified, UNDER OATH that the administration ignored his pleas for action before 9/11... and after 9/11 their thoughts almost immediately went to Iraq. Where's the president's (or VP's) sworn testimony? ... That's right -- they "chatted" with the commission, but refused to testify under oath.

Doesn't this scare you?

But this time discrediting the source required a crime. For the sake of our security... and for the sake of justice, lets hope it sticks this time.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8525978/site/newsweek

R

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

From an interview with Wilson in Oct of 2004:

Do you think Karl Rove knows who the culprit is, as you suggested earlier?

I never suggested that -- what I did suggest was that I intend to cooperate with any investigation that goes forward because I would like to see the culprit brought to justice, whether that culprit is Karl Rove who is frog-marched out of the White House in handcuffs or somebody else. At the time that I made that statement (about Karl Rove), it was before the leak in the Washington Post that said there had been two officials who called six journalists about my wife. And my statement about Rove was predicated on the following: The act of leaking my wife's name to the press was a political act. The White House has a political office; the head of that political office is Mr. Rove. Now I can't tell you for certain that he would leak the identity of my wife to the press or even authorize the leak. But what I can tell you is that in the week after the Novak column appeared, I heard from several reporters that the White House was essentially pushing the story, that the White House was calling up the press and saying the real story here is Wilson and his wife, not the president's 16 infamous words [in his January State of the Union speech, alleging Saddam had tried to buy yellowcake uranium from Niger]. And then finally I heard from another reporter who said he had just gotten off the phone with Karl Rove, who said to him, "Wilson's wife is fair game."

Anonymous said...

Looking for information and found it at this great site...
» »