Should Rove Resign?

[Cambridge]

I think it's pretty clear he should go. Let's be honest, as much as he's trying to dance around the issue here and say he didn't reveal her name -- just her identity -- it's clear what his intention was -- sacrafice a patriot for political gain.

Say what you will about her politics or her husbands politics, but the fact of the matter is she was at the very least the peer of every US soldier. Like them, she put her life on the line to protect our nation against the threats of other nations and terrorism. Furthermore, she lived a double life, keeping secrets from friends and family, so that she could infiltrate and provide us with useful intelligence. Also, if captured, she would not necessarily be protected from harm and/or toture like our the uniformed soldiers.

In an era where we understand our biggest weakness is our lack of reliable intelligence...isn't the greatest crime imaginable anything that would further detract from it -- especially for political gain? I'm sorry, but Rove has to go. The man is despicable and should be brought to trial.

Sure, he'll wiggle out of it based on a technicality (he claims he only said it was Wilson's wife -- apparently that is not specific enough despite the fact Wilson only has one wife) but it is clear that he clearly and demonstratively violated the spirit of the law.

[Deleted]

Whoever the leak is... this is totally messed up. There have got to be serious consequences for whoever is responsible. Bush better not just fire them, but recommend prosecution (if there's such a cause of action) as well.

[HoyaDestroya]

i really don't think we know enough right now to say it was Rove that leaked her name... it sounds like he said something like the ambassador's wife worked for the CIA and that it was her not the VP who asked that Wilson be sent abroad... Wilson is a sketch ball - he is the one who made something political out of all this... I can't believe he appeared today with Sen. Schumer.

[Cambridge]

hoyadestroya2 said:

it sounds like he said something like the ambassador's wife worked for the CIA and that it was her not the VP who asked that Wilson be sent abroad.

That's the dancing I'm talking about. Sure, he didn't say the name...but let's be honest if his defense is that he didn't give out the full name of the spy, but just hinted at the identity -- it's pretty clear what his intent was.

Let me be clear. This is not a party issue. This goes way, way deeper. You can scoff, but this is borderline treason.

Think of the uproar if some Liberal politician -- who was opposed to the war -- gave up the location of a Navy Seal unit operating covertly in Iraq or Afganistan and they were comprimised. This is the same exact thing.

[nychoya3]

There are people who want to turn this whole thing into a referendum on Wilson. Now, Joe obviously likes the spotlight, and he's been preening since he got it. But he's not some crazy lefty. He was a donor to Bush Sr. and has worked in big positions in democratic and republican administrations. Moreover, he was pretty well suited for the job that he was given, having served as ambassador to Niger and as a envoy to Iraq prior to the Gulf War. And if he was "anti-war" he was anti-war for the right reasons and reasons that turned out to be, well, right.

Whatever he has done since the leak is immaterial. Someone endangered national security to discredit a critic (who happened to be telling the truth), and whoever that is needs to go to jail. Now, is there a chance that some legalistic spin about whether Plame was "really" covert, or just kinda covert will get Rove off the hook? Sure. But it shouldn't get him off the hook with Bush if he actually cares about national security over politics. This whole episode should be a wakeup call to the level of sleaze that is Rove's modus operandi and the degree to which he has corrupted his party.

[AustinHoya03]

cambridgehoya said:

That's the dancing I'm talking about. Sure, he didn't say the name...but let's be honest if his defense is that he didn't give out the full name of the spy, but just hinted at the identity -- it's pretty clear what his intent was.

Let me be clear. This is not a party issue. This goes way, way deeper. You can scoff, but this is borderline treason.

Think of the uproar if some Liberal politician -- who was opposed to the war -- gave up the location of a Navy Seal unit operating covertly in Iraq or Afganistan and they were comprimised. This is the same exact thing.

The "dancing" is going to create a problem for the President as well. We know that a) the president doesn't do nuance; and b) the president said that if anyone in the White House leaked Plame's identity he would fire them.

If you boil this down to a black and white issue, Rove identified Plame to a reporter for a national news magazine. Cooper wouldn't have known anything if not for statements made by Rove. Even if Rove was merely trying to prevent Cooper from writing an innacurate story, as he claims, he should've kept his mouth shut. Rove should be fired for his actions.

However, I think if Rove's "alibi," that he was merely trying to prevent Cooper from writing an inaccurate story rather than getting career hack Bob Novak to write a column ID'ing Plame, turns out to be true, he probably won't be prosecuted for his actions. And I don't know if he can be accused of "borderline treason."

What is clear, however, is that Rove needs to own up to his actions, apologize, and accept his not-so-terrible fate of temporarily becoming a political martyr before running the presidential campaign in '08.

[nychoya3]

"However, I think if Rove's "alibi," that he was merely trying to prevent Cooper from writing an inaccurate story rather than getting career hack Bob Novak to write a column ID'ing Plame, turns out to be true, he probably won't be prosecuted for his actions. And I don't know if he can be accused of "borderline treason.""

How so? First of all, Rove's alibi changes daily, so who knows? It's very tough to get a handle on things, since the prosecutor is totally silent and no leaks seemingly come from his office. But it's fair to assume that Cooper and Miller were not the targets of his investigation, and that some indictments are probably coming down the pike. Again, who knows? But it's puzzling why, even if all the various slander thrown at Wilson was true, how it would ratify Rove's act legally or morally. Rove was trying to spin Cooper - every politico does it. However, Rove used a piece of information that he shouldn't have had to begin with and that he certainly shouldn't have shared with anybody else. There's no situation in which identifying a covert CIA agent for purposes of discrediting her husband can be justified. That's really what it boils down to, as far as I'm concerned.

As a Democrat living in New York, I don't go around accusing people of treason, since Rove has already indentified me as a veritable fifth column undermining the country already, but some other choice words come to mind. Sleaze above all else.

[Cambridge]

austinhoya03 said:

cambridgehoya said:

That's the dancing I'm talking about. Sure, he didn't say the name...but let's be honest if his defense is that he didn't give out the full name of the spy, but just hinted at the identity -- it's pretty clear what his intent was.

Let me be clear. This is not a party issue. This goes way, way deeper. You can scoff, but this is borderline treason.

Think of the uproar if some Liberal politician -- who was opposed to the war -- gave up the location of a Navy Seal unit operating covertly in Iraq or Afganistan and they were comprimised. This is the same exact thing.

The "dancing" is going to create a problem for the President as well. We know that a) the president doesn't do nuance; and b) the president said that if anyone in the White House leaked Plame's identity he would fire them.

If you boil this down to a black and white issue, Rove identified Plame to a reporter for a national news magazine. Cooper wouldn't have known anything if not for statements made by Rove. Even if Rove was merely trying to prevent Cooper from writing an innacurate story, as he claims, he should've kept his mouth shut. Rove should be fired for his actions.

However, I think if Rove's "alibi," that he was merely trying to prevent Cooper from writing an inaccurate story rather than getting career hack Bob Novak to write a column ID'ing Plame, turns out to be true, he probably won't be prosecuted for his actions. And I don't know if he can be accused of "borderline treason."

What is clear, however, is that Rove needs to own up to his actions, apologize, and accept his not-so-terrible fate of temporarily becoming a political martyr before running the presidential campaign in '08.

I think selling out your countries agents for personal gain pretty much constitutes treason.

[AustinHoya03]

cambridgehoya said:

I think selling out your countries agents for personal gain pretty much constitutes treason.

Yes, I agree that vague phrase for vague phrase pretty much constitutes extreme accusation as well.

How did Rove "gain personally" from the leak?

Bottom line is: we don't know what Rove said. If he leaked the info with the intent it not be printed, which is possible if he was merely trying to prevent an inaccurate story from being written, then he's a schmuck who should've better known better and kept his mouth shut. He should also be out of a job. If he leaked the information with the intent that Plame's name be published in a national publication, then I'll gladly agree with you. But let's wait until all the facts are out. I think we generally agree on Rove, I'm just not ready to start tying the noose or throwing around crimes which are punishable by death according to the US constitution just yet. I'm more inclined to side with nychoya and leave the description of Rove's comments at sleazy for now.

[HoyaDestroya]

i really think it's early to be jumping to conclusion as to who said what when. we should remember there is another journalist out there that has notes on the subject as well. this investigation is far from over.

[Nevada Hoya]

The fact that Miller is the only one in jail on this is deplorable. Rove should be taken to task - fired and perhaps prosecuted. That being said, apparently Valerie's secret was a well known "secret" on the DC social scene. In fact, President DeGioia might even have known. www.nathanslunch.com/PhotoPage.htm

[AustinHoya03]

Dude, Wonkette is H-O-T hot.

[StPetersburgHoya (Inactive)]

This is clearly a smear that's gone terribly wrong.

I imagine the conversation between a reporter and Rove turned to Wilson's comments after Bush's Iraq speech and Rove smeared Wilson by saying that it was his old lady that sent him to Africa and not the VP, clearly trying to imply something about his manhood or being whipped or something like that. The GOP has categorized this as a heroic attempt to correct and incorrect story (the implication being that he was some sort of knight in shinning armor riding to the defense of his President against the nasty liberal media - and if you have ever had your radio broken and listened to Limbaugh, Hannity, Orielly, or any of the other GOP shows that keep AM Radio from dying, you would know that this is not so much an implication on the non-official level but a toure-de-force argument).

Bush may or may not have known about it happening later, but the White House decided to stonewall with the press. Hence, the comments that Scott McClellan probably wishes he could take back.

Novak writes his column repeating the smear - only now it brings the leak to national attention. A furor is induced by the left leading a special prosecutor to be named who begins a grand jury investigation.

The journalists subpoenaed to give evidence value their ties to the White House and can clearly see that if they speak on the record about them in court they will not be welcome back in the West Wing so they claim that they are protecting sources - as a result one goes to jail.

Time publishes a story saying that Rove said that it was "Wilson's wife" who sent him over to Africa. Lets look at this logically and take into account what the right has to say about it.

1) It could be any "Mrs. Wilson" - This happened in context - there was a prompt that is not mentioned in the story that led to the statement - it is clear that Rove is indicating Amb. Wilson's wife.

2) He didn't say her last name - The law does not say that you have to say someone's full name in order to identify them - this is immaterial as to whether Rove is guilty.

3) It is not known whether Rove knew that she was an undercover operative - Rove clearly did some fact checking to determine who had the authority to send Amb. Wilson to Niger - its fairly reasonable to assume he had to know her position within the CIA to garner the fact that she had the authority to send him

Rove should resign. Should be indicted and should go to prison where he can join the other GOP All-Stars of Criminal Presdencies like Herbert Porter, Herbert Kalmbach, Haldeman, Ehlichman, Mitchell, Colson, Gordon C. Strachan, Robert Mardian, Kenneth Parkinson, Dean, Magruder, Ed Reinecke, Dwight Chapin, and G. Gordon Liddy.

[StPetersburgHoya (Inactive)]

I surfed over to Fox News.com to see how they are covering the story. I found the following hilarious half-baked attempt at analysis:

www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,160755,00.html

Lets see what we've got here:

1) Fox News asks one of their own staff members - the host of another show - to serve as an expert for the analysis. Nope, no bias of any sort detected so far.

2) The article is mistitled and shifts its focus if you read it objectively - its supposed to compare the current Rove issue to Watergate. What it really does is degenerate into a laundry list of what the writer doesn't like about the current news media. The association is clearly meant to drive at one assumption though - the news media is reporting this story - they can't be trusted in the current environment. However, the editors have realized there's a problem and they are trying these "ethical" problems so that they can never happen again.

So it sort of ends up with a very contradictory analysis:

a) media = bad

b) media outlets are trying to fix their problems and they wouldn't stoop to using the journalistic tactics that were used to "go after" Nixon.

So they manage to say: Nixon was a victim, the current media is bad, but the media surely wouldn't debase themselves by investigating the president like Woodward and Bernstein.

[HoyaDestroya]

let's get some facts straight here. Karl Rove was not shipping this story around... the Time magazine reporter called him, not the other way around.

i think you'll are jumping way too far ahead here - wait for the facts before you start calling for someone to be jailed.

it's now being reported that it was Novak that told Rove that Valerie Plame worked for the CIA... and then Rove discussed it with the Times reporter when he asked whether the VP was the one that sent Wilson abroad.

if you could all calm down and wait for the facts to emerge you might not sound like such lunatics.

[Cambridge]

You're right about prosecution...however I think there is enough evidence of impropriety and deception to demand resignation. Many politicians have resigned for much, much less. Politics is a zero sum game and if you mistep, you pay the consequences. The man's intergrity is forever tarnished. Why keep him around? It will only tarnish Bush's standing and cause splintering amongst the party.

[kchoya]

The details continue to trickle out:

WASHINGTON (AP) - Chief presidential adviser Karl Rove testified to a grand jury that he talked with two journalists before they divulged the identity of an undercover CIA officer but that he originally learned about the operative from the news media and not government sources, according to a person briefed on the testimony.

The person, who works in the legal profession and spoke only on condition of anonymity because of grand jury secrecy, told The Associated Press that Rove testified last year that he remembers specifically being told by columnist Robert Novak that Valerie Plame, the wife of a harsh Iraq war critic, worked for the CIA.

apnews.myway.com/article/20050715/D8BBQEVO0.html

[Cambridge]

Interesting. A couple quotes jump out.

When Novak inquired about Wilson's wife working for the CIA, Rove indicated he had heard something like that, according to the source's recounting of the grand jury testimony.

Here is Rove's mistake. Irregardless of where he claims to have learned the role of Plame -- from the media or from confidential sources -- it is clear to all observers and should have been clear to Rove that Novak was calling him to fact check the Plame story. When Rove gave him the "official" confirmation of the story, he comprimised his integrity.

Whether Rove intended to reveal the agent or even definitely knew she was an agent is irrelevent...as he had to know that Novak assumed, rightly or wrongly, that Rove would be privvy to such information. By saying he had heard such things, rather than to not comment on the issue, Rove actively used his position of power and authority to comprimise an intelligence agent. He had to have known that his position in the White House and closeness to the President would lend an official seal to any information he doled out to a reporter.

Rove told the grand jury that three days later, he had a phone conversation with Time magazine reporter Matt Cooper and - in an effort to discredit some of Wilson's allegations - informally told Cooper that he believed Wilson's wife worked for the CIA, though he never used her name, the source said.

So basically he used the information, regardless of how he obtained it to sully the reputation of a political opponent. Well done.

I'm no lawyer, but I was under the impression that if you peddle or even buy goods gotten by illicit means, regardlesss of your knowledge of the original crime, you are guilty by association...

[hoyahoyasaxa]

Apparently, though, she wasn't even clandestine at the time her cover was supposedly "blown":

A former CIA covert agent who supervised Mrs. Plame early in her career yesterday took issue with her identification as an "undercover agent," saying that she worked for more than five years at the agency's headquarters in Langley and that most of her neighbors and friends knew that she was a CIA employee.

"She made no bones about the fact that she was an agency employee and her husband was a diplomat," Fred Rustmann, a covert agent from 1966 to 1990, told The Washington Times.

"Her neighbors knew this, her friends knew this, his friends knew this. A lot of blame could be put on to central cover staff and the agency because they weren't minding the store here. ... The agency never changed her cover status."

"She was home for such a long time, she went to work every day at Langley, she was in an analytical type job, she was married to a high-profile diplomat with two kids," Mr. Rustmann said. "Most people who knew Valerie and her husband, I think, would have thought that she was an overt CIA employee."
www.washtimes.com/national/20050715-121257-9887r.htm

More:

But at the same time, Wilson acknowledged his wife was no longer in an undercover job at the time Novak's column first identified her. "My wife was not a clandestine officer the day that Bob Novak blew her identity," he said.
www.nynewsday.com/news/nationworld/nation/sns-ap-cia-leak-rove,0,4798469,print.story?coll=nyc-nationhome-headlines

[Cambridge]

Again, there is a huge difference between common knowledge in the Washington community...and national/international press.

What if everything that was common knowledge inside the beltway were officially confirmed and printed in an internationally distributed column by a respected journalist?