Why Bush Has To Fire Rove (David Corn, The Nation, via Yahoo News)

[Bush_Eats_Beef]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/20050711/cm_thenation/35295/nc:742

The Nation -- In a weekend posting I asked if it was time to get ready for the Karl Rove frog-march? The question was prompted by a Newsweek article by reporter Michael Isikoff that disclosed the first documentary evidence showing that Rove revealed to a reporter that former Ambassador Joseph Wilson's wife worked at the
CIA. In a July 11, 2003 email that Time magazine reporter Matt Cooper sent to his bureau chief, Cooper noted he had spoken to Rove on "double super secret background" and that Rove had told him that Wilson's "wife...apparently works at the agency on wmd issues." "Agency" means CIA. This is not good news for Rove and the White House.

The email--which Time had turned over to special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, who is investigating the Plame/CIA leak--may not be enough to prompt Fitzgerald to indict Rove. Under the narrowly written Intelligence Identities Protect Act, Fitzgerald would have to show that Rove knew Valerie Wilson (a.k.a. Valerie Plame) was working at the CIA under cover--that is, as a secret employee--which she was. But Fitzgerald still could build such a case upon other evidence. And Rove also could be in legal peril if his previous testimony to Fitzgerald is contradicted by this email--or the other material Time surrendered, over Cooper's objections, to Fitzgerald or by Cooper's forthcoming testimony to Fitzgerald's grand jury. (Last week, Cooper declared his source, presumably Rove, had given him permission to testify before the grand jury.)

But let's put aside the legal issues for a moment. This email demonstrates that Rove committed a firing offense. He leaked national security information as part of a fierce campaign to undermine Wilson, who had criticized the White House on the war on
Iraq. Rove's overworked attorney, Robert Luskin, defends his client by arguing that Rove never revealed the name of Valerie Plame/Wilson to Cooper and that he only referred to her as Wilson's wife. This is not much of a defense. If Cooper or any other journalist had written that "Wilson's wife works for the CIA"--without mentioning her name--such a disclosure could have been expected to have the same effect as if her name had been used: Valerie Wilson would have been compromised, her anti-WMD work placed at risk, and national security potentially harmed. Either Rove knew that he was revealing an undercover officer to a reporter or he was identifying a CIA officer without bothering to check on her status and without considering the consequences of outing her. Take your pick: in both scenarios Rove is acting in a reckless and cavalier fashion, ignoring the national security interests of the nation to score a political point against a policy foe.

This ought to get Rove fired--unless he resigns first.

Can George W. Bush countenance such conduct within the White House? Consider what White House press secretary Scott McClellan said on September 29, 2003, after the news broke that the Justice Department was investigating the leak. McClellan declared of the Plame/CIA leak, "That is not the way this White House operates. The president expects everyone in his administration to adhere to the highest standards of conduct. No one would be authorized to do such a thing."

[goclark]

1. k

[merwin]

2. Could you fix the link please?

Thanks

[Beaver Tail]

3. Link

http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/20050711/cm_thenation/35295;_ylt=AnCLfLf2zAFR8UuhXyNdFsas0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA3YWFzYnA2BHNlYwM3NDI-

[Benhurst]

5. You can get the article directly from The Nation by

going to www.thenation.com/ .

Look at the first listing under BLOGS, upper right-hand corner.

[Noxmtbnk]

7. Here's the yahoo link for those who like to vote...

Why Bush Has To Fire Rove

[Bush_Eats_Beef]

4. Use the link from The Nation:

...I don't know what's been happening with Yahoo's links lately.

http://www.thenation.com/blogs/capitalgames?bid=3&pid=5295

[lovuian]

6. Wheres Bush asking for Rove's resignation???

Where is it??? What does he think???

Has Bush brought Rove in and questioned him???

[xxqqqzme]

8. 'No one would be authorized to do such a thing.'

Guess 'no one', now, has a name, scotty.

[central scrutinizer]

9. If Rove "resigns" - so what?

Does anybody believe that he won't still be running the political show from his super secret, undisclosed location? Kinda of like when Karen Hughes "resigned".

[The Night Owl]

10. Can George W. Bush countenance such conduct within the White House?

Has anything ever stopped him before?

[lovuian]

11. Wheres Bush's position on this??? Does he speak???

No Comment!!! Baaawaaahaaa!!!

[maquisard]

12. "Double super secret background"?

Am I the only one reminded of Animal House and the infamous "double secret probation"?

[librechik]

15. I'm reminded of Maxwell Smart

and how all their screwball atempts at secrecy foiled their own purposes.

Double super secret background indeed. They want to play children's games and avoid accountability this way, I guess.

[skip fox]

13. He'll want to get as much distance as possible before the indictments.

There were at least six calls and confirmations to three follow-up calls, a situation which strongly implies coordination. Who better to do so than Rove. Coordination implies deliberation and cannot be done "unknowingly."

If he made all the calls, it's still deliberate, but he would also have to arrange for others to confirm. More deliberation. Deeper culpibility. More indictments.

Here's a DU thread which spells it out:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1919571

[librechik]

14. Why the country has to fire Bush

If we don't clearly and publicly acknowledge his crimes and wrongdoing we will NEVER be trusted on the global stage, and our people will be the targets of hate all over the world. We must show that we are honest and follow the rule of law, and as long as we leave Bush in charge, we can never show that.