Speakeasy forum

General discussion

Why no drumbeats about Novack/Plame/Rove ?

As long claimed by the Bushhaters, it may appear that Rove was the source for the Novack story. Why is this story not making the airwaves in a big way? (I know the reason)Why also would two Liberal reporters protect Rove as the source? Scruples? In the media?

Discussion is locked
You are posting a reply to: Why no drumbeats about Novack/Plame/Rove ?
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Please refer to our CNET Forums policies for details. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Track this discussion and email me when there are updates

If you're asking for technical help, please be sure to include all your system info, including operating system, model number, and any other specifics related to the problem. Also please exercise your best judgment when posting in the forums--revealing personal information such as your e-mail address, telephone number, and address is not recommended.

You are reporting the following post: Why no drumbeats about Novack/Plame/Rove ?
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Collapse -
Was there a new release

In reply to: Why no drumbeats about Novack/Plame/Rove ?

on this story?

Dan

Collapse -
Yes

In reply to: Was there a new release

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/8445696/site/newsweek/

I still don't get this whole thing in the first place. Well versed experts in the law supposedly broken have repeatedly stated that even if every alleged thing happened, no law was broken.
Collapse -
Because....

In reply to: Why no drumbeats about Novack/Plame/Rove ?

.... there has been an investigation in progress by the Justice Department, and a special prosesecutor.

Why rant and rave about who was responsible for the leak until the investigations are completed, or indict someone before then. Reacting to rumors, to he said/she said and other speculations does nothing to get at the truth.

http://premium.cnn.com/2005/LAW/07/03/cooper.rove/


http://msnbc.msn.com/id/8445696/site/newsweek/


http://www.matthewgood.org/mblog/2005/07/karl-rove-leaked-plame-identity.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valerie_Plame This site has a timeline.

Angeline
Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email
semods4@yahoo.com

Collapse -
Yeah ...

In reply to: Because....

... but that hasn't stopped them before. There's always a reason when big stories fizzle in the face of what should be explosive new details.

Evie Happy

Collapse -
I wasn't aware that it...

In reply to: Yeah ...

... had fizzled. The CNN and MSNBC links are current.

I reckon it could be expected that the Sunday shows would have focused on the Supreme Court stuff.

Angeline
Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email
semods4@yahoo.com

Collapse -
Aw c'mon Angeline ...

In reply to: I wasn't aware that it...

... Wilson was the toast of the town when he had his book out and ran about town LYING (and it was determined by the 9-11 commission that he LIED) about his wife's role in his appointment to Niger. The Novak kerfuffle was beaten to death. Then ... nothing. No apologies for the attacks on Novak, etc. or acknowledgment by the press for their complicity in perpetuating Wilson's myths.

Yes, there are a few recent articles. But there's a reason nobody has run with this. Especially given that folks are again wondering what "Bush's handlers" (Rove is supposedly one) have in mind for the SCOTUS nomination. For a party and press that never misses a chance to demonize Rove, the relative silence is indeed suspicous.

Evie Happy

Collapse -
Aw c'mon Evie, "Rove is supposedly one"?

In reply to: Aw c'mon Angeline ...

there's no dispute that Karl Rove is the most infuential figure behind this current Administration.

I don't understand how the issue is so cloudy. Whatever Wilson said or didn't say about his wife's influence, Novak outed her, which I understand to be a serious violation of US law. Her influence isn't a reason to violate US law. If Novak were a liberal, you'd all be saying he was a traitor and calling for his head. There's no consistency in your position.

Rob

Collapse -
Let's let the investigators decide.

In reply to: Aw c'mon Evie, "Rove is supposedly one"?

Granted, it will take a long time. Nobody's going anywher.

Not that negative findings necessarily quell continued speculation follwowing such high profile investigations.

Angeline
Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email
semods4@yahoo.com

Collapse -
You understand wrong.

In reply to: Aw c'mon Evie, "Rove is supposedly one"?

The continued investigation is political. Read the law Novak supposedly broke. It was so carefully crafted that it would be unlikely to apply to any case not identical to the case it was crafted to address. You have been involved in threads this has been discussed in before, so your ignorance of the law is no excuse.

Nobody would counter that Rove is influential. But he, nor others of influence in this Administration, is NOT a "handler" as some disrespectfully state.

Collapse -
Because of the larger issue, Duckman.

In reply to: Why no drumbeats about Novack/Plame/Rove ?

>> Why also would two Liberal reporters protect Rove as the source? <<

Because a free press is essential to democracy, and the ability to protect sources is essential to a free press. I am in favor of some limits, but this wouldn't reach them. I'd say direct knowledge of murder, rape, or espionage (true espionage, not something like the Pentagon Papers, where it's a coverup of a government screwup by claiming "national security") shouldn't be subject to shield, but everything else whould be.

-- Dave K, Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!

Collapse -
I seem to recall you feeling otherwise ...

In reply to: Because of the larger issue, Duckman.

... in the case in Rhode Island. Too bad the "new and improved" search is so utterly useless Sad

Evie Happy

Collapse -
(NT) (NT) Not really, Evie. The RI case was absurd...

In reply to: I seem to recall you feeling otherwise ...

Collapse -
A crime was committed

In reply to: (NT) Not really, Evie. The RI case was absurd...

He protected a source that provided him with a video tape. He should have revealed that source.

Evie Happy

Collapse -
I concur with Dave. But if it were me, I'd throw the odious

In reply to: Because of the larger issue, Duckman.

and sanctimonious Novak to the wolves without hesitation.

Rob

Collapse -
(NT) (NT) Well at least you didn't call him fat this time

In reply to: I concur with Dave. But if it were me, I'd throw the odious

Collapse -
That's part of what makes you a liberal.

In reply to: I concur with Dave. But if it were me, I'd throw the odious

Conservatives believe in the rule of law.

Collapse -
So why are they going after the Time and Times

In reply to: That's part of what makes you a liberal.

reporters, and not Novak? Couldn't possibly be that Novak is the one conservative, could it? (Actually, one of the commentators on the McLaughlin Group said Friday that Novak already gave Rove up, and they're now looking for corroboration before indicting him. That would almost, but not quite, make me change my mind, as Rove carries chief responsibility for over 100,000 deaths in Iraq...)

-- Dave K, Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!

Collapse -
Another person ...

In reply to: So why are they going after the Time and Times

... that didn't read my article. Seems Novak probably scooped Cooper on the story and had no "original sources" of his own other than whoever he tried to confirm this with. Let's wait and see on Rove.

The 100,000 deaths in Iraq is just a BIT over the top -- even for you. You should pull your own post!

Evie Happy

Collapse -
I've asked the same question here to resounding silence.

In reply to: Why no drumbeats about Novack/Plame/Rove ?

Novak is immune because he's a Republican stooge. The other two are under investigation by the Justice Department (not Rove, the Time reporter) because they're not. I don't see any signs that Rove is under investigation, he's immune too.

Rob

Collapse -
(NT) (NT) You didn't read my link did you.

In reply to: I've asked the same question here to resounding silence.

Collapse -
Yes I did, but I found no specifics for why he could act

In reply to: (NT) You didn't read my link did you.

that way without retribution, no compelling evidence or rule of law cited, Whatever his wife said or did to get him the job is in no way germane to the Administration putting her as a CIA agent in harms way. To me it seems really simple. She's a protected asset, a concept everyone, especially Republicans should understand after their screaming and yelling about James Jesus Angleton and a ton of others who went rogue and public and outed agents while the Repblicans held the Administration as well as when the Democrats did. The Republicans were always first to call for blood. What's different now? (he asked provocatively, knowing its about Rove and Novak and Republican politics of Payback as usual).

Rob

Collapse -
No you didn't read it.

In reply to: Yes I did, but I found no specifics for why he could act

Your statement: Novak is immune because he's a Republican stooge. The other two are under investigation by the Justice Department (not Rove, the Time reporter) because they're not.

Does not jive with the article: ...Novak appears to have made some kind of arrangement with the special prosecutor, and other journalists who reported on the Plame story have talked to prosecutors with the permission of their sources. Cooper agreed to discuss his contact with Lewis (Scooter) Libby, Vice President **** Cheney's top aide, after Libby gave him permission to do so. But Cooper drew the line when special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald asked about other sources.

Initially, Fitzgerald's focus was on Novak's sourcing, since Novak was the first to out Plame. But according to Luskin, Rove's lawyer, Rove spoke to Cooper three or four days before Novak's column appeared. Luskin told NEWSWEEK that Rove ''never knowingly disclosed classified information'' and that ''he did not tell any reporter that Valerie Plame worked for the CIA.'' Luskin declined, however, to discuss any other details. He did say that Rove himself had testified before the grand jury ''two or three times'' and signed a waiver authorizing reporters to testify about their conversations with him....


You don't know what deal Novak cut. Indeed it seems he may have scooped Cooper and had no ''original source'' of his own! Perhaps that's how they got to Cooper in the first place? Novak revealed his "source" which was scuttlebutt about some meetings. Of course this is speculation, but it makes far more sense than your scenario.

At the time there was rampant speculation as to why a rank anti-Bush partisan with NO known background in investigations or intelligence was supposedly selected by Cheney for this important mission to Niger.

You've been pointed to the facts before, that Novak (and probably nobody) violated the law in question. Many experts have wondered why this has gone on as long as it has. But the liberal rags deserve what's coming to them after their zeal to ''get'' Novak and the Bush Administration.

Joe Wilson: National disgrace that Vanity Fair is worthy of having a cover story on I suppose. [ wretch ] Valerie Plame: A most unsecret of secret agents. The misreporting of facts continues ...

Collapse -
Oops ...

In reply to: No you didn't read it.

... I left out your most telling quote indicating you didn't read the article:

I don't see any signs that Rove is under investigation, he's immune too.

If you read the article and didn't see any signs then you have either graduated to Journeyman Skimmer (under the Master DK) or you are pulling my leg.

Collapse -
(NT) (NT) You've been responded to repeatedly. You simply ignore it.

In reply to: I've asked the same question here to resounding silence.

Popular Forums

icon
Computer Newbies 10,686 discussions
icon
Computer Help 54,365 discussions
icon
Laptops 21,181 discussions
icon
Networking & Wireless 16,313 discussions
icon
Phones 17,137 discussions
icon
Security 31,287 discussions
icon
TVs & Home Theaters 22,101 discussions
icon
Windows 7 8,164 discussions
icon
Windows 10 2,657 discussions

GIVEAWAY

Enter to win* a free holiday tech gift!

CNET's giving five lucky winners the gift of their choice valued up to $250!