Swedish Meatballs
11 hours ago
"If you betray the trust, there will be a consequence. We will hold you responsible for not telling the truth."Now here is Conyers' stuff.
- George W. Bush, 11/3/03
"If you don't tell the truth, there is going to be serious consequences."
- Bush, 10/30/03
Vice Presidential Nominee Dick Cheney, August 2, 2000:Read More......“They will offer more lectures, and legalisms, and carefully worded denials. We offer another way -- a better way -- and a stiff dose of truth.”White House Press Spokesman Scott McClellan, July 11, 2005:"Q: Do you want to retract your statement that Rove, Karl Rove, was not involved in the Valerie Plame expose?
A: I appreciate the question. This is an ongoing investigation at this point. The president directed the White House to cooperate fully with the investigation, and as part of cooperating fully with the investigation, that means we're not going to be commenting on it while it is ongoing.
Q: But Rove has apparently commented, through his lawyer, that he was definitely involved.
A: You're asking me to comment on an ongoing investigation.
Q: I'm saying, why did you stand there and say he was not involved?
A: Again, while there is an ongoing investigation, I'm not going to be commenting on it nor is ... ."
The ongoing controversy about who might have leaked the name of a covert CIA operative to journalists heated up Monday as reports about the possible involvement of President's Bush's chief political strategist, Karl Rove, dominated the daily White House news briefing and Democrats began to ratchet up their criticism of Rove....Really, leaking national security secrets at a time of war is a "potential embarrassment" rather than a crime that could be punishable by jail? And it's really just an excuse by the Dems to gang up on Bush? Well, if Ken Mehlman said it and every other Republican is too afraid to say anything (and off the record they've been quoted by other newspapers that this is very serious indeed), why I guess it must be true. Nothing to see here, keep moving.
Still, the new information about Rove's role was emerging as a potential embarrassment for a White House that had scrupulously sought to avoid the kinds of investigations that plagued the Clinton administration....
It has also given Democrats a political issue....
The sharpest criticisms came from some of the most partisan Democrats in Congress....
The only Republican to issue a statement on the matter Monday was Ken Mehlman, chairman of the Republican National Committee. "It's disappointing that once again, so many Democrat leaders are taking their political cues from the far-left, MoveOn wing of the party," he said, referring to the online advocacy group MoveOn.org. "The bottom line is the Democrats are engaged in blatant partisan political attacks...."
Mehlman: Has stated that he's not the leaker.What?! Mehlman just said Rove wasn't the leaker?!!!
I know he's fully cooperated with this investigation.... So unfortunate, Hillary, Kerry, Dean would follow the angry left... Looking at those emails what I saw was Karl Rove discouraging Matthew Cooper from filing a story that was wrong.Huh, well, here's a question: If Karl Rove is fully complying then why does the president have to wait for the investigation to be over for him to know if Karl was the leaker? Can't he just ask him? Why did we spend all this money on an investigation while Karl Rove and Scott McClellan lied? The White House calls THAT full cooperation?
Wolf: Is there any evidence Niger was sending enriched uranium to Iraq?
Wolf: Were there meetings on what to do involving Joe Wilson, how to deal with this problem after he wrote that op ed?
Mehlman: I don't recall those meetings occuring.
Wolf: Were you called before a grand jury?
Mehlman: I'm not going to comment. A political smear has occured.
Wolf: Why can't you tell us if you were asked to testify?
Mehlman: I don't think it's appropriate.... We know that Karl Rove said a year ago that any reporter he's talk to should cooperate with the prosecutor.
Wolf: Did you give a waiver to any reporters you've talked to?
Mehlman: I don't recall.... The issue here is that there's been full compliance by Karl Rove and the White House... Karl did not leak classified information, he did not leak the name of anybody.
I'm not going to prejudge. I think it's unfortunate... partisan smear campaign.
Wolf: (Plays tape of McClellan saying leaker would be fired.) Does that statement still hold?Gee, is that why you issued a press release commenting about the investigation today, Ken?
Have you had any conversations with the White House about Karl Rove?
I'm not going to comment on a pending investigation.
President Bush was asked today if he planned to fire Karl Rove, a senior aide at the center of an investigation over the unmasking of an undercover C.I.A. officer, and he offered only a stony silence in reply.... "Are you going to fire him?" the president was asked twice in a brief Oval Office appearance with Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong of Singapore. Both times, the president ignored the questions.I love that this happened during a cozy meeting with the autocratic ruler of Singapore, just his kind of guy when Bush forgets he's supposed to be spreading democracy, not propping up the bad guys.
U.S. transit authorities say the nation's ground-transportation network requires an immediate $6 billion security upgrade, yet it is budgeted to receive just $100 million from the federal government next year.
More than two years ago, the MTA announced it would spend $591 million in federal and state funds to make the transit system more secure.
But as of March, it had only spent $30 million of the money to hire four politically connected consultants — Jacobs Engineering Group, SAIC, URS and Parsons Brinckerhoff — to come up with ideas about security projects.
If there's a leak out of my administration, I wanna know who it is. Uh...and...if the person has violated law, that person will be taken care of.
The White House is suddenly facing damaging evidence that it misled the public by insisting for two years that presidential adviser Karl Rove wasn't involved in leaking the identity of a female CIA officer. President Bush, at an Oval Office photo opportunity Tuesday, was asked directly whether he would fire Rove - in keeping with a pledge in June, 2004, to dismiss any leakers in the case. The president did not respond.Where are Rove's GOP defenders? Even George Bush can't defend him? Read More......
For the second day, White House press secretary Scott McClellan refused to answer questions about Rove.
For two years, the White House has insisted that presidential adviser Karl Rove had nothing to do with the leak of a CIA officer's identity. And President Bush said the leaker would be fired.Read More......
But Bush's spokesman wouldn't repeat any of those assertions Monday in the face of Rove's own lawyer saying his client spoke with at least one reporter about Valerie Plame's role at the CIA before she was identified in a newspaper column.
NYT (via SF Chronicle):Not so good first paragraphs, but other articles/columns of note today:Nearly two years after stating that any administration official found to have been involved in leaking the name of an undercover CIA officer would be fired, and assuring that Karl Rove and other senior aides to President Bush had nothing to do with the disclosure, the White House refused on Monday to answer any questions about new evidence of Rove's role in the matter.Detroit Free Press:The White House refused Monday to repeat earlier assertions that any administration official who leaked classified information would be fired. The refusal comes days after Karl Rove, one of President George W. Bush's top aides, was revealed as the source of a news leak that exposed a CIA undercover officer in 2003.Houston Chronicle:The White House scrambled Monday to reconcile President Bush's vow to fire anyone who leaked information about an undercover CIA operative with revelations that top political aide Karl Rove spoke to a reporter about the agent.AP:The White House is suddenly facing damaging evidence that it misled the public by insisting for two years that presidential adviser Karl Rove wasn't involved in leaking the identity of a femaleSF Chronicle editorial:
CIA officer.THE OFFICIAL silence from the White House on Monday was quite disturbing.
- Robert Scheer (I haven't even read this yet and I know it's gonna be good, love this man).Read More......
- LA Times.
- Washington Post, lead story.
- NY Newsday.
Because of the powerful role Mr. Rove plays in shaping policy and deploying Mr. Bush's political support and machinery throughout the party, few Republicans were willing to discuss his situation on the record. Asked for comment, several Republican senators said on Monday that they did not know enough or did not want to venture an opinion.If they Republicans are this worried, then this scandal IS as bad as we think. Read More......
But in private, several prominent Republicans said they were concerned about the possible effects on Mr. Bush and his agenda, in part because Mr. Rove's stature makes him such a tempting target for Democrats.
"Knowing Rove, he's still having eight different policy meetings and sticking to his game plan," said one veteran Republican strategist in Washington who often works with the White House. "But this issue now is looming, and as they peel away another layer of the onion, there's a lot of consternation. Rove needs to be on his A game now, not huddled with lawyers and press people."
A senior Congressional Republican aide said most members of Congress were still waiting to learn more about Mr. Rove's involvement and to assess whether more disclosures about his role were likely.
"The only fear here is where does this go," the aide said. "We can't know."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
© 2010 - John Aravosis | Design maintenance by Jason Rosenbaum
Send me your tips: americablog AT starpower DOT net