Claiming he would not "add to the public record," Rove "add[ed]" to the misinformation in "the public record" on Plame case
SUMMARY: During a discussion of Scott McClellan's new book on Hannity & Colmes, Karl Rove said that McClellan's "questions to me were: Did I leak Valerie Plame's name? And the answer is no. In fact, we know today that the name of Valerie Plame was leaked to Robert Novak by Richard Armitage, the number two guy at the State Department, and not by me." In fact, Novak identified both Rove and Armitage as the sources for his column that revealed Plame's employment with the CIA. And former Time magazine reporter Matthew Cooper named Rove as his source who identified former Ambassador Joseph Wilson's wife as a CIA agent.
On the May 27 edition of Fox News' Hannity & Colmes, Fox News political analyst Karl Rove said he would not "add to the public record" on the Valerie Plame leak case, but then added to the misinformation in "the public record" offered up by him and others connected with the case, in disputing former White House press secretary Scott McClellan's reported claim in his new book that Rove had misled him regarding Rove's involvement in the leak of Plame's identity as a covert CIA operative.
Co-host Alan Colmes asked Rove, "What about this specific charge that he is claiming that you misled him about your level of involvement in the Valerie Plame case?" Rove replied, "That's simply not true. I'm not going to add to the public record on this because there's a civil lawsuit that the Wilsons have. ... [U]ntil that's resolved, I can't add to the public record." Nevertheless, he then said: "But the fact of the matter is, Scott's questions to me were: Did I leak Valerie Plame's name? And the answer is no." He then asserted: "In fact, we know today that the name of Valerie Plame was leaked to [conservative columnist] Robert Novak by Richard Armitage, the number two guy at the State Department, and not by me and not by [Vice President Dick Cheney's former chief of staff I. Lewis] Scooter Libby."
In fact, Novak has identified both Rove and Armitage as the sources for his July 14, 2003, column, which publicly revealed Plame's employment with the CIA. Former Time magazine reporter Matthew Cooper also named Rove as his source who identified former Ambassador Joseph Wilson's wife as a CIA agent during a telephone conversation on July 11, 2003.
Moreover, contrary to Rove's narrow characterization of the question McClellan purportedly asked -- Rove worded the issue in terms of whether he "leak[ed] Valerie Plame's name" [emphasis added] -- Rove's lawyer Robert Luskin has reportedly acknowledged that there is no meaningful distinction between leaking Plame's "name" and leaking her identity as Wilson's wife, as Media Matters for America has noted. In a July 12, 2005, National Review Online (NRO) article, White House correspondent Byron York wrote that "Luskin told NRO that Rove is not hiding behind the defense that he did not identify Wilson's wife because he did not specifically use her name. Asked if that argument was too legalistic, Luskin said, 'I agree with you. I think it's a detail.' "
Regarding Libby, his indictment alleged that he discussed Plame's CIA employment with then-New York Times reporter Judith Miller before Plame's employment was public. After Miller was jailed for 85 days for refusing to testify before the federal grand jury in the Libby case, she identified Libby as her source for the information on Plame.
From the May 27 edition of Fox News' Hannity & Colmes:
COLMES: This is a "Fox News Alert": A short time ago, the Politico.com posted a story with exclusive details about former White House press secretary Scott McClellan's new book, which is due out next week. McClellan leveled several criticisms at the administration over the run-up to the war in Iraq, the response to Hurricane Katrina, and the handling of the Valerie Plame affair. He also makes several criticisms of our own Karl Rove, who joins us once again tonight from Washington.
And Karl, among the things he says is that you and Scooter Libby had a secret meeting where you kind of decided how to handle this. He says he was misled by you about your involvement in the Valerie Plame affair, went out there and told the American public and the press one thing, and said it was fatal to his ability to be able to speak on behalf of the president.
How do you respond to those charges?
ROVE: Well, first of all, I've just read the same small article you have, so I'm going to reserve my judgment on the greater book until somebody else buys it and gives me a copy.
I will say this. It's a little irresponsible as he -- if this is accurate depiction of what's in the book. He says that, following a meeting, Scooter and I visited in 2005. Well, Scooter and I visited all the time. I don't know what the particular meeting in question was about. I know what it wasn't about, which was it was not about Plame and Wilson.
Both of our attorneys told us not to talk to anybody else in the White House about anything connected with that and so, we didn't. But look, Scooter and I, you know, came into contact every day, if -- or every other day, on things like the selection of judges or a particular policy issue or the vice president's travel schedule or, you know, certain -- a draft of a presidential speech that we were commenting on.
So, you know, he was the White -- he was the vice president's chief of staff, and as a result, we had a lot of business. And now, I think it's frankly maybe a sign of irresponsibility for Scott to sort of suggest that because he saw the two of us meet and he didn't happen to be in the meeting he somehow knows what the meeting was about.
COLMES: What about this specific charge that he is claiming that you misled him about your level of involvement in the Valerie Plame case?
ROVE: That's simply not true. I'm not going to add to the public record on this because there's a civil lawsuit that the Wilsons have, and until that is resolved -- they lost at the district court level, it's on appeal, pretty confident that it's going to be tossed out -- but until that's resolved, I can't add to the public record.
But the fact of the matter is, Scott's questions to me were: Did I leak Valerie Plame's name? And the answer is no. In fact, we know today that the name of Valerie Plame was leaked to Robert Novak by Richard Armitage, the number two guy at the State Department, and not by me and not by Scooter Libby.
[...]
HANNITY: Hey, I want to put a little emphasis on the Plame point if I can just -- without going into any more detail, because I have another question about it, Karl. But, he said in this book, "I have no idea what you and Libby discussed, but it was suspicious for these two, who I'd never noticed spending any one-on-one time together." You're saying that's absolutely not true, you did spend a lot of time with Libby.
ROVE: Well, look, it goes to show how out of the loop he was, that he didn't think we spent much time together. I mean, over the course of the seven years or six years that we worked together, Scooter and I spent a lot of time, first on the campaign, and then when we were at the White House, we were on several committees together.
We were ofttimes -- he was the vice president's representative. We had a lot of policy meetings where we would have conversation and discuss -- I mean, Scooter and I officed maybe 20 feet from each other.
ROVE: Well, look, it goes to show how out of the loop he was...
And...so Scott McClellan, the President's mouthpiece, was kept out of the loop inside the White House? He was not told everything that was going on? He was only told what to say to the press? Hmmm...
Well, look, it goes to show Karl Rove is a LIAR, a CRIMINAL, and a SCUMBAG. He's an unrepentant, arrogant self-server who sold his nation out for purely craven partisan reasons.
This Administration will be known as the one that PUNISHED TRUE PATRIOTISM by seeking to destroy any who dared speak out against ill-advised plans, illegal schemes, and illegitimate methods.
Because of their cover-ups, it will be years, perhaps decades before the true depth of the depravity and immorality of this Administration is known. And Karl Rove was at its center; these people WERE and ARE enemies of all America should stand for. No punishment can be harsh enough for their utter betrayal of the American People. And it cannot be soon enough.
Well, look, it goes to show Karl Rove is a LIAR, a CRIMINAL, and a SCUMBAG.
Don't hold back, Tex. Tell us what you REALLY think of KKKarl Rove... :-)
Sometimes the dishonesty at Media Matters is truly unbelievable.
Robert Novak, "Armitage's leak," 9/14/06, TownHall.com: "The news that he [Armitage] and not Karl Rove was the leaker was devastating news for the Left." - MM conveniently omitted this article from their post. Why, MM? Why?
Robert Novak, "The Lost Scandal," 3/8/07, TownHall.com: [T]he jurors appeared uninterested in hearing from Richard Armitage, the source of the CIA leak."
MM is being flat-out dishonest by trying to use Novak to go after Rove.
For months (if not, years), MM and others on the left tried to run with the "Rove-is-the-leaker" story. MM and all of them were WRONG. Novak flat-out exonerated Rove.
But MM is still trying topush this falsehood and portray Rove in a false light.
Shame on MM.
See Matt Cooper:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/matt-cooper/mcclellan-right-and-wrong_b_104156.html
Sometimes the dishonesty at Media Matters is truly unbelievable.
But nothing equals the intellectual dishonesty displayed by Shoes every time she posts here. That's truly unbelievable.
Lets talk about intellectual dishonesty.
Why do you suppose, assuming the disclosure of Valerie Plame's identity truly was a crime and was the purpose of Patrick Fitzgerald's investigation, Richard Armitage, cleary identified as the leaker, was never charged? There can be only two answers to this question: What Armitage did was not illegal or, the real purpose of he investigation was not to punish the leaker. Which one do you accept?
Why do you suppose Fitzgerald contnued his investigation of this leak long after he knew who the actual leaker was? This continuation implies the purpose of Fitzgerald's investigation was something other than identifying and punishing the leaker of Plame's identity, since that leaker had already been identified.
Why, after all this investigation, was NO ONE charged with leaking Valerie Plame's identity? What does this say about Patrick Fitzgerald and his real motives?
because you have to prove the leaking was done intentionally. armitage presented it as just something he happened to mention offhand to novak. and just because he knew about armitage does not mean he knew the whole story. he was appointed to investigate the leak. and he charged libby with perjury, because libby lied to him, just like he and rove lied to mccleallan. what is beyond dispute are the following facts:
plame's status was classified information. so said the cia.
rove and libby were identifying her as an agent before novak even printed her name. so said reporters who testified before the grand jury, and all of whom had no reason to lie because none of them printed her name. judith miller even testified that libby tried to get her to mask his white house employment.
rove and libby gave out her name in violation of the security oaths they signed. so said the oath, which forbid the release of any information except that which they already knew was declassified.
bush pledged to fire "anyone involved". so he said when the reports first surfaced that rove and libby were giving her name to reporters, a fact they denied to scott mcclellan and a denial he gave to the press. a denial that proved to be a flat out lie.
" just because he knew about armitage does not mean he knew the whole story"
This is simply rubbish. Armitage completely informed Fitzgerald about his dealings with Novak. In fact, Armitage approached the FBI with this information before Fitzgerald was ever appointed. Fitzgerald started this case KNOWING Armitage was the leaker who tipped Novak. Fitzgerald questioned Armitage several times before the Grand Jury. Your claim that Fitzgerald was ignorant of the whole story implies Fitzgerald is an incompetent.
Since your first point was false, we can safely assume the rest of your indisputable nonsense is also garbage, which could likewise be destroyed in detail.
Pure gospel, Tex. Well put as usual.
As frustrating as this is, at least we can derive a little amusement out of the right-wing slime machine inevitably going into overdrive in a hysterical, harmonious effort to pounce on McClellan personally.
Justice Department scandal, anyone?
Why does the media continue to give this guy a free pass to lie?
Because of Rove's boyish charm, I would imagine. Either that or fear of retribution... ;>)
And other than that Administration , has there been one other than Bush that has been this secretive, lying and criminal?
I seem to remember a lot of people in the Reagan Administration being indicted for one crime or another......
After Obama takes his oath of office and brings in John Edwards as his Attorney General........ he needs to let Edwards have all the time , money, and help he needs to put these lying, cheating un-American assclowns where they belong! Prison!
Starting with Karl "Who reminds me of that bald,black raincoat wearing Nazi in the first Indiana Jones movie" Rove.... and then let the birds sing until their lungs burst!
I found a picture that I'd definitely like to see someday soon.....
I tried pasting it into the comment box. In case it doesn't work, I also included a link to it so people can go see it for themselves.
http://z.about.com/d/politicalhumor/1/0/G/6/gop_cell_block.jpg
I wouldn't want to see Cheney sentenced to life imprisonment...that would be too cruel.
Yes - it WOULD be cruel and unusual punishment - for his fellow inmates to have to live with a loser like that.....
Cheney should be in jail for war crimes, among other things.
Cheney should be in jail for war crimes, among other things.
Agreed.
foster:
If there is a God in heaven ...
So we’ve determined some fantastical information, not oozed-out by another traitor — and Rove, scooting to where? Now what’s the Lame Duck gonna do about dis or dat? Quack? Which one stated they'd prosecute someone else about...whatever it was? As as rats fleeing from the sinking ship, vermin always consider money to be a proper flotation device.
Now what?
BTW, who’s gonna beam Scotty outta here?
"...vermin always consider money to be a proper flotation device. "
And this is the spin in righty world, that McClellan did the book for the money (BilldO is on record).I'm pretty sure Scotty was getting paid to deliver White House talking points (absorbed from outside the loop, apparently) for several years, I don't remember seeing the same skepticism from the media about all of those little chats.
I hope the Rove angle isn't still fooling many Americans, that is, the idea that if Armitage or anybody else leaked Plame's identity, it's impossible that Rove did as well.
As always, I'll be fair & balanced, and offer a spirited defense of Rove per the item above. Put yourself inside of the head of Herr Karl(just for a moment, don't be afraid). He's got to decide, after stating that he won't add to the public record on the topic, whether or not he'll add to the record;
(Karl thinks:) "Gee, if I contradict the words I just said, that may damage my credibility. Oh, yeah.... Har har har... credibility!"
I don't remember seeing the same skepticism from the media about all of those little chats.
Or in NATIVEOFSF's post. Petulant that His Favorite Administration has been outed as a dysfuctional batch of calumnous mountebanks and rogues?
But they were all morally bankrupt while they were on the payroll.
And many people throughout the Bush Misadministration (especially Bush, Cheney, Rove, Rumsfeld, and Gonzales) will remain morally bankrupt until the day they die.
Gonzales can not even get a job, that man sold himself to the devil.
Gonzales can not even get a job, that man sold himself to the devil.
There are crops here in Texas that need picking. And gas station restrooms that need cleaning...
I have no pite for that "man". He sold out, and now he gets to pay the price.
Rule # 1 Before the Democrats have any evidence of any wrongdoing, promise to be fully open and honest
Rule # 2 Once there is significant suspicion that there is evidence of wrongdoing, refuse to answer any questions because you don't want to impede or impact any legal proceedings
Rule # 2.a Once there is significant suspicion that there is evidence of wrongdoing, refuse to answer any questions because you claim executive privilege, even if you next try to claim that you didn't talk to the President about any of the items up for debate
Rule # 3 Once there are legal proceedings, do everything you can to impede or negatively impact those proceedings, especially if you get to claim a hazy memory of the issues
Rule # 4 Once the legal proceedings are over, say that you will not talk about it any more because it's over and done with
There are two dates referred to above:
July 14, 2003, on which date someone named novak publicly revealed Ms. Plame's employment with the CIA; and this guy named novak has identified both Karl Rove and Richard Armitage as the sources of this information about Ms. Plame...
July 11, 2003, on which date former Time magazine reporter Matthew Cooper says Rove related to him, during a telephone conversation, that former Ambassador Joseph Wilson's wife was a CIA agent.
Former Ambassador Joseph Wilson? Other than being Ms. Plame's husband, what the heck does he have to do with this?
EVERYTHING.
This whole thing about Ms. Plame is just a distraction from her husband Mr. Wilson, and from what he wrote in an Op-Ed piece that appeared in the New York Times on July 6, 2003, just several days before the above named dates... the whole thing about Ms. Plame was (and still is) meant to distract you and I from what Mr. Wilson wrote... and it was meant to (and probably did) intimidate him from saying or writing any more on the matter: because if in just the space of a few days, the Bush Cheney Rove administration reacted to his Op-Ed in the NYTimes by "outing" his wife, then who knew what they might do, if he persisted and got them really mad at him.
For posterity, and a better understanding of this confused distractionary mess, a few selected excerpts from Mr. Wilson's Op-Ed:
Published on Sunday, July 6, 2003 by the New York Times
What I didn't find in Africa
by Joseph C. Wilson 4th
Did the Bush administration manipulate intelligence about Saddam Hussein's weapons programs to justify an invasion of Iraq?
Based on my experience with the administration in the months leading up to the war, I have little choice but to conclude that some of the intelligence related to Iraq's nuclear weapons program was twisted to exaggerate the Iraqi threat.
America's foreign policy depends on the sanctity of its information.
For this reason, questioning the selective use of intelligence to justify the war in Iraq is neither idle sniping nor "revisionist history," as Mr. Bush has suggested.
The act of war is the last option of a democracy, taken when there is a grave threat to our national security.
More than 200 American soldiers have lost their lives in Iraq already.
We have a duty to ensure that their sacrifice came for the right reasons.
http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0706-02.htm
July 6, 2003
It helps to know why Ms. Plame's identity was leaked by the Bush Cheney Rove administration: To distract us from what Mr. Wilson wrote in the NYTimes, and to perhaps intimidate him from writing or speaking any more on the matter.
And you know what? It worked. It is one of the many successful, even brilliant, manipulations of the American People that have been worked on them by the Bush Cheney Rove administration... it worked, it was successful, it was even brilliant: nobody went to jail... not even "scooter" libby.
This has been a talking point of all the Bush defenders, saying that he did not contribute to policy-making decisions.
He was the press secretary. He wasn't supposed to be part of the decision-making process. He was there in meetings to be able to report the events that happened. He was never supposed to be someone who helped make things happened!
They're spinning it with everything they've got.
Eat the Press
From what I've seen and heard so far there is one major problem with the Scotty Mack story...how it's being covered. When one of the central themes is an incompetent, complicit press that allowed the White House to lie us into war I find it a trifle disconcerting that the same cats who were stupid and lazy are the same cats that will be covering the story about their own conduct. I've heard excuses, denials, and equivocations. It's like having convicted Catholic priests report the news on the child sex abuse scandal in the Catholic church. David Gregory was the worst on his show and Chris Matthews...not only did he deny the press had a role in the way the war went down he also referred to the 77% of the country that thinks the President is a dope the Far Left. Thankfully one of the panelists reminded him he was talking about most of the country.
Two Trillion spent, Four Thousand US dead, Hundreds of Thousands of Iraqi dead and for what??? After we purge government of the disease that is neoconservatism we need to turn our sights back on the press. I'll bring the forks.
In this instance I think it would be a big mistake to continue critiquing the media only in terms of bias and partisanship...although there is certainly some evidence of that, particularly (and obviously) FOX News. The discussion, IMO, should focus more on media competence. Focusing on media bias only lends to more screaming matches, with exchanges of charges and counter-charges. The fact is that the media have been remiss in performing their basic traditional functions of scrutinizing what our government tells us and reporting accurately. Whether it's because of the pressures of 24/7 news coverage or because there aren't enough competent journalists to fill all the spots, the media often fail miserably in performing an extremely vital function in a free society. And too often the media emphasize the sensational stories that have little bearing on our lives. If only the media had covered the build up to the Iraq war as exhaustively as they covered Anna Nicolle Smith and Natalee Holloway perhaps we wouldn't be in this situation.
If only the media had covered the build up to the Iraq war as exhaustively as they covered Anna Nicolle Smith and Natalee Holloway perhaps we wouldn't be in this situation.
Well said my friend. Look at all the resouces FAUX news spent at 10pm eastern with Greta discussing Natalee Holloway meanwhile Rove and Bush lied in the summer of 2005 and kept on with the propaganda. The other media seemed to still be afraid. Katie Couric on CBS This morning on Wed said the media did not do the job, and she is correct. Shame on the media and Shame on Karl Rove and The Bush Administration.
I agree with you to a large degree. But do you suppose the media is going to be doing their duty if a Dem president is elected. I would say they will all of a sudden become much more competent.
Actually to be fair there are many really good investigative reporters for some of the print media. If people had read the stories that should have been on page one (but were in fact on page 16 or so) but not reported by the national television media then they would see the evidence of all the wrongdoing in this administration. But alas, not many are perusing the nether regions of the paper. And the television media is for those with a short attention span.
"The president was very clear about the reasons for going to war..."
- Secretary of State Rice
I've gotta ask, is she trying to use the old Jedi mind trick here?
Because I've forgotten all of the lies, the mis-statements, the duplicity, the blunders, the mismanagement, the corruption, the lack of WMDs, the flight suit, the banner, the complicity of the press, the gullibility of our citizens.
All I remember now is that the president was very clear about the reasons for going to war.
All I remember now is that the president was very clear about the reasons for going to war.
If the President cannot even recall whether he ever did cocaine how can we be certain that he even recalls why he took us to war?
That's got to be the lamest, almost, excuse for drug use.
If my mind hadn't been wiped clean by Rice's statement, I'd say that I remember someone being ridiculed for more than ten years because he didn't inhale.
I'm waiting for someone to say "... smoke dope? you bet I did."
That person would get my vote.
I've known every kind of junkie and drunk in my life. Everyone of them had more integrity than most of the people in this administration. Everyone of them had more going on in their drug or booze addled brain that the average right wing drone.
" I'm waiting for someone to say "... smoke dope? you bet I did."
That person would get my vote."
-Worrierking
Obama has done just that, and has made no qualms about it. I applaud him for that, it's a refreshing honesty that most of our politicians are sorely lacking (especially since I can guarantee most of them have done some form of illicit substance.)
All I remember now is that the president was very clear about the reasons for going to war.
If I remember correctly, his reason was "Saddam Hussein tried to kill my daddy."
During WWII, the "Media" featured Tokyo Rose and Lord Hawhaw, dishing out propaganda daily in an attempt to demoralize and mislead our troops and our nation.
Those broadcast professionals were KNOWN for where their allegiances were held, they were obvious about who they worked for. Still, they were marked for prosecution and death as a result of their efforts.
Today, our propagandists are not only puppets for the "powers that be" in a corrupt government, but they are flying under a false flag. They claim they were shocked ... SHOCKED! ... that they were fooled into doing the administration's bidding, spouting the administrations' LIES as if TRUTH to the American People, working hard to "sell the product".
And then they settle down and work hard doing the exact same thing TODAY. "Here's our OWN Karl Rove, to weigh in on Scott McClellan's new book. Karl, WHAT'S WRONG with Scott? Why would he tell all these LIES about you and George W. Bush's excellent service to our nation?"
Journalism. Hah!
TEX, CAPTFOSTER, MARI, NATIVE, BOTTLEBLONDE, DEM, EDENSCAPE, and, of
course the ever lovely, COL.
I keep dredging up that 27% who STILL think this horrible administration is doing "a heck of a job". When I first started to notice poor old Scott, standing at that podium, and that sad look on his face that showed how disgusting he felt at what he was forced to say, I knew that he was going through a nightmare of conscience. His shame was as obvious as his desire to just be somewhere else. My question is why he was allowed to LIVE. Right now I have no faith that these traitors to my country will spend one day in jail for their crimes.
My favorite (so far) comment about his book is someone from the White House saying to the effect of "this isn't the Scotty we used to know".
Since he left he grew a spine and acquired a conscience - both of which are lacking in the rats remaining in this administration.
Some current and former Bushites are saying that Scott McClellan never spoke up and said that he had any disagreement with anything Bush was doing, that he never contributed anything to policy discussions. Others are saying that he would not know what Bush was actually feeling and thinking about Iraq et al because he wasn't in those meetings.
Which is it? They need to get their stories straight, that's for sure! If he wasn't in meetings and so therefore wouldn't know how Bush was thinking, then how can he be held liable for not having contributed to those meetings he wasn't at? If he was in those meetings, and didn't contribute to them, simply listened, then how can it be said that he didn't get a good flavor for what Bush was thinking?
Talk about hypocrisy and hypocrites!
Karl Roves involvement in the Plame case goes beyond criminal.
This case was also something that was not covered the way it should of been by the media. How soon they forget the smears and distortions Mr Rove has been apart of since he entered politics. His smears are the reason we today along with stealing an election in 2000 have Bush as President. I would like the media and particually the major media players begin to ask Mr Rove mroe direct questions instead of giving him the chance to smear , lie and weasil his way out of what he was able to to in the legal process and avoid prosectution for treason. The man outed a Covert CIA agent, and got away with it.
Nice comparision ;-)
Yeah but what about the substance?
I notice an overriding theme in the reactions to the book - that there's something wrong with the messenger, the White House saying it's "sad" and "not the Scott we knew" etc. but not much in the way of denial of the accusations. The only straight-out denial comes from the career liar, Karl Rove. I assume that means that the stories are true but that Scott is very bad for telling the truth.
Sounds about right.
Iowalib,
FYI: I saw Dan Bartlett on the Today Show this morning take issue with McClellan. Bartlett only had a couple of minutes after about 20 minutes of McClellan and then McClellan had time to respond to Bartlettt. If you can, you should try to find it on youtube.
I probably spoke too soon, before they got their stories together.
I've never thought he was any kind of genius, Mary 59
I couldn't agree more. Gee if you are lying, stealing and cheating, in my book that doesn't make you a genius. Just a liar, cheat and thief. Oh and he had a complicit media and gop slopping majority marching in lock step as well. Some genius.
Julia and the rest,
To me this antipathy toward Rove is similar to conspiracy theories. Everyone "knows" how bad Rove is, but no one can provide any proof. Rove is routinely blamed for just about everything.
I have no problem with people being critical of Rove, what I find interesting is the dearth of evidence to support all these claims.
Way to stick up for the morally bankrupt there, AA. But I expect no better from you. Just business as usual.
But AA says there is a dearth of evidence ;-)
Oh the folly of a mind not so nimble.
If you had been surrounded by sharp-ass lawyers most of your sleezy career, advising you on how to avoid responsibility or blame for your "contributions" to the demise of the country, you would not fear prison. As law abiding citizens, you and I, if we did the things this secretive, soul-less and traitorous thug did and is NOW doing, we would be ashamed and fearful of being found out. Field Marshal Rove has no such shame or even fear. Could you or I afford 20 or so very expensive legal experts to watch our backs and hold our hands when the hounds came near? Could you smirk at the image in your mirror every morning, aware of your "special" place in the selling-out of your country? No, I didn't think so...
throw these criminals in jail
<a href="http://s14.photobucket.com/albums/a337/crazycracka420/?action=view¤t=dancing_fat_guy.gif" target="_blank"><img src="http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a337/crazycracka420/dancing_fat_guy.gif" border="0" alt="Photobucket"></a>