Monday, July 11, 2005 Rove is the Plame Leak plus Rove's Weak Defense OK, so Newsweek provides us with the documentary evidence that confirms what we heard last wk, which is Matt Cooper's source was Karl Rove. So, what kind of defense will be given? Firstly, Rove is known as Bush's Hit Man and as a "win by any means necessary" kind of guy. So, what is the Evil Toady One's weak defense?: His defense so far seems to be that he didn’t say her name, just “Wilson’s wife,” and didn’t know that she was undercover, just that she was CIA. Yeah... That could be dried out and used as fertilizer. And John of Americablog thinks so, too. Here's some of his top-notch questions/analysis: 1.) Whether Rove said "Valerie Plame" or "Wilson's wife" is irrelevant. He still outed an agent. 2.) Bush said he wanted to get to the bottom of this over a yr ago, so if Rove was so innocent, why didn't he just come forward immediately and say "yeah, it was me, but I didn't realize she was undercover"? 3.) If it is legally relevant whether Rove "knew" that Plame was undercover or not, it is not relevant in terms of him keeping his job. Rove intentionally outed a CIA agent working on WMD, it is irrelevant whether he did or didn't know if she was an undercover agent. 4.) The very fact that he appears to be claiming that he did NOT know about her undercover status is reason enough to fire him now. How dare the top political aide to the president out a CIA agent and not even think of checking whether she's undercover? So, the following now remains to be seen: A.) Who told Rove that Plame was a CIA agent? She was undercover after all. & B.) Novak said TWO administration sources confirmed that Plame was CIA. Who was the 2nd one? That indeed is 1 helluva question. |