Alright, I missed this too- did Karl Rove really say that not only did he first hear about Plame from another reporter, but he doesn’t remember what reporter?
That is, shall we say, a touch hard to believe.
And for the sheer entertainment value, C&L has this must see news coverage on the Rove affair:
Lou says, “…Rove testifying that he first learned about Plame from columnist Robert Novak, a CNN contributor. Danna Bash reports.” Immediately after that you can clearly hear a female voice on mic whispering “that’s bullshit”. Then Dana Bash continues with her report.
Hehe.
over it
I have to agree. More than a little bit unbelievable. If he cannot remember who it was…how can he remember that it was a reporter? This whole thing stinks. I wish they would hurry up and wrap it up.
SomeCallMeTim
OT, but is the blog now run through WP? It looks exactly the same.
jcricket
The recent “information” that’s been released is most likely coming from someone on Rove’s defense team, possibly Luskin himself. It’s nothing more than a summary of Rove’s side of the story from his testimony. And I seriously doubt that testimony passes the “sniff test”. Amazingly it all exonerates Rove and points to the media as the ones to blame in outing Valerie Plame. Wow! Additionally, it directly contradicts what Novak and Cooper have both said, publicly (in addition to their grand jury testimony). But of course the media is just trying to bring Karl down. How convienent.
Put less politely, “that’s bullshit”.
My speculation is that Rove’s grand jury testimony plays a significant part in Fitzgerald’s zeal to get further info from the reporters. Rove is not only in trouble for leaking Plame’s name, but also quite possibly of lying to the grand jury and the White House security office (when he told them a BS story about his conversation with Novak). Not to mention there are one or two other “senior administration officials” who are in as much trouble as Rove.
BTW, Add violating a Federal NDA to Rove’s growing list of crimes.
John at America Blog makes a good point that even if Rove’s recollection of the conversation is correct, he’s still guilty of violating the law.
I’m not 100% certain Rove is guilty of everything he is accused of. At the very least his (and the other admin. officials) ethical breaches are the kind of thing Republicans would use as a ram to start hearings and demand resignations. At the most, he’s guilty of treason.
And just like the “war” against Bill Clinton really picked up steam when he was lying to the press corps, and those lies came to symbolize (for a lot of people) the whole Clinton presidency, I suspect the same is possible for Bush. There are a significant number of people who support impeachment or, at the very least, feel misled about the Iraq war. Continuing to attack on this issue may give it the room it needs to bust open a whole number of things that could topple (at least politically, if not literally) Bush’s 2nd term.
Sad that the media only stands up when they feel they are the ones being played (as opposed to the American people), but in this case, I’ll take it.
KC
I’ve been out, but just came back, turned on my computer and found this article. Is the defense leaking or what? If this is true, then someone else was leaking, not Rove, I guess.
James Robertson
So it’s unbelievable that he couldn’t remember? You have very little imagination. As part of my job, I visit a lot of customers, do a lot of conference calls, and attend a fair number of trade shows. If you were to ask me where I heard a particular fact I picked up, I’d probably be hard pressed to tell you.
Now, Rove likely talks to a hell of lot more people on a daily basis than I do. Unless he has a photographic memory, this isn’t terribly hard to believe. It would be hard to believe that he remembered “everything”
KC
Good point, James.
Tom Johnson
The Rove NDA story should be front-page stuff on the blog.
http://www.democrats.reform.house.gov/Documents/20050715140232-17725.pdf
Mike Jones
I find it rather implausible that he couldn’t remeber, either. Yeah, Rove talks to a lot of people. So do most people at his level. That’s why they generally keep notes. And this matter – expecially since we know he’d already started a “research operation” on Wilson – seems like the sort of thing that he would have particularly noted as significant.
Rick
Hey, First Lady Hillary has massive recall problems in testifying about assorted maneuvers. That’s understandable, but Rove is supposed to remember one phone call among who knows how many he takes from the press?
Especially if he considered Joe Wilson no particularly big deal. As turns out to be the case.
Cordially…
over it
While I agree that Rove speaks to many people…I feel it just furthers my disbelief that he cannot remember who it was. Since he speaks to so many people…how is it that he remembers that it was (out of all these people) a reporter that told him? If he can remember that much…he can remember who it was.
Now, if he just flat out said “I cannot remember where I heard it”, I would find that believable.
ppgaz
All of this is churn, and moot.
First of all, the story was leaked for a purpose, and there is no reason to think that it was not leaked by someone close to Rove, and leaked in order to give Rove cover. To call it suspect would be a kindness.
Second, whether anyone “out here” in the world believes this stuff, or how anyone “out here” interprets it, matters not. What matters is one thing and one thing only: Fitzgerald.
It’s his view that will count. And if the Rovians think that leaking things like this will help his position in the case … well, I sincerely hope that they get a profound opportunity to enjoy the results of their experiment to the fullest possible extent. Nothing would be more fitting than for Rove’s situation to be “affected” by the sort of tricky-dicky leak spin wink-at-truth cleverness that he does so well.
Rove is truly a piece of work. He makes Nixon seem like just a nice, ordinary guy.
Larry
From Kleinman
Rove’s conduct certainly meets the far less demanding elements of the Espionage Act :
Possession of information relating to the national defense which the person possessing it has reason to believe could be used to damage the United States or aid a foreign nation and wilful communication of that information to a person not entitled to receive it.
Under the Espionage Act, the person doing the communicating need not actually believe that revelation could be damaging; he needs only “reason to believe.”
Classification itself is generally reason to believe, and a security-clearance holder is responsible for knowing what information is classified. Nor is it necessary that the discloser intend public distribution;
if Rove told Cooper — which he did — and Cooper didn’t have a security clearance — which he didn’t — the crime would have been complete.
And to be a crime the disclosure need not be intended to damage the national security;
it is only the act of communication itself that must be wilful.
neil
For those of you who doubt that Rove could forget who he talked to, please remember that he has been in the business of dirty politics for well over a decade. By now, he must be very good at forgetting the right things.