for Jake
You are right, the Plame Kerfuffle is old news, and it is unsubstantiated crap. Turns out that the not only did Rove not do anything wrong, neither did Novak, and the two journalists that have been held in contempt are likely not revealing their sources because they have none.
The Identities Act that that Rove is suspected of violating is very specifically written that someone must out a non-official covert operative (NOC) with malicious intent using information that was gleaned from their exclusive government sources and the NOC must have been covert within the past 6 years. Turns out Valerie Wilson (Plame) has not been covert since 1997, and her own husband blew her cover in 1999.
The media knows this because in their amicus brief to the court regarding the two journalists being held in contempt, they contend that they cannot be held in contempt because no law has been broken.
Think about it, if Rove were guilty of something, the WH would be quietly distancing itself from him--just like Kerry distanced himself from Wilson (the man behind this whole thing)--and the Democrats would be celebrating their victory. Instead it is just the opposite. Bush can make declarative statements, like "no one in this administration violated any laws" because they can prove it.
It's completely disingenuous to rail against the war in Iraq, and then whenever the partisan media gets distracted by something shiny (like the possibility of eliminating Bush's closest advisor)----to complain about a lack of coverage in Iraq.
News is body counts, and the only news we will get out of Iraq is "IED kills 4 and wounds 17, but first lets go to Aruba to check in on the Holloway story." There were more than 2000 journalists in Aruba tracking down one missing person. There are less than 2000 journalists based in 4 of the 20+ provinces in Iraq. What get's covered in MSM is what will reach more people to sell more toothpaste and prescription erectile disfunction drugs, not necessarily what is most important.
The Identities Act that that Rove is suspected of violating is very specifically written that someone must out a non-official covert operative (NOC) with malicious intent using information that was gleaned from their exclusive government sources and the NOC must have been covert within the past 6 years. Turns out Valerie Wilson (Plame) has not been covert since 1997, and her own husband blew her cover in 1999.
The media knows this because in their amicus brief to the court regarding the two journalists being held in contempt, they contend that they cannot be held in contempt because no law has been broken.
Think about it, if Rove were guilty of something, the WH would be quietly distancing itself from him--just like Kerry distanced himself from Wilson (the man behind this whole thing)--and the Democrats would be celebrating their victory. Instead it is just the opposite. Bush can make declarative statements, like "no one in this administration violated any laws" because they can prove it.
It's completely disingenuous to rail against the war in Iraq, and then whenever the partisan media gets distracted by something shiny (like the possibility of eliminating Bush's closest advisor)----to complain about a lack of coverage in Iraq.
News is body counts, and the only news we will get out of Iraq is "IED kills 4 and wounds 17, but first lets go to Aruba to check in on the Holloway story." There were more than 2000 journalists in Aruba tracking down one missing person. There are less than 2000 journalists based in 4 of the 20+ provinces in Iraq. What get's covered in MSM is what will reach more people to sell more toothpaste and prescription erectile disfunction drugs, not necessarily what is most important.
posted by djobe at 8:23 AM
4 Comments:
D-
Yesterday Drudge noted that Rove wasn't invited to a white house dinner on Sunday evening. The president has also said that anyone in his administration who is convicted (not charged, so he's setting a pretty high standard) of a crime will be released.
In regards to the lack of coverage in Iraq, that's probably because of the media blackout that has been implemented over the war in Iraq.
Don't even get me started on toothpaste.....
CM
That's right, Bush did say that. Although being suspected of a crime is a pretty low standard.
Anyone can be suspected, of anything, at anytime.
Regardless, Rove has not been indicted because no crime was committed...therefore he will not be released, (the super genius that he is, he probably planted Wilson 7 years ago, and then tricked him into appearing in Vanity Fair with his "covert" wife in the picture...)
That might be the case with liberal media re complaining about lack of Iraq coverage, but not with me personally. I'm confined to my office 50 hours week for work and feed myself, earful after earful of talk radio every day. I can tell unless its about fighting conspiracy theories on why we went, or any other wounds the administration has, the Iraq war doesn't get much attention.
It wasn' that Rove was actually guilty or not of a crime, it was that Bush changed his position from "leaking information" a year ago, to recently "committed a crime" It seemed it coincidently came right after all of the day after day after day hoopla from the syndicated no spin talk shows about how the action was being mislead by liberal media to perceived as a crime, which it isn't. It seemed as if something was said, then something was learned, and then a new position was produced. Either way nobody cares now...
Speaking on the Iraq war, what are your thoughts on the censorship law originally signed by BUSH Sr. and re-enacted Bush jr, regarding the photography or recording of soldiers killed, this time, pertaining to Afghanistan and Iraq?
later man
jake
Oh yea, check out our site if you haven't already ... www.supportandhome.com I know you may disagree with the general message, ... let me know your suggestions if any (besides removing it from the web).
jake
Post a Comment
<< Home