billvon 3,070 #26 July 8, 2005 >because a quick scan of MSNBC, CNN, ABC etc. show no references either. CNN: 4 stories in the last 5 days MSNBC: 8 stories in the last 5 days Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #27 July 8, 2005 QuoteOh, don't worry. We'll hear more and more in the upcoming days about how she had no cover anyway, and how this was really at the direction of the now-discredited George Tenet, and all kinds of crap. Just you wait. Shit never smelled so sweet. Wendy W. I'm still waiting...... Can you give me a little better idea of when we can expect this shit to start smelling sweet? Do you think it will take another week or should I expect to wait longer? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #28 July 8, 2005 Quote>because a quick scan of MSNBC, CNN, ABC etc. show no references either. CNN: 4 stories in the last 5 days MSNBC: 8 stories in the last 5 days Aha, a more indepth search brought up a few stories on CNN and MSNBC, and one on Fox News, but they are pretty much a rehash without any new information. Perhaps that explains why Fox hasn't published more than one. Unless you think good journalism is yammering on with regurgitated information. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
penniless 0 #29 July 8, 2005 QuoteQuote>because a quick scan of MSNBC, CNN, ABC etc. show no references either. CNN: 4 stories in the last 5 days MSNBC: 8 stories in the last 5 days Aha, a more indepth search brought up a few stories on CNN and MSNBC, and one on Fox News, but they are pretty much a rehash without any new information. Perhaps that explains why Fox hasn't published more than one. Unless you think good journalism is yammering on with regurgitated information. You should apply for a job in the White House press room. If Bush barfed on Japan's prime minister you'd find a justification for it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,070 #30 July 8, 2005 >Unless you think good journalism is yammering on with regurgitated information. No, per FOX and the White House Press Corps, good journalism is supporting the administration and not asking tough questions. For example - "Did Karl Rove leak information on an undercover CIA agent?" is a question only a liberal traitor would ask. "How are you going to work with (Democrats) who seem to have divorced themselves from reality?" is a question that an excellent, principled and objective reporter would ask. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
03CLS 0 #31 July 8, 2005 http://bushsbrain.com/ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #32 July 9, 2005 QuoteQuoteQuote>because a quick scan of MSNBC, CNN, ABC etc. show no references either. CNN: 4 stories in the last 5 days MSNBC: 8 stories in the last 5 days Aha, a more indepth search brought up a few stories on CNN and MSNBC, and one on Fox News, but they are pretty much a rehash without any new information. Perhaps that explains why Fox hasn't published more than one. Unless you think good journalism is yammering on with regurgitated information. You should apply for a job in the White House press room. If Bush barfed on Japan's prime minister you'd find a justification for it. Gee Ms. Penniless...please point out where I defended anybody. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #33 July 9, 2005 Quote>Unless you think good journalism is yammering on with regurgitated information. QuoteNo, per FOX and the White House Press Corps, good journalism is supporting the administration and not asking tough questions. For example - Please provide a source. Quote"Did Karl Rove leak information on an undercover CIA agent?" is a question only a liberal traitor would ask. I think thats a better question for a good prosecutor. It's unlikely to be answered by any suspect whether guilty or not. "How are you going to work with (Democrats) who seem to have divorced themselves from reality?" is a question that an excellent, principled and objective reporter would ask. Now, I have a theory about this statement. I believe that extreme emotions create a degree of psychosis and I believe that anger is one of the strongest emotions. It is an emotion that can cause a person to commit insane acts of road rage, murder, suicide bombings etc. I think the Lunatic Left Wing has been angry at Bush since they lost the elections in 2000. I think the anger has been further fanned by the war and other events. I believe it has now reached a point of real psychosis whereby they tend to be having a real snap with reality. I think news sources like MSNBC, CNN ABC etc know this and since they are in the business of selling news, they print articles they know the Psycotic Left Wing will inhale like an addictive drug. This helps the sagging ratings these news (and I use the term very loosely) have experienced for the last few years. Problem many on the left have is like any addict, they are in such a state of denial that they will attack anything that doesn't help feed their addiction. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EricTheRed 0 #34 July 9, 2005 Your statement also seem to apply to Rush Limbaugh (esp the addict parts)illegible usually Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #35 July 9, 2005 QuoteYour statement also seem to apply to Rush Limbaugh (esp the addict parts) Anger is probably the most powerful drug there is. It definitely causes breaks with reality. The difference between drugs and psychosis is with drugs, you know you're fucked up. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,070 #36 July 9, 2005 >Please provide a source. That liberal, biased site called www.whitehouse.gov. Do a search. >I think thats a better question for a good prosecutor. It's unlikely >to be answered by any suspect whether guilty or not. Interesting that you think we should treat Rove, McClellan etc like criminal suspects. >It is an emotion that can cause a person to commit insane acts >of road rage, murder, suicide bombings etc. It can even cause people to invade countries and kill thousands. In extreme cases, it can even cause people to _support_ such killing. > I think news sources like MSNBC, CNN ABC etc know this and since > they are in the business of selling news, they print articles they > know the Psycotic Left Wing will inhale like an addictive drug. So your explanation of why a right-winger asked the president a soft question was to make sure 'liberal news sources' make lots of money? Perhaps he then sold someone a bridge for real cheap. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #37 July 10, 2005 Quote>Please provide a source. QuoteThat liberal, biased site called www.whitehouse.gov. Do a search. I did, it doesn't say that. So you don't have a source? >I think thats a better question for a good prosecutor. It's unlikely >to be answered by any suspect whether guilty or not. QuoteInteresting that you think we should treat Rove, McClellan etc like criminal suspects. No, the left has Rove already tried and convicted. Haven't you listened to your leader Howard Dean and the other Left Wing Idiots like him? >It is an emotion that can cause a person to commit insane acts >of road rage, murder, suicide bombings etc. QuoteIt can even cause people to invade countries and kill thousands. In extreme cases, it can even cause people to _support_ such killing. Oh, back to the Bush lied mantra? Lets not go backwards and debate bad intel, OK? > I think news sources like MSNBC, CNN ABC etc know this and since > they are in the business of selling news, they print articles they > know the Psycotic Left Wing will inhale like an addictive drug. QuoteSo your explanation of why a right-winger asked the president a soft question was to make sure 'liberal news sources' make lots of money? Perhaps he then sold someone a bridge for real cheap. Not even close to what I said and you know it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Andy9o8 2 #38 July 10, 2005 It was reported today the the Cleveland Plain Dealer chose not to run two investigative stories derived partly on leaked information due to fear of prosecutors' subpoenas. The paper said this is the first time in its entire history it has ever decided to censor itself that way, but felt compelled to do so due to the new climate. We Americans have been using the words "Freedom" and "Liberty" as synonymous with our nation's most precious values since long before most of us, or even our parents, were born. Look at the old newsreels run in movie theaters during World War 2 - always under the heading of "what we're fighting for." And it is what we fought for. Think about the importance of real, genuine freedom of the press as the foundation of those freedoms and liberties. Think about how any free, democratic nation can remain free and democratic if those freedoms and liberties are eroded. Now reflect upon the past 4 years or so and consider how some of those freedoms and liberties are being slowly, steadily eroded -- more than just about any other time during our lifetimes. Hint: the timing is no coincidence. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites TheAnvil 0 #39 July 10, 2005 You have positive proof Rove leaked the info, eh? Odd that you haven't published it nationally then or taken to the airwaves with it. Perhaps he did, perhaps he didn't. I would like to know who did and see their clearances pulled and see them face some sort of disciplinary action - fine, jail time, whatever. The funny thing here is that the liberals are the ones who demanded this investigation. Bob Novak, hated by the left-leaning Washington press corps, isn't going to jail, so apparently he complied. Now two of the leftist reporters, who undoubtedly relished the thought of Novak going down, are in the hot seat for not cooperating (one actually did cooperate in the end). I find that funny as hell. This leak is a bad thing, and when there's proof of who leaked it they should suffer the consequences. For my left leaning friends out there screaming for Rove's head - were you screaming for Leahy's head with equal vigor when he was kicked off the Senate Intelligence Committee for leaking classified information? For El Jefe Clintonista's head over relaxing technology transfer restrictions to the Chinese? If not, look in the mirror and say 'hypocrite' over and over and over and over and over again whilst I chuckle. Vinny the Anvil Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL JACKASS POWER!!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites EricTheRed 0 #40 July 10, 2005 QuoteThink about the importance of real, genuine freedom of the press as the foundation of those freedoms and liberties. Think about how any free, democratic nation can remain free and democratic if those freedoms and liberties are eroded. There are unfortunately many who do not value freedom. Hopefully those of us that do can repair the damage done by those who would prefer any opposition be silenced.illegible usually Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites EricTheRed 0 #41 July 10, 2005 Speaking of losses of freedom... http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0507100277jul10,1,147122.story?coll=chi-newsnationworld-hedillegible usually Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gravitymaster 0 #42 July 10, 2005 http://msnbc.msn.com/id/8525978/site/newsweek/ Quote"Nothing in the Cooper e-mail suggests that Rove used Plame's name or knew she was a covert operative." Quote"A fair reading of the e-mail makes clear that the information conveyed was not part of an organized effort to disclose Plame's identity, but was an effort to discourage Time from publishing things that turned out to be false," the source said, referring to claims in circulation at the time that Cheney and high-level CIA officials arranged for Wilson's trip to Africa. Sniff, sniff... I still ain't smelling that sweet shit yet. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,070 #43 July 10, 2005 >So you don't have a source? You're asking for a source of someone not asking something? I think you may be a little unclear on the concept of a 'source.' www.whitehouse.gov contains transcripts of all the press conferences over the past two years; if you can find one that shows a reporter asking if Karl Rove betrayed a US agent, then you would have a source to contradict me. If you can't find that source, my point stands. >No, the left has Rove already tried and convicted. Haven't you > listened to your leader Howard Dean and the other Left Wing Idiots > like him? You were the one who suggested that it is better to ask questions of them as a prosecutor, rather than as a reporter. Does this indicate you have become a liberal, or did you misspeak? >Oh, back to the Bush lied mantra? Lets not go backwards and >debate bad intel, OK? By all means! I know the right wing is getting very embarrassed by the whole thing. >Not even close to what I said and you know it. That's pretty much exactly what you said; I think your slam backfired. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gravitymaster 0 #44 July 10, 2005 Quote>So you don't have a source? QuoteYou're asking for a source of someone not asking something? I think you may be a little unclear on the concept of a 'source.' www.whitehouse.gov contains transcripts of all the press conferences over the past two years; if you can find one that shows a reporter asking if Karl Rove betrayed a US agent, then you would have a source to contradict me. If you can't find that source, my point stands. You said: "No, per FOX and the White House Press Corps, good journalism is supporting the administration and not asking tough questions." Since you are attributing this per Fox and the White House, I asked for proof. Or is this just your Opinion? >No, the left has Rove already tried and convicted. Haven't you > listened to your leader Howard Dean and the other Left Wing Idiots > like him? QuoteYou were the one who suggested that it is better to ask questions of them as a prosecutor, rather than as a reporter. Does this indicate you have become a liberal, or did you misspeak? I didn't misspeak. You just missed the point. The point was if there has been a crime committed, it is a question no potential suspect will answer anyway and it was also a commentary on those who have already tried and convicted Rove. We still have a Justice System in this country whether the Left likes it or not and a person is innocent until proven guilty. >Oh, back to the Bush lied mantra? Lets not go backwards and >debate bad intel, OK? QuoteBy all means! I know the right wing is getting very embarrassed by the whole thing. Not embarrassed at all. It's just that whenever the Lefties run out of material, the fallback is always to "Bush Lied". I'm just tired of arguing with a wall. Edit: I don't mean you personally Bill. Just in general >Not even close to what I said and you know it. QuoteThat's pretty much exactly what you said; I think your slam backfired. Yawn..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gravitymaster 0 #45 July 10, 2005 You said in another thread: QuoteAgain, most people in the reality-based world realize that the burden of proof is on the accuser, not the accused. Yes, many things might have happened. Maybe Saddam got rid of the WMD's. Maybe Bush got it all wrong. Maybe the CIA actually killed all the Kurds and the Iranians. But people in the reality-based community go on what you can prove, not what conspiracy theorists can dream up. Quite a double standard you have there. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gravitymaster 0 #46 July 11, 2005 http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/02/20040210-3.html#2 http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/10/20031010-6.html#c http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/10/20031001-6.html http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/09/20030929-7.html McClellan does a pretty thorough job of explaining the procedure for handling this type of allegation. Of course the Press continues to ask the same questions over and over again. McClellan shows pretty good restraint in putting up with the repetitivness and regurgatation of the same questions. QuoteQ All right. Let me just follow up. You said this morning, "The President knows" that Karl Rove wasn't involved. How does he know that? MR. McCLELLAN: Well, I've made it very clear that it was a ridiculous suggestion in the first place. I saw some comments this morning from the person who made that suggestion, backing away from that. And I said it is simply not true. So, I mean, it's public knowledge. I've said that it's not true. And I have spoken with Karl Rove -- QuoteMR. McCLELLAN: No, I understand that. And I'm saying, if someone leaked classified information of that nature, then it should be looked into by the Department of Justice. Now you need to ask the Department of Justice what their procedures are and what they would do. Q And if the President thinks the Department of Justice should look into it, what kind of cooperation would the White House provide? In the past, there have been some concerns about records and that sort of thing -- MR. McCLELLAN: Of course, we always cooperate with the Department of Justice in matters like this. And you could expect we would in this matter, as well. QuoteQ You said that the President knows that Karl Rove was not involved, and you specifically have spoken to Karl Rove and gotten those assurances. By those statements, you've implied that the President has not talked to Karl Rove specifically about this. MR. McCLELLAN: No, I said that -- Q Is that a correct inference, or did we -- MR. McCLELLAN: I've already answered this question, when Terry asked it earlier, and I said that it's not my habit to get into conversations the President has with staff or with advisors. I'm not going to get into those conversations. QuoteQ I have one other follow up. Can you say for the record whether Mr. Rove possessed the information about Mr. Wilson's wife, but merely did not talk to anybody about it? Do you know whether for a fact he knew -- MR. McCLELLAN: I don't know whether or not -- I mean, I'm sure he probably saw the same media reports everybody else in this room has. Q When you talked to Mr. Rove, did you discuss, did you ever have this information, could you have talked to him? MR. McCLELLAN: We're going down a lot of different roads here. I've made it very clear that he was not involved, that there's no truth to the suggestion that he was. So the questions have been asked before and answered. I'm sure this won't be good enough and there will be some hair still to split, but consider yourself refuted. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,106 #47 July 11, 2005 More today: online.wsj.com/public/article/0,,SB112104330395581808,00.html?mod=todays_free_feature... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites TheAnvil 0 #48 July 11, 2005 Quote Mr. Cooper's email said Mr. Rove told him the wife of former diplomat Joseph Wilson "apparently works at the agency on wmd [weapons of mass destruction] issues." Like I thought. Hardly treason. Not exactly stating what she does and outing a covert agent. Leftists spinning and making fools of themselves - nothing more. Unless more proof/facts come out - which they may indeed. Vinny the Anvil Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL JACKASS POWER!!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites narcimund 0 #49 July 11, 2005 QuoteUnless more proof/facts come out - which they may indeed. I'm sure the apologists will laugh it off no matter what comes out. If there were photos of Rove with a smoking gun and dead children in front of him, the photographer's voting history would be investigated vigorously. First Class Citizen Twice Over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gravitymaster 0 #50 July 11, 2005 QuoteQuoteUnless more proof/facts come out - which they may indeed. I'm sure the apologists will laugh it off no matter what comes out. I'm the haters will not be satisfied unless Rove is foung guilty. QuoteIf there were photos of Rove with a smoking gun and dead children in front of him, the photographer's voting history would be investigated vigorously. And if that photo contained exculpatory information, the haters would claim it's Photo-shopped. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next Page 2 of 5 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
Andy9o8 2 #38 July 10, 2005 It was reported today the the Cleveland Plain Dealer chose not to run two investigative stories derived partly on leaked information due to fear of prosecutors' subpoenas. The paper said this is the first time in its entire history it has ever decided to censor itself that way, but felt compelled to do so due to the new climate. We Americans have been using the words "Freedom" and "Liberty" as synonymous with our nation's most precious values since long before most of us, or even our parents, were born. Look at the old newsreels run in movie theaters during World War 2 - always under the heading of "what we're fighting for." And it is what we fought for. Think about the importance of real, genuine freedom of the press as the foundation of those freedoms and liberties. Think about how any free, democratic nation can remain free and democratic if those freedoms and liberties are eroded. Now reflect upon the past 4 years or so and consider how some of those freedoms and liberties are being slowly, steadily eroded -- more than just about any other time during our lifetimes. Hint: the timing is no coincidence. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheAnvil 0 #39 July 10, 2005 You have positive proof Rove leaked the info, eh? Odd that you haven't published it nationally then or taken to the airwaves with it. Perhaps he did, perhaps he didn't. I would like to know who did and see their clearances pulled and see them face some sort of disciplinary action - fine, jail time, whatever. The funny thing here is that the liberals are the ones who demanded this investigation. Bob Novak, hated by the left-leaning Washington press corps, isn't going to jail, so apparently he complied. Now two of the leftist reporters, who undoubtedly relished the thought of Novak going down, are in the hot seat for not cooperating (one actually did cooperate in the end). I find that funny as hell. This leak is a bad thing, and when there's proof of who leaked it they should suffer the consequences. For my left leaning friends out there screaming for Rove's head - were you screaming for Leahy's head with equal vigor when he was kicked off the Senate Intelligence Committee for leaking classified information? For El Jefe Clintonista's head over relaxing technology transfer restrictions to the Chinese? If not, look in the mirror and say 'hypocrite' over and over and over and over and over again whilst I chuckle. Vinny the Anvil Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL JACKASS POWER!!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EricTheRed 0 #40 July 10, 2005 QuoteThink about the importance of real, genuine freedom of the press as the foundation of those freedoms and liberties. Think about how any free, democratic nation can remain free and democratic if those freedoms and liberties are eroded. There are unfortunately many who do not value freedom. Hopefully those of us that do can repair the damage done by those who would prefer any opposition be silenced.illegible usually Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EricTheRed 0 #41 July 10, 2005 Speaking of losses of freedom... http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0507100277jul10,1,147122.story?coll=chi-newsnationworld-hedillegible usually Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #42 July 10, 2005 http://msnbc.msn.com/id/8525978/site/newsweek/ Quote"Nothing in the Cooper e-mail suggests that Rove used Plame's name or knew she was a covert operative." Quote"A fair reading of the e-mail makes clear that the information conveyed was not part of an organized effort to disclose Plame's identity, but was an effort to discourage Time from publishing things that turned out to be false," the source said, referring to claims in circulation at the time that Cheney and high-level CIA officials arranged for Wilson's trip to Africa. Sniff, sniff... I still ain't smelling that sweet shit yet. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,070 #43 July 10, 2005 >So you don't have a source? You're asking for a source of someone not asking something? I think you may be a little unclear on the concept of a 'source.' www.whitehouse.gov contains transcripts of all the press conferences over the past two years; if you can find one that shows a reporter asking if Karl Rove betrayed a US agent, then you would have a source to contradict me. If you can't find that source, my point stands. >No, the left has Rove already tried and convicted. Haven't you > listened to your leader Howard Dean and the other Left Wing Idiots > like him? You were the one who suggested that it is better to ask questions of them as a prosecutor, rather than as a reporter. Does this indicate you have become a liberal, or did you misspeak? >Oh, back to the Bush lied mantra? Lets not go backwards and >debate bad intel, OK? By all means! I know the right wing is getting very embarrassed by the whole thing. >Not even close to what I said and you know it. That's pretty much exactly what you said; I think your slam backfired. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #44 July 10, 2005 Quote>So you don't have a source? QuoteYou're asking for a source of someone not asking something? I think you may be a little unclear on the concept of a 'source.' www.whitehouse.gov contains transcripts of all the press conferences over the past two years; if you can find one that shows a reporter asking if Karl Rove betrayed a US agent, then you would have a source to contradict me. If you can't find that source, my point stands. You said: "No, per FOX and the White House Press Corps, good journalism is supporting the administration and not asking tough questions." Since you are attributing this per Fox and the White House, I asked for proof. Or is this just your Opinion? >No, the left has Rove already tried and convicted. Haven't you > listened to your leader Howard Dean and the other Left Wing Idiots > like him? QuoteYou were the one who suggested that it is better to ask questions of them as a prosecutor, rather than as a reporter. Does this indicate you have become a liberal, or did you misspeak? I didn't misspeak. You just missed the point. The point was if there has been a crime committed, it is a question no potential suspect will answer anyway and it was also a commentary on those who have already tried and convicted Rove. We still have a Justice System in this country whether the Left likes it or not and a person is innocent until proven guilty. >Oh, back to the Bush lied mantra? Lets not go backwards and >debate bad intel, OK? QuoteBy all means! I know the right wing is getting very embarrassed by the whole thing. Not embarrassed at all. It's just that whenever the Lefties run out of material, the fallback is always to "Bush Lied". I'm just tired of arguing with a wall. Edit: I don't mean you personally Bill. Just in general >Not even close to what I said and you know it. QuoteThat's pretty much exactly what you said; I think your slam backfired. Yawn..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gravitymaster 0 #45 July 10, 2005 You said in another thread: QuoteAgain, most people in the reality-based world realize that the burden of proof is on the accuser, not the accused. Yes, many things might have happened. Maybe Saddam got rid of the WMD's. Maybe Bush got it all wrong. Maybe the CIA actually killed all the Kurds and the Iranians. But people in the reality-based community go on what you can prove, not what conspiracy theorists can dream up. Quite a double standard you have there. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gravitymaster 0 #46 July 11, 2005 http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/02/20040210-3.html#2 http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/10/20031010-6.html#c http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/10/20031001-6.html http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/09/20030929-7.html McClellan does a pretty thorough job of explaining the procedure for handling this type of allegation. Of course the Press continues to ask the same questions over and over again. McClellan shows pretty good restraint in putting up with the repetitivness and regurgatation of the same questions. QuoteQ All right. Let me just follow up. You said this morning, "The President knows" that Karl Rove wasn't involved. How does he know that? MR. McCLELLAN: Well, I've made it very clear that it was a ridiculous suggestion in the first place. I saw some comments this morning from the person who made that suggestion, backing away from that. And I said it is simply not true. So, I mean, it's public knowledge. I've said that it's not true. And I have spoken with Karl Rove -- QuoteMR. McCLELLAN: No, I understand that. And I'm saying, if someone leaked classified information of that nature, then it should be looked into by the Department of Justice. Now you need to ask the Department of Justice what their procedures are and what they would do. Q And if the President thinks the Department of Justice should look into it, what kind of cooperation would the White House provide? In the past, there have been some concerns about records and that sort of thing -- MR. McCLELLAN: Of course, we always cooperate with the Department of Justice in matters like this. And you could expect we would in this matter, as well. QuoteQ You said that the President knows that Karl Rove was not involved, and you specifically have spoken to Karl Rove and gotten those assurances. By those statements, you've implied that the President has not talked to Karl Rove specifically about this. MR. McCLELLAN: No, I said that -- Q Is that a correct inference, or did we -- MR. McCLELLAN: I've already answered this question, when Terry asked it earlier, and I said that it's not my habit to get into conversations the President has with staff or with advisors. I'm not going to get into those conversations. QuoteQ I have one other follow up. Can you say for the record whether Mr. Rove possessed the information about Mr. Wilson's wife, but merely did not talk to anybody about it? Do you know whether for a fact he knew -- MR. McCLELLAN: I don't know whether or not -- I mean, I'm sure he probably saw the same media reports everybody else in this room has. Q When you talked to Mr. Rove, did you discuss, did you ever have this information, could you have talked to him? MR. McCLELLAN: We're going down a lot of different roads here. I've made it very clear that he was not involved, that there's no truth to the suggestion that he was. So the questions have been asked before and answered. I'm sure this won't be good enough and there will be some hair still to split, but consider yourself refuted. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,106 #47 July 11, 2005 More today: online.wsj.com/public/article/0,,SB112104330395581808,00.html?mod=todays_free_feature... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites TheAnvil 0 #48 July 11, 2005 Quote Mr. Cooper's email said Mr. Rove told him the wife of former diplomat Joseph Wilson "apparently works at the agency on wmd [weapons of mass destruction] issues." Like I thought. Hardly treason. Not exactly stating what she does and outing a covert agent. Leftists spinning and making fools of themselves - nothing more. Unless more proof/facts come out - which they may indeed. Vinny the Anvil Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL JACKASS POWER!!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites narcimund 0 #49 July 11, 2005 QuoteUnless more proof/facts come out - which they may indeed. I'm sure the apologists will laugh it off no matter what comes out. If there were photos of Rove with a smoking gun and dead children in front of him, the photographer's voting history would be investigated vigorously. First Class Citizen Twice Over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gravitymaster 0 #50 July 11, 2005 QuoteQuoteUnless more proof/facts come out - which they may indeed. I'm sure the apologists will laugh it off no matter what comes out. I'm the haters will not be satisfied unless Rove is foung guilty. QuoteIf there were photos of Rove with a smoking gun and dead children in front of him, the photographer's voting history would be investigated vigorously. And if that photo contained exculpatory information, the haters would claim it's Photo-shopped. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next Page 2 of 5 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
Gravitymaster 0 #45 July 10, 2005 You said in another thread: QuoteAgain, most people in the reality-based world realize that the burden of proof is on the accuser, not the accused. Yes, many things might have happened. Maybe Saddam got rid of the WMD's. Maybe Bush got it all wrong. Maybe the CIA actually killed all the Kurds and the Iranians. But people in the reality-based community go on what you can prove, not what conspiracy theorists can dream up. Quite a double standard you have there. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #46 July 11, 2005 http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/02/20040210-3.html#2 http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/10/20031010-6.html#c http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/10/20031001-6.html http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/09/20030929-7.html McClellan does a pretty thorough job of explaining the procedure for handling this type of allegation. Of course the Press continues to ask the same questions over and over again. McClellan shows pretty good restraint in putting up with the repetitivness and regurgatation of the same questions. QuoteQ All right. Let me just follow up. You said this morning, "The President knows" that Karl Rove wasn't involved. How does he know that? MR. McCLELLAN: Well, I've made it very clear that it was a ridiculous suggestion in the first place. I saw some comments this morning from the person who made that suggestion, backing away from that. And I said it is simply not true. So, I mean, it's public knowledge. I've said that it's not true. And I have spoken with Karl Rove -- QuoteMR. McCLELLAN: No, I understand that. And I'm saying, if someone leaked classified information of that nature, then it should be looked into by the Department of Justice. Now you need to ask the Department of Justice what their procedures are and what they would do. Q And if the President thinks the Department of Justice should look into it, what kind of cooperation would the White House provide? In the past, there have been some concerns about records and that sort of thing -- MR. McCLELLAN: Of course, we always cooperate with the Department of Justice in matters like this. And you could expect we would in this matter, as well. QuoteQ You said that the President knows that Karl Rove was not involved, and you specifically have spoken to Karl Rove and gotten those assurances. By those statements, you've implied that the President has not talked to Karl Rove specifically about this. MR. McCLELLAN: No, I said that -- Q Is that a correct inference, or did we -- MR. McCLELLAN: I've already answered this question, when Terry asked it earlier, and I said that it's not my habit to get into conversations the President has with staff or with advisors. I'm not going to get into those conversations. QuoteQ I have one other follow up. Can you say for the record whether Mr. Rove possessed the information about Mr. Wilson's wife, but merely did not talk to anybody about it? Do you know whether for a fact he knew -- MR. McCLELLAN: I don't know whether or not -- I mean, I'm sure he probably saw the same media reports everybody else in this room has. Q When you talked to Mr. Rove, did you discuss, did you ever have this information, could you have talked to him? MR. McCLELLAN: We're going down a lot of different roads here. I've made it very clear that he was not involved, that there's no truth to the suggestion that he was. So the questions have been asked before and answered. I'm sure this won't be good enough and there will be some hair still to split, but consider yourself refuted. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,106 #47 July 11, 2005 More today: online.wsj.com/public/article/0,,SB112104330395581808,00.html?mod=todays_free_feature... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheAnvil 0 #48 July 11, 2005 Quote Mr. Cooper's email said Mr. Rove told him the wife of former diplomat Joseph Wilson "apparently works at the agency on wmd [weapons of mass destruction] issues." Like I thought. Hardly treason. Not exactly stating what she does and outing a covert agent. Leftists spinning and making fools of themselves - nothing more. Unless more proof/facts come out - which they may indeed. Vinny the Anvil Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL JACKASS POWER!!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
narcimund 0 #49 July 11, 2005 QuoteUnless more proof/facts come out - which they may indeed. I'm sure the apologists will laugh it off no matter what comes out. If there were photos of Rove with a smoking gun and dead children in front of him, the photographer's voting history would be investigated vigorously. First Class Citizen Twice Over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #50 July 11, 2005 QuoteQuoteUnless more proof/facts come out - which they may indeed. I'm sure the apologists will laugh it off no matter what comes out. I'm the haters will not be satisfied unless Rove is foung guilty. QuoteIf there were photos of Rove with a smoking gun and dead children in front of him, the photographer's voting history would be investigated vigorously. And if that photo contained exculpatory information, the haters would claim it's Photo-shopped. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next Page 2 of 5 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
