shit hits Karl Rove's fan

124»

  Comments


  • SwayzeSwayze 14,705 Posts
    investigation into the White House cover-up of the lies that
    led our nation to war in Iraq.



    im not sure thats what the investigation was about.

    it is now, bitch.

  • sabadabadasabadabada 5,966 Posts
    i guess - why not - its all a lot easier than coming up with some ideas on how you want to govern. Especially when those ideas keep getting rejected every two years.

  • Yeh, they're kinda using some circuitous logic.
    Here's their case:

    * In his January 2003 State Of The Union, President Bush made his case
    for war in Iraq. He included this now-infamous 16-word deception about
    Iraq's nuclear capability: "The British government has learned that
    Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from
    Africa." [2]
    * But the White House had known for nearly a year that this claim was
    false. In February 2002, the CIA sent former Ambassador Joseph Wilson
    to Niger to investigate the unsubstantiated claim that Saddam Hussein
    tried to buy uranium from Niger for use in nuclear weapons [3].
    * Wilson had discovered that the claims were bogus and documents used to
    support the claims had been forgeries. He reported this to the CIA,
    and the CIA told the White House [3].

    Why Did The President Ignore Wilson's Findings And Lie? It's About Iraq

    * Why did President Bush use the discredited nuclear claims in his
    January 2003 State of the Union Address to make the case that Iraq was
    a nuclear threat? They wanted to invade Iraq.
    * A CBS News polling report in late 2002 made clear, "there is no
    consensus on adopting a pre-emptive strike policy in general--except
    where a nuclear attack against the United States is
    contemplated..." [4]
    * Only well after the war had begun would the Washington Post report on
    "a pattern in which President Bush, Vice President Cheney and their
    subordinates...made allegations depicting Iraq's nuclear weapons
    program as more active, more certain and more imminent in its threat
    than the data they had would support. On occasion administration
    advocates withheld evidence that did not conform to their views." [5]

    Wilson Strikes Back--Exposes Bush's Lie In Lead-Up To War

    * Six months after the President's 2003 State of the Union Address, as
    Bush's WMD and nuclear claims began to unravel, Wilson went public and
    exposed the Bush Administration's false nuclear claims in a New York
    Times op-ed [6].
    * The full July 6, 2003 op-ed, "What I Didn't Find In Africa," can be
    read here: http://www.moveon.org/r?r=1070
    * The White House saw Wilson as a major threat. According to the Los
    Angeles Times, "Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff was so
    angry about the public statements of former Ambassador Joseph C.
    Wilson IV, a Bush administration critic married to an undercover CIA
    officer, that he monitored all of Wilson's television appearances and
    urged the White House to mount an aggressive public campaign against
    him, former aides say." [7]

    White House Retaliates--Outs Valerie Plame Wilson As CIA Agent

    * The week after Wilson's op-ed in the New York Times, "two senior
    administration officials" were cited by conservative columnist Robert
    Novak in his column outing CIA agent Valerie Plame Wilson [8].
    * The White House Iraq Group (WHIG), originally formed to sell the war
    to the public, "morphed into a virtual hit squad that took aim at
    critics who questioned its claims." [9] WHIG was run out of Vice
    President Cheney's office, and included Cheney's Chief of Staff
    "Scooter" Libby, top Bush strategist Karl Rove, and other top Bush
    administration officials.
    * Not only did this leak end Valerie Plame Wilson's 20-year career as a
    CIA covert agent, but it also exposed a longstanding CIA front
    company, Brewster Jennings & Associates, where Plame worked and put at
    risk many of the undercover agents who had worked with Wilson in the
    past [10].

    Today's Indictment--White House Official Obstructed Investigation Into The
    Lie

    * Today's indictment says Libby illegally obstructed the investigation
    into the White House outing of an undercover CIA agent, Valerie Plame
    Wilson. He also was charged with perjury and making false statements
    to FBI agents. The ongoing investigation of Karl Rove revolves around
    the same issues, among possible others.
    * Former President George H. W. Bush was right in 1999 when he said, "I
    have nothing but contempt and anger for those who betray the trust by
    exposing the name of our sources. They are, in my view, the most
    insidious, of traitors." [11]
    * Former Republican National Committee Chair Ed Gillespie was right when
    he said, "I think if the allegation is true, to reveal the identity of
    an undercover CIA operative--it's abhorrent, and it should be a crime,
    and it is a crime." [12]

  • sabadabadasabadabada 5,966 Posts
    * Former Republican National Committee Chair Ed Gillespie was right when
    he said, "I think if the allegation is true, to reveal the identity of
    an undercover CIA operative--it's abhorrent, and it should be a crime,
    and it is a crime." [12]

    and this didnt happen, because it didnt satisfy the statute, so its essentially obstructing an investigation into a crime that never occured.

  • * Former Republican National Committee Chair Ed Gillespie was right when
    he said, "I think if the allegation is true, to reveal the identity of
    an undercover CIA operative--it's abhorrent, and it should be a crime,
    and it is a crime." [12]

    and this didnt happen, because it didnt satisfy the statute, so its essentially obstructing an investigation into a crime that never occured.

    Why obstruct it then?

  • sabadabadasabadabada 5,966 Posts
    no i totally understand, its the coverup, not the crime that gets you. Im actually suprised Rove was stupid enough to let this happen. But I also think that there probably isnt going to be much more to this.

  • motown67motown67 4,513 Posts
    no i totally understand, its the coverup, not the crime that gets you. Im actually suprised Rove was stupid enough to let this happen. But I also think that there probably isnt going to be much more to this.

    I think Libby is probably going to be found guilty.

    He told the FBI and the Grand Jury more than once that he wasn't sure where he found out about Plame's identity from, but that it was probably reporters that told him, and that he only passed it along later.

    In truth, Cheney told him the name and he passed it along to Rove and to reporters as part of a concerted effort to undermine Wilson for questioning Bush's claims about Iraq buying uranium from Niger.

    He also told the Grand Jury that when the Wilson story broke he didn't know Wilson, Plame or even whether Wilson had a wife.

    In truth, he and Cheney were deeply interested in Wilson's trip to Africa and his wife before Wilson even wrote his editorial saying the Administration was making things up about Iraq's WMD program.

    How's he going to get out of that?

  • FatbackFatback 6,746 Posts
    Yeah it was a cover up and that's pretty bad. Scooter was right to step down.



    That said, what they were covering up and its consequences...







    ...I can't finds words.


  • FatbackFatback 6,746 Posts
    there probably isnt going to be much more to this.



Sign In or Register to comment.