RockThrower

The Adventures of Karl Rove and Libby Lewis

Questions?

David Johnston of the New York Times reports today that Rove and Libby, at the time of the leaks, were "working closely together on a related underlying issue: whether President Bush was correct in suggesting earlier that year that Iraq had been trying to acquire nuclear materials from Africa."

Why were they working on that? Isn't that a task better suited to the National Security Council?

Was it because they were the ones who made sure that the reference to the Iraq seeking Uranium from Niger was included in Bush's state of the Union message?

Inquiring minds want to know.

Anybody?

Save Your Rocks

Politics it might be said, is in its essence the ability to count votes.

That is particularly true in the United States Senate.

And like it or not, Bush has the votes to push his nomination of John Roberts to the Supreme Court through the Senate. 

And so, while I am not in the habit of giving free advice, here goes:

Save your Rocks for something we can win, like the 2006 Congressional elections.  Spend you money on something that will make a difference, like the special election to replace the congressman in Ohio's 2nd district.  Keep your focus on Karl Rove.

Rockthrower

Bush in Wonderland

What have these guys been smoking?

Only in the Alice in Wonderland world of the Bush Administration where black is white, up is down, and government websites and reports are regularly edited to strip out facts that conflict with administration positions would Karl Rove’s assertion that he was only confirming reporters inquiries be offered as proof that “he was not involved” in the illegal outing of a CIA agent.

By his own admission Karl Rove served as a confirming source that led to publication of two articles identifying an undercover CIA operative. And then there is that little detail of Time correspondent Matt Cooper reporting that he first learned that Wilson’s wife worked at the CIA from Rove.  Apparently, that meets the Bush administration definition of non-involvement.

And so there was former Rove deputy and current Republican National Committee chair Ken Mehlman Sunday on Meet The Press saying “the information that's come out this week, that we all agree on, says they were not involved in a leak.” We’ll, at least now we know who is coaching Scott McClellan. 

While it remains to be seen if Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald will agree with the White House definition of “non-involvement,” I’m having a hard time buying into the idea that Karl Rove, the “architect” of the Republican majority, was just a passive observer in this nasty little mess.  And apparently I am not the only one.  The Los Angeles Times is reporting this morning (Monday) that Rove and I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, the top aide to Vice President Dick Cheney were intensely focused on discrediting former Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV in the days after he wrote an op-ed article for the New York Times suggesting the administration manipulated intelligence to justify going to war in Iraq.

To quote that political sage Homer Simpson, “Duh”!

But the reality is that whatever Rove, Libby and others in the White House may have done, the story of the outing of a CIA agent and the smearing of her husband, a life long public servant, is really not about Rove and Libby. No, what this story is really about is the honesty, character and integrity of President Bush and others in the Bush Administration, of which apparently, there is very little.

Regardless of whether Rove and Libby et al get “frog-marched” off to jail, the federal investigation into their actions have given the American people a birds eye view of how the Bush administration really works.  Whether it’s changing factual information on health websites on family planning, erroneously editing scientific reports on global warming or manipulating intelligence in order to justify the war with Iraq, their modus operandi is the same – invent your own version of reality by denying the facts, lie about the information, and slander and attack anyone who dares to question you.

The latest example of thier duplicitousness can be seen in a a new effort by  the Environmental Protection Agency to pay up to $5 million over five years for public relations activities including the ghostwriting of articles "for publication in scholarly journals and magazines," as reported by Felicity Barringer in the New York Times  Then there is the Administrations ongoing effort to undercut research on global warming. Republican Congressional Representative Joe L. Barton of Texas has launched an inquiry of a major scientific study of Tree Ring findings indicating an abnormal warming of the earth. As reported by Andrew C. Revkin in the New York Times, Barton, who heads the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, has requested responses to criticisms of the study by two Canadians with no expertise in climate change, and asked for “raw data, documents and financial information.” Representative Sherwood Boehlert of New York, the chairman of the House Science Committee, has called Barton’s investigation "misguided and illegitimate."

While the recent effort to spin away Karl Rove’s troubles is far from being the only example of Bush administration efforts to manipulate the truth, it may be the most egregious.  The Republican National Committee talking points on the issue are enough to make your head hurt – and may be straining the Bush administrations credibility with the American people.

A new poll by ABC News finds that only 25 percent of  Americans  think the White House is fully cooperating in the federal investigation of the leak of a CIA operative's identity. And three-quarters say that if presidential adviser Karl Rove was responsible for leaking classified information, it should cost him his job.  Even among Republican’s, fewer than half (47 percent) say they believe the White House is fully cooperating.  And it may be damaging the President.   A recent NBC news poll  finds that only 41 percent of Americans believe Bush is “honest and straightforward.”

I’m not sure that any of that matters to the Bush White House. They live in “their own reality.”   But it may matter to Congressional Republicans who have their ass on the line in 2006, or have Presidential aspirations for 2008.  If John McCain, who has had his own up close and personal experience with Karl Rove starts asking questions, watch out, the fur is about to fly.

RoveGate

Rove Republicans Apparently Believe They Are Above the Law

Here is the real question American’s ought to be thinking about as they consider the Bush Administration’s cover up of the involvement of a top White House aide in the intentional outing of a CIA agent, a violation of federal law: If they will lie about this, what else have they lied about?

There may have been a time when Republicans put truth and the rule of law ahead of partisan politics. It was the Republican Senator Lowell P. Weicker who helped to uncover the Watergate cover-up and voted for Watergate hearings. It was Weicker, to the sound of thunderous bipartisan applause in the Senate hearing room who declared, “Let me make it clear, Republicans do not cover-up; Republicans do not go ahead and threaten; Republicans do not go ahead and commit illegal acts; and God knows Republicans don’t view their fellow Americans as enemies to be harassed.”

But it’s becoming exceedingly apparent that time is past. Despite previous denials of White House involvement, in the face of factual revelations that Karl Rove indeed was a source of the information identifying Valerie Plame as a CIA operative, rather than confront the truth, the Republican spin machine has gone on the attack. Led by Republican National Committee (RNC) Chair Ken Mehlman, the RNC is aggressively pushing talking points denying Karl Rove’s culpability, criticizing the news media, attacking Joseph Wilson and blaming the Democrats. My guess is that the next thing Ken Mehlman will say is that it was Bill Clinton who made the call to Matt Cooper.

And their surrogates are pushing the story. I hope Fox News saved some money last night and sent their news writers home. They already had the RNC talking points.

But the Republican spin machine is showing signs of spinning out of control. According to a transcript of MSNBC’s "Scarborough Country," published by Editor and Publisher, during a conversation between host Joe Scarborough and Republican Congressman Peter King about Rove, King said “ I think people like Tim Russert and the others, who gave this guy such a free ride and all the media, they're the ones to be shot, not Karl Rove.” He went on to say that Republicans “should be out attacking Joe Wilson.”

Where is Lowell Weicker when you need him?

While I am aware that certain leaders of the Republican party have come to believe that they can invent their own “reality,” more rational leaders might want to consider that the revelations about Rove are not the result of a partisan attack by Democrats, but rather the result of a federal Department of Justice investigation of a federal crime. And that it is the Republican-led White House who is on record as saying that Karl Rove and other senior White House officials were not involved, and that if any White House personnel were found to be involved, they would be fired.

Republican leaders, such as Orrin Hatch, who told the Washington Post that the focus on Rove’s involvement is “a tempest in a teapot”, are trying to convince the American people that “RoveGate” is little more than a partisan battle between Democrats and Republicans.

But spin it as they may, the reality is that it is the result of a federal investigation of a federal crime that occurred in the context of an effort to disparage an American citizen who dared to question the manipulation of national intelligence by the Bush Administration in order to justify the War in Iraq. This obstinate push by Republicans to put partisan interests ahead of the law should raise serious concerns among the American people, not just about Karl Rove, but about the elected leadership of the Republican Party.

As for me, I wonder if there is a Republican leader out there who believes in the rule of law. Is there a Republican willing to hold Karl Rove accountable for what appears to be a best a serious ethical violation, if not an outright federal crime? Unfortunately, I don’t think so.

Channeling Ron Ziegler

Referring to the announcement that President Nixon believed no one in the administration, "past or present" should be given "immunity from prosecution," Ziegler stated that this was "the operative statement." New York Times correspondent R. W. Apple, Jr. asked if that meant all other statements were "inoperative." Yes, responded Ziegler.

Nixon Administration Press Briefing

For a minute there I thought White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan was going to channel Ron Ziegler. Ziegler of course is the infamous Nixon press secretary who uttered the famous disclaimer “that statement is no longer operative.”

Confronted with previous statements declaring that Karl Rove and others in the White House had nothing to do with the outing of CIA operative Valerie Plame and the attacks seeking to defame her husband Joseph Wilson, McClellan refused to answer any of at least 35 questions today about revelations that top Bush aide Karl Rove was Time magazine correspondent Matthew Cooper’s source for the story.

McClellan is previously on record saying:

“I've made it very clear that it was a ridiculous suggestion in the first place. ... I've said that it's not true. ... And I have spoken with Karl.”
I've made it very clear, he (Rove) was not involved, that there's no truth to the suggestion that he was.

Sept. 29, 2003

“They are good individuals (Scooter Libby (Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff), Karl Rove and Elliott Abrams). They are important members of our White House team. And that's why I spoke with them, so that I could come back to you and say that they were not involved.”

Oct. 7, 2003

I spoke with those individuals, as I pointed out, and those individuals (Rove, Abrams, Libby) assured me they were not involved in this.
(Q: They were not involved in what?)
A: The leaking of classified information.

Oct. 10, 2003

Oops!

Whether those statements prove to be “operational” or not remains to be seen. But for the time being McClellan fell back on an old standard, refusing to comment on an “ongoing criminal investigation.”

Bottom line though, either Scott McLellan knowingly and intentionally lied to the White House Press Corps, or Karl Rove cut his throat and fed him to the sharks. Either way, McClellan’s dead, he just hasn’t had a chance to lie down yet.

But as McClellan is probably figuring out right about now, he is just a small fish in this cesspool. The Bush administration is facing some very tough questions over Rove’s involvement in the outing of Valerie Plame and my guess is that Scotty doesn’t have the answers.

But for starters, here’s some questions he should be thinking about:

Why is Judy Miller in jail? If Karl Rove has been confirmed as Matt Cooper’s source, who is Ms. Miller protecting? Maybe she just needed a vacation, but my guess is she isn’t doing time at the GrayBar hotel so that Matt Cooper can go to his kids’ soccer games this Fall. Is there another White House source? And if so, does it mean that the Bush White House was engaged in a criminal conspiracy to defame Joseph Wilson by outing his wife?

Who told Karl Rove that Valerie Plame was in the CIA?

No doubt, the White House minions are working overtime tonight to come up with some “operative” answers to these and other tough questions they will face in the days ahead. And while they might not want to channel Ron Ziegler for answers, my guess is that Karl Rove and friends are wishing they had paid more attention to Nixon’s advice to him. According to Ziegler’s obituary in Editor and Publisher, Nixon once admonished Ziegler “that anyone in the White House who talked to Time (magazine) reporters "should have their resignations requested within one minute."

So Much for Moderation

My bet says Bush will throw the troops some red meat -- pick a conservative.

The ink hadn’t dried on Justice Sandra Day O’Connor’s resignation letter to President Bush before Christian conservatives began demanding the President replace Justice O’Connor with a conservative that will do their bidding. Here are some excerpts of what they are saying.

Operation Rescue calls upon President George W. Bush to live up to his pro-life commitment to voters in the last election by appointing a justice to the nation's highest court who will uphold the Right to Life for all pre-born Americans. Now it is time to fulfill your obligation to God and to those who elected you, and appoint a staunchly pro-life judge to the Supreme Court. -- Troy Newman, President, Operation Rescue

Justice O'Connor's resignation is the most critical of any of the justices because her replacement will turn the direction of this court. We are already praying and working for a nominee that will not waffle as she did. -- Reverend Robert Schenck, President, National Clergy Council."

"I am confident that President Bush will name a replacement for Justice O'Connor who has the same judicial philosophy as Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas, as he indicated he would in his reelection campaign. -- Tony Perkins, President, Family Research Council

The President has the historic opportunity to keep faith with the promise he has repeated numerous times, which is to name justices who are like Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas. -- Jan LaRue, Chief Counsel, Concerned Women of America.

President Bush must nominate someone whose judicial philosophy is crystal clear. And no one has been clearer about this than the President himself, who said during his campaign that he would appoint justices in the mold of Clarence Thomas or Antonin Scalia. We have full confidence that he will carry out that pledge. -- James C. Dobson, Ph.D. Focus on the Family.

Strange, no one mentioned Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez. Who knows though, maybe Bush will surprise me and pick a moderate. Under that theory, Bush picks Gonzalez and uses the nomination to triangulate the Christian Right, showing his independence from his base and gaining a little breathing room from moderates who are increasingly concerned that Christian conservatives may have too much influence. He can smooth the way by promising the Conservative Christian cabal to appoint a true believer when Rehnquist retires – after the mid-term elections. It would be a tough sell- but he has Pat Robertson’s point man, Jay Sekulow to help him.

If I had to bet though I’d say that Bush will throw a little red meat to the base and appoint someone to the right of Attila-the-Hun. Bush will use the pick to fire up the faithful heading into the mid-term elections and then when Democrats object – cast them as obstructionist who are keeping him and the Republican Congress from getting anything done.

It’s clear that the Bush team has already been thinking about how they can use the Supreme Court pick to advance their electoral strategy. C. Boyden Gray, a top advisor to the President’s judicial nomination process and chair of the Committee for Justice said today "We will be watching Senate Democrats and intend to link moderate and red states senators to their liberal Senate colleagues and outside groups. If Sens. Kennedy, Schumer, Durbin, Leahy, and Boxer attack, it will be Ben Nelson (Neb), Mark Pryor and Blanche Lincoln (Ark), Robert Byrd (WVa), Bill Nelson (Fla), Tom Carper (Del), Debbie Stabenow (Mich), Jeff Bingaman (NMex), Evan Bayh (Ind), Byron Dorgan (ND), Mary Landrieu (La), and Tim Johnson (SD) who will be held accountable."

So much for the fair review and vote on the Supreme Court nominee based on the merits of the candidate that the President said he wanted in his comments today.

Anyway, after the Republicans and their Conservative Christian friends wage war on Democrats in the Red States during the mid-term elections, Bush can appoint his buddy Gonzalez as Chief Justice, making his mark on history by appointing the Supreme Courts first Latino, and drawing Latino voters into the Republican tent as America heads into the next presidential election.

That’s my bet anyway.