Rove Said to Testify in CIA Leak Case (4th time)Thu Oct 6, 2005 17:0464.140.158.132
Rove Said to Testify in CIA Leak Case
Karl Rove Said to Give More Testimony in CIA Leak Case Without Guarantee of Not Being Indicted
By JOHN SOLOMON Associated Press Writer
The Associated Press
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=1189988
WASHINGTON Oct 6, 2005 — Federal prosecutors have accepted an offer from presidential adviser Karl Rove to give 11th hour testimony in the case of a CIA officer's leaked identity but have warned they cannot guarantee he won't be indicted, according to people directly familiar with the investigation.
The persons, who spoke only on condition of anonymity because of grand jury secrecy, said Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald has not made any decision yet on whether to file criminal charges against the longtime confidant of President Bush or others.
The U.S. attorney's manual requires prosecutors not to bring witnesses before a grand jury if there is a possibility of future criminal charges unless they are notified in advance that their grand jury testimony can be used against them in a later indictment.
* Spy Case Suggests White House Security Problem
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Investigation/story?id=1188625&page=1
Rove has already made at least three grand jury appearances and his return at this late stage in the investigation is unusual.
The prosecutor did not give Rove similar warnings before his earlier grand jury appearances.
Rove offered in July to return to the grand jury for additional testimony and Fitzgerald accepted that offer Friday after taking grand jury testimony from the formerly jailed New York Times reporter Judith Miller.
Before accepting the offer, Fitzgerald sent correspondence to Rove's legal team making clear that there was no guarantee he wouldn't be indicted at a later point as required by the rules.
Rove's attorney, Robert Luskin, said Thursday he would not comment on any ongoing discussion he has had with Fitzgerald's office but that he has been assured no decisions on charges have been made. Rove would first have to receive what is known as a target letter if he is about to be indicted.
"I can say categorically that Karl has not received a target letter from the special counsel. The special counsel has confirmed that he has not made any charging decisions in respect to Karl," Luskin said.
He said that Rove "continues to be cooperative voluntarily" with the special counsel investigation and "beyond that, any communication I have or may have in the future are going to be treated as completely confidential."
Copyright 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
====================
GOOGLE: Results 1 - 10 of about 1,060 for Rove Cia-Leak.
http://www.apfn.org/APFN/LEAKGATE.HTM
Documents Reveal Karl Rove as Source in Plame Case
http://www.apfn.org/LEAK-GATE/rove.htm
MSNBC Analyst Says Cooper Documents Reveal Karl Rove as Source in Plame Case
By E&P Staff
Published: July 01, 2005 11:30 PM ET
http://www.mediainfo.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000972839
NEW YORK Now that Time Inc. has turned over documents to federal court, presumably revealing who its reporter, Matt Cooper, identified as his source in the Valerie Plame/CIA case, speculation runs rampant on the name of that source, and what might happen to him or her. Tonight, on the syndicated McLaughlin Group political talk show, Lawrence O'Donnell, senior MSNBC political analyst, claimed to know that name--and it is, according to him, top White House mastermind Karl Rove.
Here is the transcript of O'Donnell's remarks:
"What we're going to go to now in the next stage, when Matt Cooper's e-mails, within Time Magazine, are handed over to the grand jury, the ultimate revelation, probably within the week of who his source is.
"And I know I'm going to get pulled into the grand jury for saying this but the source of...for Matt Cooper was Karl Rove, and that will be revealed in this document dump that Time magazine's going to do with the grand jury."
Other panelists then joined in discussing whether, if true, this would suggest a perjury rap for Rove, if he told the grand jury he did not leak to Cooper.
Cooper and New York Times reporter Judith Miller, held in contempt for refusing to name sources, tried Friday to stay out of jail by arguing for home detention instead after Time Inc. surrendered its reporter's notes to a prosecutor.
Meanwhile, on Capitol Hill, Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., said Friday that several unidentified Senate Republicans had placed a hold on a proposed resolution declaring support for Miller and Cooper.
``Cowards!'' Lautenberg said of the Republicans. ``Under the rules, they have a right to refuse to reveal who they are. Sound familiar?''
Lautenberg's resolution is co-sponsored by Sens. Richard Lugar (R-Ind.) and Christopher Dodd (D-Conn.) It says no purpose is served by imprisoning Miller and Cooper and that the First Amendment guarantees freedom of the press.
http://www.mediainfo.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000972839
====================================================
Leak of Identity of CIA Operative Valerie Plame:
http://news.findlaw.com/legalnews/lit/iraq/documents.html
The Treasonous Lies of Bob Novak and Karl Rove
10-5-3
As the saying goes, you cannot serve two masters. Bob Novak and Karl Rove, representing the most arms of America most subverted by the NeoCon regime - the White House and the media - are making it emminently clear who they serve, and it isn't the American public.
I watched "Meet the Press" on Sunday (Oct 5), a show that more accurately should be called the "Tim Russert Kiss-ass Hour" (or TRKA - which, appropriately, sounds like the title of one of the more knuckle-dragging species of college fraternities). The show's sole purpose for being is to allow Bush administration officials and other darlings of the rightwing to drop by for coffee-and-camera time each Sunday morning and present their slanted version of the latest outrage they have committed on America while Russert smiles, nods and simpers.
This week's episode of the TRKA Hour was dedicated to spinning the Valerie Plame story. As you will recall, Valerie Plame is the CIA operative who was outed in a collusion between, mostly probably, Karl Rove and, most definitely, Bob Novak, a blustering, pompous old coot who remains on the payroll of the "Chicago Sun-Times" for God knows what reason (maybe he has accumulated sufficient dirt on the folks who would probably LOVE to fire him). Novak has the distinction of being about the last dedicated Bush administration apologist out there amongst the "major columnists" who make regular rounds of shows like the TRKA Hour.
First up with Russert was Joseph Wilson, husband of Valerie Plame, who, like a gallant husband and good citizen, is enraged by the outing of his wife. Outing a CIA agent is, as I have said before, tantamount to attempted murder, not mention felony theft of hundreds of thousands, if not millions of taxpayer dollars. To establish an effective cover for an agent may take years and a great deal of resources - all paid for by American citizens. An agent like Plame, who worked with overseas contacts, may have people in several different countries whose confidence they have laboriously worked to gain. Those contacts, in turn, have contacts, and so forth. Once an agent is outed, this entire network is compromised, as is the safety of everyone involved who can now be linked to Plame by the "bad guys." Not only that, but you may as well flush those taxpayer dollars spent to construct the cover down the toilet.
Wilson was not intimidated by Russert, who enjoys bullying anyone not in his Kalorama Kocktail Klub (the new KKK) circle, a mutual admiration society centered in the swank Kalorama neighborhood where Cheney and Russert dwell as chummy neighbors. Confronted by Wilson, Russert did what he always does when someone has a good point: first he interrupted Wilson mid-statement, then, when Wilson failed to be cowed, merely lapsed into silent sulking. Wilson stood by his guns. Although he of course could not be absolutely sure Karl Rove was behind the leak, Rove pushed the leak for days after Novak first wrote about Plame. It should also be pointed out that Karl Rove was FIRED by Bush I in the early 1990s for leaking damaging information about someone else to a reporter. And guess who that reporter was? His good buddy Bob Novak. Wilson also stood by his assertion that, should Rove be proven guilty, he should be frog-marched out of the White House in handcuffs.
�
Next, Novak himself appeared. Russert simpered and snickered and rapturously listened to every comment of this sellout "columnist," careful not to bring up any "difficult" points such as questioning Novak about his previous episode with Karl Rove in the early 1990s. If I were a Republican PR person, the last person I would have wished to have appear on the TRKA Hour was a character as unsympathetic in looks and manner as Novak. This sour, jowly, hound-dog-eyed old geezer looks like someone sent over from central casting to play the role of the Evil Bank Manager in a movie in which the bank forecloses on Sunnybrook Farm and Rebecca is evicted. Worse, Novack's only defense was bluster and the repeated claim: "I've been in this business 40 years" (repeated four times that I counted).
Let's take a look at the gaping holes in Novak's story:
NOVAK STORY: He claims he had absolutely no idea that the information about Plame was a big deal. He says he got the impression that she was a paper pusher in one of the CIA's DC offices. He said the comment about Plame working for the CIA was "just an offhand remark" at the end of the conversation.
HOLE: The fact that the White House informant called several other journalists looking for a place to plant the leak is, by itself, enough to blow this story out of the water. But even more damning to Novak's case is that in his article on Plame, he referred to her repeatedly as a CIA "operative." Since when would anyone - even the slowest-witted among us - describe someone who files papers in an office as a "CIA operative?"
NOVAK STORY: "I've been in this business 40 years."
HOLE: Anyone who has been a journalist for 40 years, unless they are senile (maybe that's Novak's best defense!) would know the difference between "CIA paper pusher" and "CIA operative."
NOVAK STORY: He claims he is not revealing his source because that is his prerogative as a journalist.
HOLE: That prerogative is supposed to apply only to sources who, at the time of imparting the information, made the journalist promise not to reveal the source. In the case of Turner vs. Dolcefino, for example, the issue was that the reporter had vowed silence in exchange for the information given by the source.
In addition, journalistic prerogative usually involves PRIVATE CITIZENS. The protection of White House officials is, to say the least, overstretching prerogative by most anyone's definition. Why? The press is supposed to be in the business of PROTECTING the public from unethical officials, not protecting the unethical officials! Once Novak knew that he had been induced to out a CIA agent, it should have become his duty as a journalist to expose the perpetrator. In any case, Novak claimed that the comment about Plame was "an offhand remark" made at the end of a regular conversation. Since when does an "offhand remark" at the end of an "ordinary conversation" involve swearing the listener to secrecy? C'mon, Novak. It was either leak and you KNEW it, or it was a casual conversation and needn't be kept secret.
NOVAK STORY: When Tim Russert asked Novak is he was afraid he might go to prison for refusing to reveal his sources, Novak smirked smugly and said he hardly thought that would be a danger.
HOLE: If Novak takes his own story about journalistic prerogative seriously, then he SHOULD be worried. Why isn't he worried? First, because he doesn't take his own line seriously - it's bullsh-t and he knows it. Second, because he knows in any case that his good buddy John Ashcroft would never put him in jail. That treatment is reserved for young women (Vanessa Leggett) without friends in high places who aren't jeapordizing national security and who aren't officially even journalists!
NOVAK STORY: The CIA called Novak and told him not to use Plame's name because it would make things very difficult for her, especially when she went abroad. Novak claims that this didn't seem strong enough to compel him not to reveal Plame's name.
HOLE: As Novak is so fond of sayinghe's "been in this business 40 years" and knows how Washington works. It this is true, then he KNOWS that the CIA cannot provide him with any details about an agent and the nature of her work (like mentioning that she could be killed in retaliation) because to do so would further compromise her.
NOVAK STORY: Incredibly, Novak tries to justify his injustifiable act against Plame by saying that he thinks Wilson was too left-leaning to have been entrusted with investigating the Iraq WMD issue.
HOLE: Novak proves here that he is anything but a patriotic American citizen. In our system, we are supposed to have an unbiased jury, an unbiased judge, and, ideally, a government that represents the check and balance of two parties. When we are talking about going to WAR, then it seems critical above all things to have an unbiased "jury" examining the evidence. Who would think it was "American" to have a jury trying a black man, for example, stacked with white racists? We have worked decades to root out that kind of injustice. If Novak were a patriotic American, he would applaud Wilson's role, especially as Wilson's take on the WMDs has been confirmed by David Kay.
But the fact of the matter is, Novak and Rove -regardless of whether Rove was the direct leaker or merely the highest-level (short of Bush) "leak condoner"- are NOT good citizens nor are they patriotic Americans. Here are the crimes against Democracy, the American public, and private individuals they have committed:
1. Undermining of national security by exposing a CIA operative and by creating a rift of trust between the White House and CIA.
2. Attempted murder. That is what outing a CIA agent amounts to, purely and simply. In the 1990s, an agent named Welch was outed and, within a short time, found murdered outside his home. Some of the people in the chain of contacts of which Plame was a part may be murdered, even if she is not. Sadly, these retaliatory murders may never be revealed because of the secrecy of the chain.
3. Subversion of the American press. Novak allowed the American press to be used as a tool by the White House for revenge. This is not "free speech" or "journalistic prerogative." This is premeditated abuse of the press, just as surely as the Mockingbird program, through which the CIA planted phony, damaging stories in the press to help gain White House and Pentagon objectives. Just as no one would call the Mockingbird program "the right of free speech," no one would consider what Novack did his "right." What possible public"need to know" was there in revealing Valerie Plame as an agent?
4. Theft of American tax dollars. By refusing to come forward with the leaker, both Rove and Novack are forcing the need for an investigation - a very expensive investigation. The right thing to do, the selfless thing to do, would be for Novak to come clean about his source and/or for the leaker to step forward for the good of the country. The fact that this is not happening is glaring, incontrovertible proof that Novack and Rove's self interest outweigh all other considerations, including the welfare of the American people they are supposed to serve.
5. Advocation of a dictatorship: The fact that Wilson's report on the WMDs was c
Main Page -
Thursday, 10/06/05
Message Board by American Patriot Friends Network [APFN]
