Okay, what will be the MSM spin on Rove?

[Stevendsmith]

How will the pathetic clique of timid, war-crime-enabling clowns bury this bit of uncomfortable information.

We must counter-attack with phone calls, emails, and letters to the editor!

[bryant69]

1. I don't know

There's a chance they may go a head and slam into him for two reasons.

1. It deflects attention away from the possible loss of protection for sources, thus helping to preserve their ability to do things the way they like.

2. They like a good story, and Rove being broght down is a good story.

that said, it's impossible to know for sure.

The right wing spin will probably combine all previous spins in an attractive program of spinning.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[XNASA]

2. The spin is.....

Rove is the source, so he's not guilty of any crimes.

[tubbacheez]

3. Since Rove himself authorized his implication, I'm guessing two things...

First, that he thinks he can play this off as "oops, sorry, my bad, i might've broken a law, but it isn't that bad". And that coming clean early in the public eye will help him do just that.

Second, that he has something more important to protect and that he's cut some deals to keep that story buried in secrecy.

[dave123williams]

4. Like they're even covering the story?

[Pathwalker]

5. According to MSNBC this morning, it is that NO CRIME

was committed because a: he just said "Joe Wilson's wife" not Valerie Plame, and b: He didn't know she was undercover. That's what ABC said last night, too.
My local rag's editorial yesterday was that a Special Prosecuter is needed to INVESTIGATE Fitzgerald because of the LACK of leaks coming from this Grand Jury!!!!

[Neecy]

7. also on MSNBC...

Their banner flag this morning while they did the Rove story read, "IT'S A FEDERAL CRIME TO KNOWINGLY EXPOSE A CIA OPERATIVE".

Now, how often do they add the word "knowingly" when they discuss federal charges? Nice of them to slip Rove's lawyers' defense into their blurb!

The fix is in.

[AlinPA]

6. A short story on page 10 or 12. End of spin. End of story. End of case.

[FormerRepublican]

8. I think we know what the response will be by reading what the 'pubs...

...are saying. We need to logically and repeatedly counter what they say. We need to hold the MSM feet to the fire to get the truth out.

Here's an example of this done well:

"So this is what the campaign against former ambassador Joseph Wilson is about? In a long editorial yesterday, the hawks of The Wall Street Journal called for Patrick Fitzgerald, the US attorney investigating the Bush administration leak that identified Wilson's wife as a CIA officer, to "fold up his tent." The goal of the WSJ conservatives – and perhaps that of the other GOPers who have been bashing Wilson – is to get the Bush White House off the hook for the leak that outed Valerie Wilson (nee Plame). This leak, which appeared in a Robert Novak column a year ago, ruined the career of a government employee who worked to prevent the spread of unconventional weapons. It may have undermined national security by impairing her operations and threatening her contacts. And it was a possible violation of the federal law that prohibits government officials from disclosing the identities of covert government officers."

http://www.alternet.org/story/19328

Most importantly, we need to point out the risk to the United States should this kind of behavior escalate so that any CIA agent is 'fair game.' We need to link this to 9/11 - and talk about how failures caused by political malfeasance undermining our agents can be as damaging as a lack of intelligence.

We need to bury them with mail until they relent and start telling the real story. Our country is at stake. We need to remember that, and not give up when the 'pubs start screaming back. We need to use logic and reason on all our friends so the truth spreads even if the MSM never prints a word. And we need to blog it to death in reasoned, well thought out posts that will convince anyone in the middle that what they're being fed by the government and MSM is not always accurate.

[Kahuna]

9. As usual, they will repeat the lie (there's no proof) ad naseum..

so that by the time the truth comes out, more people would have been exposed to the lie than to the truth. That's their modis operandi. They get their talking points FROM Rove, as we are learning from the Plame case. But it's not that we didn't already know it.

[creeksneakers2]

10. The MSM will give the right wing spin

They'll say at the time people were being misinformed that Cheney had asked Wilson to go to Niger. (Cheney didn't specifically ask for Wilson) They'll say they were only trying to protect Cheney, and keep the press from making mistakes. They'll say they had no idea Plame was covert.

The MSM will say that its really about a free speech issue.

This is, if they say anything at all.