|
Edited on Thu Jul-14-05 11:54 AM by skids
Those few of you who bother come here looking for details to confirm your pre-formed belief that we are orchestrating a deceptive smear campaign. Let's talk about trust.
If someone tells you something, and it turns out not to be true, do you trust them again and again in the future?
For the past year, people have probably been telling you that "Rove was not the source" and if there was a leak it was a lower-level official. Rove even denied it himself saying flat out "No" to a reporter that asked him if he had "any knowledge" of the leak. Now we have an email where he plainly exposes that he had knowledge, and the leak is right there in his own words. Are you going to continue believe the people that kept giving you a warm fuzzy about Rove being uninvolved?
When the most recent wave of public interest hit, the first thing out the gate they tried to make you believe was that it somehow mattered that Rove didn't say the name "Valerie Plame" but rather only referred to her as Wilson's wife. If you've even scratched the surface, you already know this is false because you have read the text of the law. Who told you that? Are you going to trust them again?
Now they want you to believe that Plame was not considered a covert asset by the CIA, and had not worked as such in the last five years, as required for prosecution under one of the many laws that Rove could have broken with that email. They fed you some rumor that Plame was outed way back in 1996 and now was just a desk jockey. Well, the CIA itself has confirmed that she had worked undercover within five years of the leak. So will you believe those that said otherwise again?
And again?
And again?
One thing I know, is liberal or conservative, people who care about the world around them really do not appreciate being misdirected, lied to, and otherwise deceived. Use your best judgement. Don't listen to people, liberal or conservative, who do not make an effort to bring you factual information... who present speculation and unconfirmed rumor as fact... who care more about changing what you think than the accuracy of what you know.
(EDIT: minor accuracy-check. CIA confirmations of Plame's status were not recent breaking news, my mistake. If I'm going to lecture on truth, I should pay close attention to detail, no? :-))
|