Is Rove supposed to be innocent now because Novak told him about Valerie

[Tony_FLADEM]

Plame.

If he passed the information to Matt Cooper it would still make him guilty.

[tk2kewl]

1. He's guilty of being an unethical prick at the very least.

[htuttle]

2. As far as I know, only Rove says Novak told him about Plame

That was his testimony to the Grand Jury.

It's entirely likely that he lied to the GJ about this, and Fitzgerald is going after a perjury charge.

That being said, even if it's true, the effort Rove coordinated to inform over six reporters about Plame is probably enough for a conspiracy charge.

[Walt Starr]

3. Rush thinks so

but then again, he's a junkie.

[writes2000]

4. Ding, Ding!

Someone in the administration TOLD Novak.

Rove TOLD Cooper.

And then Rove & Company tried to cover it up.

Guilty, guilty, guilty.

[Tamarin]

6. Novak said his other source was *No partisan gunslinger*

Powell?

[JDPriestly]

9. Colin Powell or Tenet or someone from Rice's office or Rice

But probably Colin Powell or Tenet. Tenet resigned the day that Bush spoke to his lawyer.

[JDPriestly]

10. Rove may have called this "news" around.

There may have been a conspiracy to out her. A conspiracy can be based on a tacit agreement. If more than one person tacitly agreed to damage Wilson or to clear Cheney's name by outing Plame (either ground or both), then you COULD, but do not necessarily have a conspiracy to out her. At any rate, Rove could run up some pretty hefty defense fees before long (remember the Clintons). They probably would not be paid by the government either (remember the Clintons). I'm wondering if the Wilsons have any civil claims that could be derived from the information being obtained in this investigation. Does anyone have any good ideas? Remember Clinton. Depositions in civil suits are usually pretty public, and there might be an opportunity to ask Rove about a lot of his past tricks. Now that would be interesting.

[skids]

5. Nope. He's going down.

...see the "lied to the FBI" threads. Game, set, match.

[fob]

7. Don't take the bait. rove is a LIAR!!

Thanks to; Lucille (293 posts) for finding this for me.


"I didn't dig it out. It was given to me. They thought it was significant. They gave me the name, and I used it."

--Robert Novak, as quoted in Newsday, June 23, 2003

[leveymg]

8. No - source not relevant. Telling Cooper is enough

to convict, provided he knew she was undercover. If Rove told the Grand Jury something else, he's also toasted for perjury. If he conspired with others to out Plame, or to avoid prosecution in the fyrtherance of that unlawful scheme, that's conspiracy.

Rove and his confederates could be facing a good number of years (decades) in federal prison. :7 :7 :7 :7 :7

[Beaver Tail]

11. Ill say it again

Saying Rove learned Plame's name from Novak does not matter much.

Rove easily could have said "Wilsons Wife", not "Valerie Plame (Wilson)". Any reporter could take a look at marriage records and get the name so technically this report may be correct but you don’t have to say her name to identifier her. This is just wordsmithing.

Might as well say "It was the The Fat guy, over there, the one in the speedo with chocolate ice cream all over his face"

[BillZBubb]

12. Given the conversation as reported, Rove is still in trouble.

With his clearance, he is not supposed to even discuss classified information, no matter who intiates the conversation. He in effect verified Novak's information with his response. That's a no-no.

Rove knew what he was doing. His wink-wink, "so you heard that too" response is exactly equivalent to saying "Yes, I confirm that Valerie Plame is a spy for the CIA". Only a few idiots will be thrown off the track by this spin.

[cascadiance]

13. It would be the same type of logic that said Bush was innocent

of the allegations made in the forged documents that CBS and Rather brought forth, just because the documents were forged. They'll count on the public not to be able to conclude that their isn't necessarily a direct correlation of one "truth" refuting another "allegation" if they are indirectly connected.

[stanwyck]

14. Bush said in a speech to America

that whoever had information about the leak must come forward. Bush said he would then fire whoever was responsible for leaking information. (Rove had to be a suspect. Afterall, Daddy Bush fired Rove for..leaking).
So. Rove either did tell Dubya he..uh, had "some" information on the leak. In which case, Bush is once again lying to the American people.
Or Rove didn't do as Bush asked and tell him about the leak. He lied to Bush.
Either way, he should be fired.
Does Dubya have the balls?
Or does he hope this will all just go away?
Like Bin Laden. The economy. Iraq. CEO scandals. His lying on WMD. etc., etc.