Number One neo-con MSM liar....Gergen the mealy mouthed
...liar from hell! Gergen makes me want to spit whenever I hear him speak :spray:
<snip> Gergen peddled misinformation on Plame case, again and again
Former presidential adviser and political pundit David Gergen repeatedly pushed the false Republican spin that unless White House senior adviser Karl Rove revealed CIA operative Valerie Plame's actual name, he did not commit a crime.
In fact, the 1982 Intelligence Identities Protection Act, under which the intentional disclosure of a covert agent's identity is illegal, applies to any individual who "intentionally discloses any information identifying such covert agent to any individual not authorized to receive classified information." Even Robert Luskin, Rove's lawyer, has acknowledged that leaking Plame's actual name, as opposed to information that otherwise identified her, is not central to whether Rove revealed classified information.
Appearing on the July 13 edition of MSNBC'S Hardball with Chris Matthews, Gergen stated that "as long as he didn't put the name out," Rove did not have a legal problem:
ANDREA MITCHELL (NBC News chief foreign affairs correspondent): And -- and, in fact, I have always have thought that Bob Novak's column back then said that there were two administration officials. I have always thought that Karl Rove is the only one we know about, but that there was someone else, clearly, inside the administration, inside the White House, perhaps, who was feeding this information. And this could have been in fact a higher-up or someone else that has not been identified.
GERGEN: But not only that. It's also -- everything we know so far suggests it was the second source who actually put her name out, not Karl Rove.
MITCHELL: Exactly. Exactly.
GERGEN: And as long as he didn't put the name out, I don't think he has a legal problem. And that's -- so, I don't think he's going to get indicted, unless he lied to the grand jury.
From the July 13 edition of CNN's Inside Politics:
GERGEN: I think it's also very important to distinguish between whether the White House misled us, which I think reporters feel they did, and they did, after all, say Karl Rove had nothing to do with this, with the naming or the identification of this woman. He clearly had -- he was clearly involved, contrary to what the White House said.
But on the law, based on what we know now, it would appear clearly that he does not have a legal problem, that Karl Rove did not violate the law. If he only told
I've seen him a couple of times in the last few days on CNN, and it is just so obvious that he is spinning "big time" for Rove. They must be paying him some big, big, big bucks!
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion
board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules
page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the
opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent
the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.