[Ninong]

The White House press corps jumped all over Scott McClellan at today's press briefing.

After insisting for two years that Karl Rove had nothing to do with the Valerie Plame leak, McClellan now won't comment.

The following are excerpts of a rush transcript of the White House press briefing Monday... You can see the video here.

QUESTION: Scott, can I ask you this: Did Karl Rove commit a crime?

MCCLELLAN: Again, David, this is a question relating to a ongoing investigation, and you have my response related to the investigation. And I don't think you should read anything into it other than: We're going to continue not to comment on it while it's ongoing.

QUESTION: Do you stand by your statement from the fall of 2003, when you were asked specifically about Karl and Elliot Abrams and Scooter Libby, and you said, "I've gone to each of those gentlemen, and they have told me they are not involved in this"?

QUESTION: Do you stand by that statement?

MCCLELLAN: And if you will recall, I said that, as part of helping the investigators move forward on the investigation, we're not going to get into commenting on it. That was something I stated back near that time as well.

QUESTION: Scott, this is ridiculous. The notion that you're going to stand before us, after having commented with that level of detail, and tell people watching this that somehow you've decided not to talk.

You've got a public record out there. Do you stand by your remarks from that podium or not?

MCCLELLAN: I'm well aware, like you, of what was previously said. And I will be glad to talk about it at the appropriate time. The appropriate time is when the investigation...

QUESTION: (inaudible) when it's appropriate and when it's inappropriate?

MCCLELLAN: If you'll let me finish.

QUESTION: No, you're not finishing. You're not saying anything.

You stood at that podium and said that Karl Rove was not involved. And now we find out that he spoke about Joseph Wilson's wife. So don't you owe the American public a fuller explanation. Was he involved or was he not? Because contrary to what you told the American people, he did indeed talk about his wife, didn't he?

MCCLELLAN: There will be a time to talk about this, but now is not the time to talk about it.

QUESTION: Do you think people will accept that, what you're saying today?

MCCLELLAN: Again, I've responded to the question.

QUESTION: You're in a bad spot here, Scott...

(LAUGHTER)

... because after the investigation began -- after the criminal investigation was under way -- you said, October 10th, 2003, "I spoke with those individuals, Rove, Abrams and Libby. As I pointed out, those individuals assured me they were not involved in this," from that podium. That's after the criminal investigation began.

Now that Rove has essentially been caught red-handed peddling this information, all of a sudden you have respect for the sanctity of the criminal investigation.

MCCLELLAN: No, that's not a correct characterization. And I think you are well aware of that.

We know each other very well. And it was after that period that the investigators had requested that we not get into commenting on an ongoing criminal investigation.

And we want to be helpful so that they can get to the bottom of this. Because no one wants to get to the bottom of it more than the president of the United States.

I am well aware of what was said previously. I remember well what was said previously. And at some point I look forward to talking about it. But until the investigation is complete, I'm just not going to do that.

QUESTION: So you're now saying that after you cleared Rove and the others from that podium, then the prosecutors asked you not to speak anymore and since then you haven't.

MCCLELLAN: Again, you're continuing to ask questions relating to an ongoing criminal investigation and I'm just not going to respond to them. QUESTION: When did they ask you to stop commenting on it, Scott? Can you pin down a date?

MCCLELLAN: Back in that time period.

QUESTION: Well, then the president commented on it nine months later. So was he not following the White House plan?

MCCLELLAN: I appreciate your questions. You can keep asking them, but you have my response.

QUESTION: Well, we are going to keep asking them.

When did the president learn that Karl Rove had had a conversation with a news reporter about the involvement of Joseph Wilson's wife in the decision to send him to Africa?

MCCLELLAN: I've responded to the questions.

QUESTION: When did the president learn that Karl Rove had been...

MCCLELLAN: I've responded to your questions.

QUESTION: After the investigation is completed, will you then be consistent with your word and the president's word that anybody who was involved will be let go?

MCCLELLAN: Again, after the investigation is complete, I will be glad to talk about it at that point.

QUESTION: Can you walk us through why, given the fact that Rove's lawyer has spoken publicly about this, it is inconsistent with the investigation, that it compromises the investigation to talk about the involvement of Karl Rove, the deputy chief of staff, here?

MCCLELLAN: Well, those overseeing the investigation expressed a preference to us that we not get into commenting on the investigation while it's ongoing. And that was what they requested of the White House. And so I think in order to be helpful to that investigation, we are following their direction.

QUESTION: Scott, there's a difference between commenting on an investigation and taking an action...

MCCLELLAN: (inaudible)

QUESTION: Can I finish, please?

MCCLELLAN: I'll come back to you in a minute.

(...)

QUESTION: Does the president continue to have confidence in Mr. Rove?

MCCLELLAN: Again, these are all questions coming up in the context of an ongoing criminal investigation. And you've heard my response on this.

QUESTION: So you're not going to respond as to whether or not the president has confidence in his deputy chief of staff?

MCCLELLAN: You're asking this question in the context of an ongoing investigation, and I would not read anything into it other then I'm simply going to comment on an ongoing investigation.

QUESTION: Has there been any change, or is there a plan for Mr. Rove's portfolio to be altered in any way?

MCCLELLAN: Again, you have my response to these questions.


http://rawstory.com/news/2005/TRANSC...LLED_0711.html


P.S. -- The AP has now put out their version of McClellan's comments: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050711/...NlYwMlJVRPUCUl

[schrocat]

But does it matter?

I can't help but picture Rove explaining his actions in the Plame affair to the President and the President just not getting it.

"But you didn't to mean to intentionally hurt nobody...did you Karl?"

"No Mr. President"

"Good enough for me..."


"All the President's Men?"
Hardly.
Maybe it's just me, but George Bush instead increasingly reminds me a lot of Lennie Small in "Of Mice and Men"

[Ninong]

Rove runs the White House leak machine the same way he ran the leak machine during the Republican primaries (think South Carolina against John McCain) and the same way he has operated in every campaign he has ever managed. It's still college dirty tricks to him and always has been. He hasn't changed his modus operandi since he was a wee lad for hire. Look at what he did to Ann Richards in Texas.

P.S. -- They're already using the same tactics that they used against Ann Richards against Hillary.

[Ninong]

Washington, DC – “I agree with the President when he said he expects the people who work for him to adhere to the highest standards of conduct. The White House promised if anyone was involved in the Valerie Plame affair, they would no longer be in this administration. I trust they will follow through on this pledge. If these allegations are true this rises above politics and is about our national security.”--Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV)

[schrocat]

Originally Posted by Ninong

Rove runs the White House leak machine the same way he ran the leak machine during the Republican primaries (think South Carolina against John McCain) and the same way he has operated in every campaign he has ever managed. It's still college dirty tricks to him and always has been. He hasn't changed his modus operandi since he was a wee lad for hire.

It's a shame Nixon remained such a hero to these guys...The guy is poisonous even in death.

Our world could have been a better one if that damn little girl who was a Kennedy fan hadn't pushed our Nixon stickered Karla off his bike when he was 9.

[Ninong]

Maybe Scott McClellan is worried that he could get hit with obstruction of justice charges if he knowingly lied to the press corps?

Remember that during Monicagate, Kenneth Starr was trying to nail obstruction of justice charges on any administration officials who had ever made public statements that later proved to be incorrect. As it turned out, they had all been lied to by the President and were therefore not guilty of anything criminal. He even lied to his wife.

Obviously lying about extra-marital affairs is a much, much more serious offense than what we are talking about now. I can't imagine a married man lying about his extra-marital dalliances, can you? Someone who would lie about something as serious as getting you-know-what in the Oval Office is beneath contempt regardless of how big a surplus he ran up.

Lying about something like that is obviously an impeachable offense. Lying to the American people about the reasons we were about to invade another country was just the patriotic thing to do.

[Ninong]

Originally Posted by schrocat

It's a shame Nixon remained such a hero to these guys...The guy is poisonous even in death.

Not only that, all of the criminals from Watergate and Iran-Contragate are doing quite well lately. Some, like Adm. John "five felonies" Poindexter, even gained high positions in the Bush administration. Others like Ollie North and G. Gordon Liddy are making a fortune on the hate talk circuit. And let's not forget Chuck Colson, who was born again while in prison and now gets federal grants to preach to the inmates.

Even little "tattletale" John Dean is making big bucks writing books and acting as a consultant to the TV networks on the inner workings of a Republican White House. He's been on TV almost as much as Law & Order lately.

P.S. -- I know you're not old enough to remember this but I remember watching John Dean's live testimony and all I can say is that it was a tour de force. His memory for detail was astonishing. When he first gave testimony, the tapes had not yet been discovered. After the tapes were discovered and played, it turned out that Dean had repeated conversations practically verbatim.

[Ninong]

“Karl Rove has accused liberals of not understanding the consequences of 9-11, but he’s the one who blew the cover of a covert CIA agent. The President should immediately suspend Karl Rove’s security clearances and shut him down by shutting him out of classified meetings or discussions.

The excuses offered by Karl Rove’s lawyer don’t pass the laugh test. Naming someone’s spouse is the same as naming them. And as a 31-year veteran of politics, Karl Rove should know that if you want to keep a secret, you don’t tell a reporter.”--Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ)

[Ninong]

According to Republican Propaganda outlet, Faux News, there is nothing to see here, folks.

On Fox News's Fox and Friends this morning, Kelly Wright reported: "Amid the difficult task of choosing a candidate for the Supreme Court and waging the war on terror, the White House is also dealing with a report about top White House adviser Karl Rove."

But, he concluded: "Bottom line here, guys, when you read between the lines, Karl Rove never mentioned anyone's name."

[Ninong]

Ana has a way with words:

We would like to apologize for our characterization yesterday of Scott McClellan as a puppy dog. Thanks to the New York Times, we were able to review all of his statements on the Rove-Plame matter and now we feel that a more accurate analogy would be that Scott McClellan is like a hapless baby rodent of some kind. Perhaps a gerbil or a weasel. Small, hairless, blind, and dependent on a larger rodent for all his information. So it's true, McClellan did, in extreme flustered mode, yelp out such regrettable declarations as "I've made it very clear, [Rove] was not involved, that there's no truth to the suggestion that he was," and "The president knows that Karl Rove wasn't involved," and, more brazenly, "There has been absolutely nothing brought to our attention to suggest any White House involvement."




These statements are all in sharp contrast to the more maturely weasely statements of the President and Rove himself, around which there is enough wiggle room for a fat, bald man to slither through and stay employed for at least three more years. All this proves is that no one tells Scotty anything. It's not really his job to know anything. His job is to say what he's told to say, or, in some extraordinary cases, what he intuits they might say with the power of his mind:

I've known Karl for a long time, and I didn't even need to go ask Karl, because I know the kind of person that he is, and he is someone that is committed to the highest standards of conduct.

Like we said, he doesn't know anything.


http://www.wonkette.com/

[Ninong]

First we had Rove's attorney telling us that Rove never said the name Valerie Plame, now we have Faux News, the propaganda outlet of the RNC, telling us that Bush never actually said the word 'fired.' http://mediamatters.org/items/200507120004

That's just something some reporters and Democrats made up.

And Kenny Mehlman is reminding everyone that Amb. Wilson was wrong to suggest that Vice President Cheney had authorized his trip to Africa or even had any advance knowledge of it. Wilson incorrectly assumed that the people in the CIA who sent him were doing so at Cheney's direction. No one in the administration wants to talk about the fact that the British were wrong and therefore our claims based on their faulty intelligence were wrong. The documents were obvious forgeries.

P.S. -- Even if the special prosecutor doesn't indict anyone, let's not lose sight of the fact that the White House was misleading the public on this matter for the past two years. It strains credulity to believe that Bush was not aware of exactly what happened. If everyone had just admitted who said what and to whom, there would have been no need for an expensive investigation. If they're so sure that no laws were broken, then why didn't they just admit that it was all a big misunderstanding. Their political hatchet man misspoke and leaked something that he didn't expect to see in print. They're very sorry that Matt Cooper betrayed their trust and they promise to not use him for future leaks.

[schrocat]

Originally Posted by Ninong

If they're so sure that no laws were broken, then why didn't they just admit that it was all a big misunderstanding. Their political hatchet man misspoke and leaked something that he didn't expect to see in print. They're very sorry that Matt Cooper betrayed their trust and they promise to not use him for future leaks.

ahem...now that was funny.

[Ninong]

Obviously it was a mistake for Rove to convey anything to a reporter on merely "double super secret background." From now on, all leaks must be on "double double super duper secret background with a cherry on top!"

[Ninong]

By: Larry Johnson http://www.tpmcafe.com/story/2005/7/13/04720/9340

The misinformation being spread in the media about the Plame affair is alarming and damaging to the longterm security interests of the United States. Republicans' talking points are trying to savage Joe Wilson and, by implication, his wife, Valerie Plame as liars. That is the truly big lie.

For starters, Valerie Plame was an undercover operations officer until outed in the press by Robert Novak. Novak's column was not an isolated attack. It was in fact part of a coordinated, orchestrated smear that we now know includes at least Karl Rove.

Valerie Plame was a classmate of mine from the day she started with the CIA. I entered on duty at the CIA in September 1985. All of my classmates were undercover--in other words, we told our family and friends that we were working for other overt U.S. Government agencies. We had official cover. That means we had a black passport--i.e., a diplomatic passport. If we were caught overseas engaged in espionage activity the black passport was a get out of jail free card.

A few of my classmates, and Valerie was one of these, became a non-official cover officer. That meant she agreed to operate overseas without the protection of a diplomatic passport. If caught in that status she would have been executed.

The lies by people like Victoria Toensing, Representative Peter King, and P. J. O'Rourke insist that Valerie was nothing, just a desk jockey. Yet, until Robert Novak betrayed her she was still undercover and the company that was her front was still a secret to the world. When Novak outed Valerie he also compromised her company and every individual overseas who had been in contact with that company and with her.

The Republicans now want to hide behind the legalism that "no laws were broken". I don't know if a man made law was broken but an ethical and moral code was breached. For the first time a group of partisan political operatives publically identified a CIA NOC. They have set a precendent that the next group of political hacks may feel free to violate.

They try to hide behind the specious claim that Joe Wilson "lied". Although Joe did not lie let's follow that reasoning to the logical conclusion. Let's use the same standard for the Bush Administration. Here are the facts. Bush's lies have resulted in the deaths of almost 1800 American soldiers and the mutilation of 12,000. Joe Wilson has not killed anyone. He tried to prevent the needless death of Americans and the loss of American prestige in the world.

But don't take my word for it, read the biased Senate intelligence committee report. Even though it was slanted to try to portray Joe in the worst possible light this fact emerges on page 52 of the report: According to the US Ambassador to Niger (who was commenting on Joe's visit in February 2002), "Ambassador Wilson reached the same conclusion that the Embassy has reached that it was highly unlikely that anything between Iraq and Niger was going on." Joe's findings were consistent with those of the Deputy Commander of the European Command, Major General Fulford.

The Republicans insist on the lie that Val got her husband the job. She did not. She was not a division director, instead she was the equivalent of an Army major. Yes it is true she recommended her husband to do the job that needed to be done but the decision to send Joe Wilson on this mission was made by her bosses.

At the end of the day, Joe Wilson was right. There were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. It was the Bush Administration that pushed that lie and because of that lie Americans are dying. Shame on those who continue to slander Joe Wilson while giving Bush and his pack of liars a pass. That's the true outrage.

[Ninong]

Kenny Mehlman, RNC Chairman hand-picked by Karl Rove, released talking points to Republicans yesterday that were full of lies and distortions. Was this an attempt to divert attention from Karl to himself or did he really think he could get away with such blatant lies? It's hard to say but it wouldn't surprise me if Karl was using his protege and special friend for his own purposes.

Kenny claims that Joe Wilson lied in claiming that Vice President Cheney sent him to Niger. Here is the evidence that Kenny says is proof that Wilson lied:

From CNN's "Late Edition" 8/3/03:

Joe Wilson: "What they did, what the office of the Vice President did, and, in fact, I believe now from Mr. Libby's statement, it was probably the Vice President himself..."

That's the proof that Wilson lied, according to Mehlman.

Take a look at the full transcript in context and see what you think. The parts that Mehlman chose to leave out are now highlighted in bold:






The segment begins with Wolf Blitzer talking to Wilson and about to play a tape of another interview with Condoleezza Rice:

BLITZER: I know you were sent to go on this mission long before the State of the Union Address. When Condoleezza Rice, the president's national security adviser, was on this program a few weeks ago, on July 13th, I asked her about your mission. Listen to this exchange I had with her. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)



DR. CONDOLEEZZA RICE, NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER: I didn't know Joe Wilson was going to Niger. And if you look in Director Tenet's statement, it says that counter-proliferation experts, on their own initiative, sent Joe Wilson. So, I don't know...

BLITZER: Who sent him?

RICE: Well, it was certainly not at a level that had anything to do with the White House.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: Is that true?

WILSON: Well, look, it's absolutely true that neither the vice president nor Dr. Rice nor even George Tenet knew that I was traveling to Niger.

What they did, what the office of the vice president did, and, in fact, I believe now from Mr. Libby's statement, it was probably the vice president himself...

BLITZER: Scooter Libby is the chief of staff for the vice president.

WILSON: Scooter Libby.

They asked essentially that we follow up on this report -- that the agency follow up on the report. So it was a question that went to the CIA briefer from the Office of the Vice President. The CIA, at the operational level, made a determination that the best way to answer this serious question was to send somebody out there who knew something about both the uranium business and those Niger officials that were in office at the time these reported documents were executed.


This is Mehlman's evidence for his claim that "Wilson Falsely Claimed That It Was Vice President Cheney Who Sent Him To Niger."

They have been pushing the idea that Valerie Plame was responsible for sending her husband to Niger as some sort of nepotism favor. (Republicans are big on nepotism, just ask Tom DeLay's wife and daughter who made $500,000 "working" for his campaign.)

Well, she didn't. And besides, since when was a trip to Niger such a plum assignment? Certainly not as nice as an all expenses paid trip to Scotland to play golf at St. Andrews. Speaking of which, you-know-who is thrilled that his name has been pushed off the front page lately.

[Ninong]

The GOP called out their heavy hitters today to go on the attack. Newt Gingrich was on The Today Show calling Joe Wilson a liar. Here's a man who was sanctioned for ethics violations, who dodged the draft by studying history at Tulane for nine or ten years, and who made his first wife sign divorce papers while she was in the hospital recovering from cancer surgery. I'm surprised they haven't yet trotted out Tom DeLay or Bill "Cat Killer" Frist. They could get Dr. Frist to review the video tapes of Joe Wilson's TV appearances and then offer his diagnosis that he's lying. After all, here's a guy who claims to have made eye contact with a blind woman.

Gingrich was having an extramarital sexual affair with Callista Bisek at the same time that he was attacking Clinton over the Monica Lewinsky affair. Gingrich is one of the Republican Party's many experienced experts on family values.

[Ninong]

The President is still waiting for the investigation to be completed to learn the truth of what happened.

Are we to believe that he doesn't know the truth already?

Assuming that he was clueless about who said what and to whom (which I seriously doubt), then why hasn't he called Rove into his office and simply asked him? If he really didn't know what happened and if he has been diligently trying to find out who leaked that information, why hasn't he simply asked Karl?

He hasn't asked Karl because he knew what happened all along. Just revisit some of his carefully worded statements over the past couple of years. I'm sure they think they have allowed for "plausible deniability" but the whole thing just doesn't pass the laugh test at this point.

P.S. -- For anyone keeping score, we now have four different reporters claiming to have received the same confidential information prior to Novak's publication of Valerie Plame's name. All of them are claiming they were tipped off by high ranking administration officials that they refuse to name. And that doesn't include Jeff Gannon, who was never really a reporter in the first place, although he has claimed that he was shown a top secret CIA memo by someone in the White House whose identity he refuses to divulge. Maybe he was shown that memo during one of his overnight stays at the White House? You know, those times when he is recorded as checking in but not checking out and then the following day he is recorded as checking out without having checked in. Stuff like that. Inquiring minds want to know what he was doing there.

[schrocat]

Inquiring minds want to know who he was doing there.




Oh the irony...

...and these are the same players who were so pissed off when Clinton let donors merely SLEEP in the Lincoln bedroom.

Gannon didn't have to contribute, and it looks like he got a little slumber party action and compensation to boot.

What do they call those folks who get compensated for slumber parties again?

I can't remember...

ho-ho-ho merry christmas boys and girls...

[schrocat]

"...In another rare instance in 1992, according to Esquire magazine, Rove misfired again when George H W Bush fired him from his campaign for leaking information to his favorite columnist, Robert Novak."

[Ninong]

schrocat,

There is one inaccuracy in the comments section of the site you linked that I would like to point out. Someone mentioned Jeff Gannon's alleged Marine Corps service. On his several professional websites, he did claim that he was "USMCPT" and he claimed that he was a member of the USMC but that is not true according to the Marine Corps' Headquarters. According to their official response, there is no record of a James Dale Guckert ever serving in either the Marine Corps or the Marine Corps Reserve. That's just a fairy tale JimmyJeff made up to enhance his macho image. The wingnuts are now defending Jeffy and claiming that anyone who attacks him is anti-gay. That's a switch.

There are very few out gays in the Republican Party for obvious reasons. Many of the closeted gays in the Republican Party (including members of Congress and high ranking officials in the administration and the RNC) go out of their way to prove how supportive they are of their party's anti-gay agenda. This is in keeping with the president's own doubletalk on this subject. He says one thing in public and another in private. He has many gay friends and his record of hiring gays is extensive but he prefers that they remain in the closet. He has appointed a few openly gay people to important posts but you will never see their partners in the audience when the announcement is made and they are never listed in the official government biography.

Even the right-wing religious extremists who think they control the Republican Party are reluctant to discuss the sexual orientation of their party's chairman publicly for fear of starting a full-scale media feeding frenzy. They're not alone. The mainstream media and the Democratic Party refused to push very hard on Gannongate because they couldn't predict where it would all end. Before you know it we might have people outing a Republican appointed Supreme Court Justice and members of both houses of Congress from both parties. And, as we all know from the Republican Convention, being out in public is not acceptable to Republicans. Which is why Mary Cheney's partner was never on TV. And she was not outed by John Kerry. She outed herself years ago. The only recent self-outing was by Allen Keyes' lesbian daughter who was fed up with her father's homophobic rants. He famously called Mary Cheney a "selfish hedonist" for being a lesbian.

Randall Terry, spokesperson for Terri Schiavo's parents and new Republican candidate from Florida, ostracized his son not because he's gay but because he admitted it publicly and then refused to undergo "degaying" treatment. The fact that his two daughters have three children out of wedlock between them doesn't seem to present as big a problem to their father's career as his son's public admission of his sexual orientation. And the fact that Randall Terry filed bankruptcy to avoid paying court-ordered restitution to the victims of his criminal activities seems to be a plus in the eyes of his many supporters. He couldn't afford to pay restitution because he needed that money to contribute to Eric Rudolph's defense fund.

When I was a teenager, I remember reading rumors about the Democratic candidate for president in 1952 (and again in 1956). The Republicans claimed they had proof that he was gay. The Democrats responded by pointing out that if the Republicans decided to carry out their threatened exposure, they would expose Eisenhower's long-term extra-marital affair with his female British driver, Kay Summersby. And, of course, no one ever outed J. Edgar Hoover while he was alive for obvious reasons. Back in the 1950's, when I was a teenager, the mainstream media didn't touch outing stories at all. The fact that the Secretary General of the United Nations was gay was not mentioned in the press at the time. Confidential magazine ran a story about Liberace being gay and he successfully sued them for damages. They couldn't prove it. They could prove that Rock Hudson was gay but the studio made a deal with them to kill the story in exchange for other considerations. Then they immediately ordered Rock to get married. He married his agent's secretary. They stayed married for a few years.

The hypocrisy in the Republican Party is staggering. At least when Democrats get caught with their pants down, they admit it. Eventually.