Valerie Plame, Time, and the NYT

[pizza]

by coercion (to make sure we are on the same page with that word), i am stating if a reporter is witholding a name from a grand jury in a criminal trial (in which the victim is the gov, a person, company, corporation, or anyone), i say coerce the release of a name by threat of contempt and prison time. again, only in a criminal trial and specifically i am referring to a reporter witholding a source that is key to identification of the truth, innocence, or guilt or an accused.

So you would propose creating laws requiring people to disclose information when a judge says its needed.. that's a pretty scary opinion.

I understand & appreciate the spirit of what you're saying, but I don't think you've considered the implications, not to mention yet another strike against our freedom.

 

[riverc0il]

So you would propose creating laws requiring people to disclose information when a judge says its needed.. that's a pretty scary opinion.

is that not already the law? if you without information from a jury the judge finds you in comtempt, correct? unless you have reason to plead the 5th? i am just advocating for the current judicial rules to be put in place for all peoples, that the presses right to withold the name of a source is not above the judicial branches duty to provide a fair and accurate trial for both the prosecution and defense.

 

[pizza]

I'm not a lawyer, so I'm not familiar with the details. One can be told to go into court with a subpeona, but I'm not sure when and how that works, or if you're required to testify when you arrive.

What I do know is that you cannot be forced to testify against a defendant in a criminal case. Or else Michael Jackson would have been in jail years ago (instead of making a deal with the people that were to testify against him - remember that?)

 

[ctenidae]

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/8525978/site/newsweek/

Looks like it was Rove. That vindictive piece of carp needs to fry if it was him. Bush will probably give him a pardon, though. Question is, how many bugs come out from under that rock when it gets turned over?

 

[dmc]

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/8525978/site/newsweek/

Looks like it was Rove. That vindictive piece of carp needs to fry if it was him. Bush will probably give him a pardon, though. Question is, how many bugs come out from under that rock when it gets turned over?

http://online.wsj.com/public/article/0,,SB112104330395581808,00.html?mod=todays_free_feature

the disclosure that Mr. Bush's top political strategist discussed the CIA employment of Mr. Wilson's wife amounts to a political embarrassment for Mr. Rove and the White House. A presidential spokesman had previously given what appeared to be an unequivocal public assurance that Mr. Rove hadn't been involved in the disclosure of Ms. Plame as a CIA operative. Discovery that earlier denials may have been carefully parsed would represent another blow to the administration's credibility, compounding damage from the underlying issue that initially brought Mr. Wilson into the spotlight

 

[dmc]

My big question about Karl Rove knowing about this is...
Why is a political advisor privy to this kind on info?
I thought it was “the need to know” basis stuff...?


This could get interesting if the Bush admin doesn't spin it and quell the presses....

 

[ctenidae]

I'm doing the full-on "Liberal" wetting-my-pants-in-excitement dance.

It's amazing the hairsplitting (that Clinton was bashed for) that's going on- current best defense seems to be that Rove didn't actually say her name, so he didn't, in fact, name her. Which is, of course, what they say they've been saying all along.
There is absolutely no good reason for Rove to either know who Valerie Plame is, or to tell a reporter that Wilson's trip to Nigeria was authorized by her. There are lots of reasons, sure, but none of them are good.
I won't even mind if Bush comes out clean, as long as Rove gets canned.

 

[dmc]

I'm doing the full-on "Liberal" wetting-my-pants-in-excitement dance.

Over the last few years I've been dissapopinted while doing that dance..

But there is a lot to this whole issue encompassing all the stuff I can't stand about the current admin...

 

[ctenidae]

Me too, on the dissapointments. Fitzgerald seems like a pretty good prosecutor, though- hes playing it very close, and I like that- I think he's waiting until he has all his ducks in a row, and then BLAMO!, out he'll come.

 

[Charlie Schuessler]

...There is absolutely no good reason for Rove to either know who Valerie Plame is, or to tell a reporter that Wilson's trip to Nigeria was authorized by her. There are lots of reasons, sure, but none of them are good....I won't even mind if Bush comes out clean, as long as Rove gets canned.

After reading this bit of news in today's Boston Globe (Reuters Report), I am bewildered why a personal consultant to the President of the United States would commit such an unlawful act of treachery...

If the prosecutor finds substantial reason to file charges against Rove, under no circumstances should the President pardon him, he is not a government employee...he's a private political consultant…never mind that he get canned, if he is prosecuted and found guilty, he should be ....

The report indicates that there may be more informants....for the good of the Nation, I hope that the President & Vice President had/has nothing to do with this fiasco…

 

[Stephen]

IF Karl Rove did this... he is no more or less guilty than Clinton committing perjury under oath.

I hope he gets the same sentence... doesn't lose his job, his pension, multi-million dollar touring circuit, just has to surrender his lawyer's permit for a little while.

-Stephen

 

[pizza]

IF Karl Rove did this... he is no more or less guilty than Clinton committing perjury under oath.

I hope he gets the same sentence... doesn't lose his job, his pension, multi-million dollar touring circuit, just has to surrender his lawyer's permit for a little while.

-Stephen

Bull. I agree that Clinton should have had more of a punishment for lying nunder oath, but the fact that he didn't does not exonerate Rove. Rove should be punished regardless of what Clinton got away with, and you know it. You'd be a hippocrite to believe otherwise.

 

[Stephen]

IF Karl Rove did this... he is no more or less guilty than Clinton committing perjury under oath.

I hope he gets the same sentence... doesn't lose his job, his pension, multi-million dollar touring circuit, just has to surrender his lawyer's permit for a little while.

-Stephen

Bull. I agree that Clinton should have had more of a punishment for lying nunder oath, but the fact that he didn't does not exonerate Rove. Rove should be punished regardless of what Clinton got away with, and you know it. You'd be a hippocrite to believe otherwise.

I think you are 100% right. If Rove did this, he's a slime and should be put away.

But if the "Rule of Law" is what important (thank you, Janet) then I'd like to see some Clinton rump-swabs finally admit that what he did would have gotten you or I thrown in jail.

-Stephen

 

[dmc]

But if the "Rule of Law" is what important (thank you, Janet) then I'd like to see some Clinton rump-swabs finally admit that what he did would have gotten you or I thrown in jail.

Rump swabs???

Dude - you have serious issues... Your filled with hatred...

You gotta chill and stop with this kind of BS to get your point accross...

 

[Stephen]

But if the "Rule of Law" is what important (thank you, Janet) then I'd like to see some Clinton rump-swabs finally admit that what he did would have gotten you or I thrown in jail.

Rump swabs???

Dude - you have serious issues... Your filled with hatred...

You gotta chill and stop with this kind of BS to get your point accross...

ROFL HAHHAHAHHA HA HA heh he tee hee...

Good one dmc. You had me for a moment there. :wink:

-Stephen

 

[dmc]

But if the "Rule of Law" is what important (thank you, Janet) then I'd like to see some Clinton rump-swabs finally admit that what he did would have gotten you or I thrown in jail.

Rump swabs???

Dude - you have serious issues... Your filled with hatred...

You gotta chill and stop with this kind of BS to get your point accross...

ROFL HAHHAHAHHA HA HA heh he tee hee...

Good one dmc. You had me for a moment there. :wink:

-Stephen

I was serious... You got hate issues...

You calling names makes your point seem secondary to your anger angainst people like me who dissagree with you..

 

[dmc]

I say Rove - you say Clinton - I say Nixon - you say... etc etc... and we can end with George Washington...

The fact IS Carl Rove - Our Presidents closest advisor is in deep doo doo...

 

[Stephen]

The fact IS Carl Rove - Our Presidents closest advisor is in deep doo doo...

No argument there.

This is the second time we've agreed on something... between that and the Sox, hell HASA frozen over!

-Stephen

 

[ctenidae]

Gotta love the "Clinton did it" defense. Useful for covering a multitude of sins. As often as Liberals trot out Kool-Aid, brainwashing, and military service to qualify for military use, Conservatives use the Clinton Defense. At least the Liberals have some variety, and doesn't it concern anyone that the Clinton Defense gets used so often?

On topic, I find it interesting that the White House is staunchly no comment, citing an ongoing criminal investigation, when they were very quick to defend Rove early on, and commented regularly, despite the ongoing criminal investigation two years ago. I would love to read a transcript of Fitzgerald's questioning of Bush back then. Waiting for all this to unfold is more exciting than waiting for the next Harry Potter book to come out!

 

[dmc]

Pretty sure W went on record saying that whoever leaked this would get fired...

Let's see if he can follow through.. Or just do whatever the F he wants like usual...

I don't think he can exist without Rove though...