Karl Rove

[georgebushmoron]

FOX is pinko????

You know, even when you're just trying to yank chains, you've got to base your fibs in a little reality, or you just lose any hope of achieving your goals...

Don't criticize me for it, I'm only saying what other Republicans are saying.

It's a tactic used by the right, based on reality or not, to reorder the framework for what is mainstream. How else do you think that the word "liberal" has now come to be used even by the sucker press to mean something negative? The popular understanding is that the press is an independant and neutral source of information, but if you can manipulate the press, you set the framework and the agenda. Probably you're not an American, for it only works its magic best in the US.

 

[luckydog71]

…. How perverted and depraved have politicians become that a snake such as Karl Rove should ever see the light of day in government. He is ideology gone mad, manifesting in unbridled hate. If politics is dirty, Mr. Rove is the poster boy of unwashable filth.

Sonny you have joined a large group of cheerleaders who want to convict Karl before he has been charged. If he is charged and then convicted he needs to go…..until then we need to suffer through the left wing cheerleaders who think we should bypass the legal process and convict him first…..

How about
A President who was accused of raping and sexually molesting numerous women.
A congressman accused of involvement in a murder
A senator who left his girlfriend in a car to die in a ditch, so he could hide the fact he was drunk
A congressman who sold his house to a lobbyist for an amount far greater than its value.
A senator who was an executive in the KKK
A senator who falsely accused many of communist connections and ruined their careers
A President who covered up a break-in at his political foes

Our politicians have taken so much power that was never granted to them under the constitution they are often above the law.

Oh how I wish you were right (excuse me I mean correct) that “Mr. Rove is the poster boy of unwashable filth”. Unfortunately it is your desire to participate in “gottcha politics” ignoring the crimes of those on your side and exaggerating the crimes of those on the other.

I will repeat my position - If the special prosecutor charges Rove with a crime and he is found guilty then he should resign or be fired. Until that time we need to let justice take its proper course. BTW – I feel the same way about Ted Kennedy. I am convinced he murderer Mary Jo Kopechne by driving his car off the bridge and then leaving her to die so he could run away and sober up. But he was never charged and never convicted. So under our laws he is innocent and is eligible to be a senator from the great state of Massachusetts.

 

[Herb_The_Perb]

I will repeat my position - If the special prosecutor charges Rove with a crime and he is found guilty then he should resign or be fired.

Wow, you're a real hardass when it comes to keeping Republicans in line, aren't you? Guess what -- if he's found guilty, he's automatically out of his job because he's in prison.

Long ago, Bush asked for the leaker(s) to step forward, and promised to fire anyone who did any leaking. We pretty much know that Rove revealed Plame's identity (there's only one person in the world who's Joseph Wilson's wife, and her name is a matter of public record) to at least one reporter. Where's Bush now? -- ducking reporters' questions about Rove.
Why does his press officer refuse to discuss the matter?
Don't be so disingenuous, LD, and please don't feed us the official GOP talking points as though they are your own ideas.

 

[luckydog71]

Don't be so disingenuous, LD, and please don't feed us the official GOP talking points as though they are your own ideas.

Herb...when Clinton was accused of raping Broadrick....by Broadrick....did you take the same stance as you are taking now? I did.

 

[russel4339]

Try a couple of news reporters already charged with revealing this woman's indentity. If Rove isn't in trouble with revealing who she was, then why are the reporters in trouble?

The reporters aren't on trial. They are going to jail for contempt of court for refusing to answer the grand juries questions on where they recevied their information. So far, of the two, one did say where he recieved the information from. The other went to jail this week.

Also, in order to protect their reporters, a whole host news agency (CNN, NY Times, Newsweek etc.) prior to Karl Rove being identified, filed friends of the court briefs flatly denying that any crime had been committed. They are being hippocritical now ranting about how Karl Rove borke the law.

All the evidence now points to the fact that Karl Rove did not break the law in question. The law in question is very detailed on what "outting" a source means and what Karl Rove did does not constitute a crime. For example, the law explicitly states that it applies only to foriegn based operatives and Ms. Wilson was not one of those.

 

[georgebushmoron]

All the evidence now points to the fact that Karl Rove did not break the law in question. The law in question is very detailed on what "outting" a source means and what Karl Rove did does not constitute a crime. For example, the law explicitly states that it applies only to foriegn based operatives and Ms. Wilson was not one of those.

Your emphatic statement at this point in time is premature. Only the Prosecutor can make that claim. Your making that claim before the prosecution does shows your slant and inability to allow due process. You're obviously a Rove supporter, don't bother trying to hide it in your thin veil of "analysis".

 

[Sonny]

luckydog71

"Unfortunately it is your desire to participate in “gottcha politics” ignoring the crimes of those on your side and exaggerating the crimes of those on the other" - posted by LuckyDog71

Actually, no. Karl Rove's tactics generally, whether legal or not, are the basis of my characterization. I have no 'side', I am centre with left leaning and also embrace some rightist points. The whole list you made is a litany of people certainly as bad as Mr. Rove. There is surely more than one poster boy of unwashable filth, regardless of 'side' - and that is the sad, sad story of politics at the top. And not just in the USA but elsewhere. Makes it really hard for those folks who enter politics with an altruistic motivation to serve.

 

[Webster]

The reporters aren't on trial. They are going to jail for contempt of court for refusing to answer the grand juries questions on where they recevied their information. So far, of the two, one did say where he recieved the information from. The other went to jail this week.

Also, in order to protect their reporters, a whole host news agency (CNN, NY Times, Newsweek etc.) prior to Karl Rove being identified, filed friends of the court briefs flatly denying that any crime had been committed. They are being hippocritical now ranting about how Karl Rove borke the law.

All the evidence now points to the fact that Karl Rove did not break the law in question. The law in question is very detailed on what "outting" a source means and what Karl Rove did does not constitute a crime. For example, the law explicitly states that it applies only to foriegn based operatives and Ms. Wilson was not one of those.

The thing is that everybody is focusing on the one law. Ex-Nixon crony John Dean says there may be multiple statutes Rove could be prosecuted under. Basically, although I think Rove's act was a big deal, there's no way to tell whether or not that's what the prosecutor is really looking at.

Anyway, you may wish to read the law in question. Its reach is quite a bit broader than Republican spin would have you believe. Has nothing to do with foreign-based operatives for instance, just covert status.

 

[Webster]

"Unfortunately it is your desire to participate in “gottcha politics” ignoring the crimes of those on your side and exaggerating the crimes of those on the other" - posted by LuckyDog71

Actually, no. Karl Rove's tactics generally, whether legal or not, are the basis of my characterization. I have no 'side', I am centre with left leaning and also embrace some rightist points. The whole list you made is a litany of people certainly as bad as Mr. Rove. There is surely more than one poster boy of unwashable filth, regardless of 'side' - and that is the sad, sad story of politics at the top. And not just in the USA but elsewhere. Makes it really hard for those folks who enter politics with an altruistic motivation to serve.

Right. The answer to a crime is to prosecute it, not to whine about what other guys get away with. If other guys got away with bad things, they shouldn't have, and if the law suddenly starts being enforced, that should be A Good Thing.

It's a cliche that something somebody says about a Republican inevitably brings on a "Bill Clinton did this" response. That has nothing to do with current events, and isn't an argument as much as a distraction from one.

 

[Herb_The_Perb]

Herb...when Clinton was accused of raping Broadrick....by Broadrick....did you take the same stance as you are taking now? I did.

LD, if you don't want to address my questions, just say so (or keep discreetly silent) instead of changing the subject completely and acting as though that's a real response.

 

[luckydog71]

Your response confused me (easily done) so I went back and read your posts. You made some sarcastic remark that insinuated I was easy on Republicans….my response addressed your false accusation.

Our press real does attempt to try a person on TV rather than in a court room. The press controls what information gets to the public and how it is portrayed. Then they run opinion polls – is he guilty? Or did he do it? they publish the poll results as if they were responsible to render a verdict, they are the investigator, they are the prosecutor, they are the jury, and then they want to determine sentencing.

Fortunately for Americans, they do not have that power. I am sure this process is foreign to you, but let me explained it in simple terms

- The police do the investigation work and turn up as much evidence as they can that will be helpful in determining guilt.
- They turn this over to a prosecutor (or in this case a special prosecutor) and they decided if there is enough evidence to proceed.
- If they do decide to proceed, the normal next step is a grand jury. This evidence is given behind close doors and at the end of hearing all of the prosecutor’s evidence (and nothing from the defense) they decide if the evidence warrants a trial.
- If it does the next step is a public trial. Here the prosecutor presents his evidence following the rules for evidence. The defense also gets to question the evidence and present any additional evidence in defense.
- Then after all evidence that is permissible is heard there is a verdict given.

It is a simple concept we have used in the United States for a few hundred years. It is not perfect, but it is a better system than any other I know of.

You can think what ever you wish about Rove (or any other Republican). You can take what you hear in the press and use it to confirm what you knew all along. But that does not make him guilty; it just means you dislike him. I think Rove can live with that.

In the mean time he is entitled to the same status as every other American, he is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.

So now let me address your point. I am not spouting GOP talking points. In fact I don’t think I have heard any Republicans on TV spouting off about Rove. But I have heard the DEMS calling for America to put aside our legal system and judge Rove without allowing him to have his day in court. Sounds an awful lot like you.

 

[Webster]

But I have heard the DEMS calling for America to put aside our legal system and judge Rove without allowing him to have his day in court. Sounds an awful lot like you.

Of course he should be judged outside a court of law. He's a government official, and the more scrutiny the better. People are allowed opinions about people who serve in government, and if it seems obvious that he's a scumbag (DING!) calling for his resignation is a responsible thing to do, law or no law.

I can guarantee you that whatever the outcome of the babble outside the grand jury investigation, everyone who hates Rove is ecstatic about his day in court.

 

[georgebushmoron]

People are allowed opinions about people who serve in government, and if it seems obvious that he's a scumbag (DING!) calling for his resignation is a responsible thing to do, law or no law

I agree. Those in government should be held to a higher standard of ethics than the common people. That's why yours truly got re-elected!

 

[Herb_The_Perb]

I agree. Those in government should be held to a higher standard of ethics than the common people. That's why yours truly got re-elected!

Thass raaht, Dubya.
Yew are not a crook!
And neither is yore pal Karl.
Or Dick.
Or Kenny-Boy.

 

[luckydog71]

Of course he should be judged outside a court of law. He's a government official, and the more scrutiny the better.

Actually our founding fathers thought of that too. It is called impeachment. It requires the House of Representatives to impeach him and the senate to find him guilty.

In Nixon's case just starting the proceedings was sufficient for him to resign (and he should have).

In Clinton's case he was impeached and found not guilty in the senate (also the correct verdict in my opinion).

So the system works.

Man the more we look at the US system of justice the better it looks. It is not perfect, but it is far and way better than any other system I know.

 

[HankQuinlan]

Lucky Dog --- you still haven't dealt with the main question about accountability and integrity. They SAID they would fire any administration official who leaked that information. Turns out to be Karl Rove: "No Comment".

This translates now into "only if that person is convicted of a crime?"

And impeachment is not relevant is his case --- Rove is not an elected official. Although he is one of most powerful people in your country, he is an employee of the white house and serves at the pleasure of the president.

 

[georgebushmoron]

Man the more we look at the US system of justice the better it looks

That's a system? You mean when there are rumors, the press gets a hold of it, talks endlessly about it on national television (so the whole world knows), and the person in question is publicly put to shame so bad, they have to quit their job and endure other forms of punishment? That's a system??

Yes, that's the system they used in the Middle Ages but improved with broadcast technology. Chalk one up for American Ingenuity, Luckydog!

 

[Herb_The_Perb]

Man the more we look at the US system of justice the better it looks. It is not perfect, but it is far and way better than any other system I know.

OJ Simpson would certainly agree with you.
The detainees at Guantanamo would not.

 

[luckydog71]

OJ Simpson would certainly agree with you.
The detainees at Guantanamo would not.

Herb - you forgot one......Milgaard. Oh, ya he went through the CDN system.

OJ - he went through the system and was found not guilty. My opinion is he is scum....my opinion is he did it....my opinion is he should have been convicted...However our system says he was "Not Guilty" and I accept that. It is not perfect as I said but it works.

Club Gitmo is not in the US. They are not entitled to US justice. So compare any prison indented for the retention of war prisoners to that of Club Gitmo. I maintain it is not perfect, just better than any other system out there.

 

[luckydog71]

Yes, that's the system they used in the Middle Ages but improved with broadcast technology. Chalk one up for American Ingenuity, Luckydog!

W, you are scaring me. I agree with, you we have see far too often the press abuse their 1st amendment rights. Those rights come with responsibilities. We find the Dan Rathers of the industry (now there is a poster boy if you need one) who are more interested in pushing their political point of view under the pretense of being a journalist.

The whole Clinton incident was another example of this abuse taken to the extreme. The press went on for weeks about the stained dress, like it was a smoking gun and the Republicans smelled blood in the water. I still wonder how much this whole thing contributed to 9/11. We lost 2 maybe even 3 years of productive government because the press decided the Clinton affair was another Watergate.

I think FOX is the biggest cable news program in the US, because many people are sick of listening to the ABC brand of manufactured news. Remember the Chevy pick up truck. They could not get it to explode under side impact so they rigged it up with a small explosive so it would burst into flames for their “NEWS” broadcast. That was the beginning of the end for broadcast news.