On Scarborough Country July 12th:
JOE SCARBOROUGH, HOST: That still doesn't justify Karl Rove or anybody—and we don't know if Rove did it for sure—but justify the outing of CIA agent, does it?
REP. PETER KING ®, NEW YORK: It's only wrong if he knew that she was undercover and that the CIA was making every attempt to keep her undercover. He didn't give her name. He didn't know she was undercover.
An interesting assertion considering:
Well, as Think Progress noted, it seems quite clear that classified information was disclosed, so the only question is whether it was knowingly. The "knowingness" would be the only thing standing between Rove and a crime, theoretically.
Today we hear from the LA Times...
Luskin declined to say whether Rove knew that Plame was a covert agent, even if he did not know her name, which analysts said was a crucial factor in determining whether the law was broken.
He certainly hasn't declined before. That sounds pretty darn close to Game, Set, Match.
One main thing seems pretty clear at this point. Bush will not fire Rove for this. Rove is much too valuable to the Republican Party to be fired. Even if Rove continues to work from behind the scenes for Bush, firing him would puncture his aura of invincibility. Can't have that. Nah, if given the choice of keeping a promise made to the American people or firing a personal buddy, the American people will lose.
No comments:
Post a Comment