It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NEWS: Political Advisor Spoke Before Leak

page: 1
7

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 4 2005 @ 10:20 AM
link   
New reports indicate that Karl Rove, top Political Advisor to President Bush, spoke to Time Magazine's Reporter Matt Cooper. Rove spoke to Cooper just days before the identity of a CIA agent was released, however It is not yet clear as to what they discussed. Rove maintains that he did not disclose any confidential information.
 



www.cnn.com
A special prosecutor is investigating whether senior Bush administration officials leaked the name of CIA operative Valerie Plame to the media in retaliation after her husband wrote an opinion piece critical of the administration.

Cooper and New York Times reporter Judith Miller face jail on civil contempt charges for refusing to reveal their sources to a federal grand jury. Judge Thomas Hogan has set a final hearing on Wednesday and will make a decision after that.

Cooper's attorneys argued that Time's decision "should obviate" the contempt citation against him because the material gives the grand jury the information and makes his testimony "duplicative and unnecessary."


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


I do not believe that Rove is responsible for this security leak. The entire story is very skeptical to begin with, just because he had contact with a reporter does not mean that he's the one who said anything. Seems very circumstantial to me.

Another thing that I don't like about this, is that that they are ordered to talk. I'm very familiar with the laws regarding this, but I still don't feel it's right that they can force you to say something. What ever happened to free speech and the right to remain silent??




posted on Jul, 4 2005 @ 10:37 AM
link   
Someone voted no because they say it was a repeat, I looked and there is no other story relating to this on ATSNN.



posted on Jul, 4 2005 @ 10:39 AM
link   
Depends what you call contempt of court. I thought a courts explicit purpose was to uphold the law and the constitution. How pleading the 5th is contempt of court is beyond me.

Regarding Rove, well it wouldnt surprise me if he burned a CIA operative for her husbands lack of fealty. But lets see what the courts say first before jumping to that conclusion just yet.



posted on Jul, 4 2005 @ 01:12 PM
link   
.
How is it that Novak who was complicit in any law breaking the is not in jail and people who didn't publish the name are in jail?

Do you smell political targeting/revenge?

Could it be these people are in jail simply for not being right-wing reactionaries like Novak?
.



posted on Jul, 4 2005 @ 02:28 PM
link   
You have the right to remain silent so as to not testify against yourself under the 5th Amendment, but no such right to remain silent so as to not testify against someone else. The journalists themselves are under no threat of prosecution for what they've done in this case other than withholding their information about someone else's commission of a crime.

The 5th Amendment simply doesn't apply.

Journalists have claimed that the 1st Amendment's guarantee of freedom of the press gives them special protection to not have to reveal their sources, but this argument has always been rejected by the federal courts.



posted on Jul, 4 2005 @ 03:42 PM
link   
It's been widely assumed that it was Rove since Plame's name hit the papers.
This is just more circumstantial evidence for that idea.

Personally, I think it was Rove, the man is a master of dirty politics.
Anyone remember him pushing the story of John McCain's "interracial child out of wedlock" to Southern voters? (He and his wife adopted a Bangladeshi girl.)

Why is it the same crowd that bleats on about "morality" that is so effective at political dirty tricks? Apprently "morality" is only an issue when it comes to regulating other people's sex lives. Funny how the most amoral, ethically bankrupt people all seem to be in the crowd that constantly crows about morality.

[edit on 7/4/05 by xmotex]



posted on Jul, 4 2005 @ 04:07 PM
link   
I'm sure it was Rove and I hope it sinks the nazi bas----, and yes I said Nazi.



posted on Jul, 4 2005 @ 04:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by kazi
I'm sure it was Rove and I hope it sinks the nazi bas----, and yes I said Nazi.


Why? Does that add to the thread? I don't think so.



posted on Jul, 4 2005 @ 04:26 PM
link   
Kazi, you clearly have the IQ of a small child. Actually, my 5 year old daughter has a higher IQ than you, I'm quite sure if it actually.



posted on Jul, 4 2005 @ 04:31 PM
link   
Have some respect for the News Forum guys. I'm not going to repeat this.



posted on Jul, 4 2005 @ 07:56 PM
link   
Intrepid--what? All of a sudden persoanl opinion is not allowed, maybe if I used IMHO? Would that make it politically correct enough foryou.

Burns, keep your daughter out of this, or you make her fair game.



posted on Jul, 4 2005 @ 09:00 PM
link   
Personal opinion is allowed when it is directed at the TOPIC, not at each other.

This is ATSNN, and as such, it is not like the other common forums.
Rules and guidelines will be enforced and applied more sternly here.

Heed the request(s) made by the staff on this or continue at your own peril.




seekerof



posted on Jul, 4 2005 @ 09:56 PM
link   
Oh come now Kazi my comments are just in good fun.


My appolgies intrepid, seekerof, kazi.



posted on Jul, 5 2005 @ 11:13 PM
link   
The Court isn't happy with just the notes that Time Inc. turned over, it looks like these journalists will be going to jail:



Matthew Cooper of Time magazine and Judith Miller of The New York Times should be jailed for refusing to cooperate with a grand jury investigating the disclosure of the identity of a covert C.I.A. operative, the special prosecutor in the case said in court papers filed yesterday.

Last week, Time magazine provided Mr. Cooper's notes and other documents to the special prosecutor, Patrick J. Fitzgerald, after the United States Supreme Court refused to hear appeals filed by the magazine and the two reporters. In yesterday's filing, Mr. Fitzgerald said he had reviewed the documents and determined that Mr. Cooper's testimony "remains necessary."

The reporters filed papers on Friday asking that they be sentenced to home confinement if incarceration is required. In case the presiding judge denied that request, Ms. Miller asked to be sent to a federal prison camp in Danbury, Conn., and Mr. Cooper to one in Cumberland, Md.

New York Times



new topics

top topics



 
7

log in

join