Monday, July 11, 2005

Press Corps Attacks Rove Story

Coming in from Charging RINO, the White House press corps went after Press Secretary Scott McClellan today about Rove's apparent involvement in the Valerie Plame affair. McClellan had previously denied Rove was involved but refused to answer questions today--or even offer an attempt at spin.

The transcript is here and it's pretty brutal. Apparently the press corps has decided that this is a story. Is that fair? Well, probably not--given that Rove hasn't even been indicted let alone convicted. But, then again, the press corps has never been known to wait for verifiable evidence before going into full scandal mode. And if this is going to be a full scandal (as determined by the press), then the White House is in trouble.

The last thing this administration needs is a major distraction. McClellan better have some real answers tomorrow.


At 6:54 PM, Blogger Heiuan said...

Ouch! Yep, he pretty much got his tail feathers scorched.

Interesting question about Bill Clinton and the SC, though.

At 7:02 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...


You wrote, "Apparently the press corps has decided that this is a story. Is that fair? Well, probably not--given that Rove hasn't even been indicted let alone convicted."

It is really your opinion members of the Whhitehouse press should wait until someone is indicted and/or convicted before asking the Whitehouse spokesperson questions regarding Rove and information he gave to Matthew Cooper?

This would be a new approach to methodology in journalism. I don't think it would be a useful or helpful one.


At 7:14 PM, Blogger AubreyJ said...

This is going to end up hurting the Dems’ and the news media very, very, very much… I could be wrong but I think this story is going to go no where when all is said and done. But most of all… Most Americans are sick and tired of all this constant negative crap… It’s the same old drumbeat all over again… (I for one can not wait till the next round of elections come up.)

At 7:17 PM, Anonymous jimromano said...

I thought the whitehouse press corps had shown a lot of restraint prior to today. This story (Rove involvement) has been floating for a week now, but up til now no questions like today-

I think they were waiting for the story to have more definative substance, but were ready when it became apparent its there. The press is so afraid of being accused of a liberal bias that they played this one very cautiously. The liberal blogs were going crazy this morning because yesterdays briefing McLellan recieved exactly 0 questions about this story, and it is a story, whether you are liberal, conservative, whatever. That the Presidents senior advisor got caught lying about political retribution is significant, especially given the disputed track record of the same advisor. Rove has been accused of dirty tricks so many times it comes as no surprise, and many would say he has it coming to him.

At 7:22 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

What a glorious opportunity the White House is giving for speculation! It's so irresistable, even the MSM is jumping in.

So let's play what if:
- Suppose Rove is shown conclusively to be the source of all the Palme leaks. But managed, somehow, to avoid violating the exact letter of the law so he doesn't get indicted.
- Suppose Bush, loyal to a fault, declines to fire Rove. Or to accept his resignation (if offered).

Since it's started already, look for rising demands from the left for Bush's impeachment and/or resignation. Then ask yourself: Have these people thought this through?

If Bush goes, that means Cheney becomes President. And while Vice President Cheney probably wouldn't run for President in 2008, PRESIDENT Cheney . . . .

Be careful what you wish for.

At 7:35 PM, Blogger Jdeer165 said...

I don't believe the Dems would find any traction for a Bush impeachment. They didn't like the one for Clinton and there was actually a legal crime there, even though perjury about having an affair was dismissed by most of the country.

As for the heat on Rove; if this ends up going anywhere near an indictment I think Bush would have to remove him. After all his talk about hating leaks and removing anyone in his administration who leaked I don't think he would have much choice.

Using my crystal ball I see Rove out of the administration within six months, but no conviction or jail time.

At 7:57 PM, Blogger Alan Stewart Carl said...

Anonymous at 7:02--Oh, I think it's a story and I think the press corps should be asking questions. I just think the skewring offered up by the press corps could portend a media hyperventalation. We could be hearing a lot more about this than is warrented at this point. Rove is very disliked so there is going to be a rush to condemn him before there is even an indictment. The same thing happened with the whole Monica Lewinsky episode. There was a media storm well before there was anything more than rumors.

I don't think this could ever hit that level, but I do think the coverage could be disproportionate to the amount of evidence currently available. Today's press conference was understandable--but if it's a sign of things to come, that kind of intense focus in more appropriate when more evidence is available.

At 8:18 PM, Anonymous jimromano said...

I think the skewering came about because the Press Secretary offered himself up to be abused. He came up weak today. Does anyone buy the "ongoing investigation" stuff? They asked appropriate questions today, and it turned into a grilling only because the white house choose to clam up.

How about Scott McLellan saying "the president stands by his words, and is waiting for all the facts before making any decisions" or something like that? They have to at least acknowledge that there is an issue to address, instead of stonewalling...which makes it worse, I think.

At 1:06 AM, Blogger Kevin said...

RE: Aubreyj
You may be tired of of all this constant negative crap, but believe it or not....not all Republicans are saints ordained by God to rule the Earth and not all Dems are devils. On Sept 29, 2003 McClellan stood behind that podium with the Presidential Seal and proclaimed to America that he personally had spoken with Karl Rove and that Rove had nothing to do with the Valerie Plame incident. Then on June 10, 2004, the President stood behind that very same seal and told America that Rove had nothing to do with it and that if anyone in his administration did, they would be fired immediately. Rove's lawyer admitted to the public this past week that Rove did indeed discuss Wilson's wife with reporters prior to Novak's column that outed her -- so I ask you, are you so stuck on the (R) behind their names that you can't see past the BS? What Rove and his lawyer have admitted to has already met the qualifications the Press Secretary and the President himself set for terminating Rove immediately, even though convicting him of Treason (for outing an undercover CIA agent working on WMDs and putting American security at risk) might be hard to prove since you have to prove he knowingly was trying to 'out' her, much like what the meaning of 'is' is....we all know what he did now that his lawyer has admitted his role and we all know he was trying to discredit anyone who spoke up against the administration, we also know that Rove told Chris Matthews that going after Wilson's wife was 'fair game'. Since when is attacking families part of the family values?

At 2:27 AM, Blogger AubreyJ said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

At 2:39 AM, Blogger AubreyJ said...

Gone Fishing!!!

At 1:54 PM, Blogger Jonathan C said...

Let's not get ahead of ourselves. I'm no fan of Bush or Rove, but so far we know surprisingly little about what Rove did or didn't say. We know for certain that Rove indicated that it was Plame who commissioned the Niger report. That's about it.

It is entirely possible that Rove knew nothing of Plame's "other" job at the CIA. If Rove himself did not know she was an agent, then he must be immediately absolved of any criminal wrongdoing. After all, you can't leak information you don't have.

However, the quick bottling up of the White House's information spigot does not portend well for Karl's case. If Rove is to rove what may turn out to be the most difficult political needle of his career, he needs to come forward with full disclosure.

Here are my full thoughts.

At 3:38 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Why should the press keep their gloves on? Someone has ruined the career of dedicated agent, against the laws of the US, and in an apparent political vendetta. It is high time that the person or persons responsible for this are held accountable.
Disclosing the identity of a CIA agent for political retribution is a disgusting abuse of power, and, I suspect, not a solitary incident.

At 11:54 PM, Blogger Jonathan C said...

anonymous @ 3:38

if all you say is true, then I agree. However, I remember that during watergate a considerable amount of evidence before any serious talk about firing or indicting top level advisors. How much "juice" did investigators have on Hadleman and Erlichman before they resigned?


Post a Comment

<< Home