Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Media ignore Rove's leak, White House falsehoods, Bush's promise to fire leaker

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-13-07 05:17 PM
Original message
Media ignore Rove's leak, White House falsehoods, Bush's promise to fire leaker
Media ignore Rove's leak, White House falsehoods, Bush's promise to fire leaker

Summary: Media outlets reporting on Karl Rove's resignation omitted key facts in their discussion of Rove's involvement in the leak of Valerie Plame's identity -- that Rove in fact leaked Plame's identity to columnist Robert Novak and another reporter, that then-White House spokesman Scott McClellan initially denied that Rove was involved in the leak, and that Rove would not have been able to leave "on his own terms" had the White House fulfilled a pledge to fire anyone "involved" in the Plame leak.

Several news outlets reporting on the announcement by White House deputy chief of staff Karl Rove that he will resign effective August 31 omitted key facts in their discussion of Rove's involvement in the leak of the identity of then-CIA operative Valerie Plame. In particular, several media reports noted that Rove was not indicted in the investigation, but did not report that Rove leaked Plame's identity to conservative columnist Robert D. Novak and then-Time magazine correspondent Matthew Cooper and that then-White House spokesman Scott McClellan initially denied that Rove was involved in the leak. McClellan, in fact, said the idea of Rove's involvement was "totally ridiculous." Media reports also noted White House claims that Rove was leaving at "the right time," "on his own terms," "at the time of his own choosing" and that Rove was not "decid{ing} whether to stay or go based on what the mob wants," but those same reports then did not mention that Rove would not have been able to leave "on his own terms" if the White House had fulfilled a pledge to fire anyone "involved" in the Plame leak. Nor did media note that, despite his leaking of classified information, the White House did not strip Rove of his security clearance, and, indeed, renewed it.

For example, an August 13 online New York Times article reported only that Rove was "a focus" of the Plame investigation and that he had "survived" and "emerged from the cloud of the investigation" to work on the 2006 midterm election effort, The article, however, reported Rove's "surviv{al}" and his comment that it was his intention to leave when he wanted to and not "based on whether it pleases the mob" without providing key facts concerning his involvement in the Plame case:

His standing had already diminished considerably. Since the midterm elections, Mr. Bush's political problems have mounted in Iraq, his pursuit of a new immigration policy failed in Congress and the White House has had to defend its actions in the dismissals of United States attorneys, among other issues. Mr. Rove, 56, survived an investigation into the leak of the identity of a Central Intelligence Agency operative only to face a flurry of subpoenas from Democratic-controlled committees on Capitol Hill that he has so far rebuffed, citing executive privilege.

{...}


more...

http://mediamatters.org/items/200708130005?f=h_top
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Buzz Clik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-13-07 05:40 PM
Response to Original message
1. You're just jealous of Rove's successes.
(direct quote from Knuckledragger Central)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 03:34 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC