July 12, 2005

Setting the record straight about Rove's leak

I've been following the Plame leak case for a few weeks now—and this is a story years in the making—but I thought this article from Salon was particularly good at getting the facts straight and analyzing the possible implications. It gives a brief history of the whole affair and then explains to what extent Rove might or might not be culpable, all in very clear terms.

I suspect Rove was fully cognizant of what he was doing, and what he's done is despicable. He should be fired without question (go tell the White House you think so, too). Also, it was encouraging to see the press finally do its job and hammer Scott McClellan yesterday and today. If the stakes of this case, occurring right around the whole Deepthroat/Mark Felt revelation, don't inspire mainstream journalists to dig deep and take some risks to find out the whole truth, I don't know what would.

While we're at it, how about another caption contest for the above illustration (done by yours truly)?

Photos courtesy of Google Image Search


  1. Here's my caption:

    Scott McClellan: It is totally rediculous to claim that Karl Rove is pissing on Robert Novak's face. If anyone in this administration pissed on Robert Novak's face, they would no longer be in this administration.

  2. Later...

    Scott McClellan: I'm not going to comment on an ongoing urination.

  3. Wow, the way that Fox News is "reporting" the Rove story is just entirely unacceptable. It's no secret that Fox tends to be a bit biased, but this is just totally out of control. They claim that Bush never said he'd fire Rove. Are you fucking kidding me? There's transcripts all over the place. This is fucking insane!

    And half of America is taking it for truth...

  4. You mean this part?

    "Bush, at an Oval Office photo opportunity Tuesday, was asked directly whether he would fire Rove — in keeping with his pledge in June 2004 to dismiss any leakers in the case. The president did not respond."

    Looks like they do say Bush said he would fire whoever was responsible.
    Still, the framing in the article is really insidious. Look at this lead:

    "Democrats, some White House reporters and assorted opponents of President Bush are demanding the ouster of Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove (search) after the revelation that Rove discussed a CIA employee with a member of the press."

    It's imprecise as hell and tilted to make Bush look like the protagonist. But this is of course standard editorial policy at Fox.

  5. Anonymous11:35 PM

    Google image search makes no guarantee that images are not subject to copyright, and will not be considered partner or knowing accomplice to your actions when whoever's image that is sues your ass.

  6. Google image search makes no guarantee that images are not subject to copyright, and will not be considered partner or knowing accomplice to your actions when whoever's image that is sues your ass.

    Thanks for stopping by the blog. As the 52,000th asshole to post a pointless comment, you've won a purple Toyota Camry.

  7. Caption suggestion:

    "Wow. That's some leak."

  8. Why is Rove pissing on Novak? Shouldn't it be Isikoff pissing on Rove? Isn't this 'come to Jesus we're not above the law' act by Newsweek just a little payback for being forced to recant the Gitmo Koran story?

    In my picture, Isikoff would be telling Rove, 'That's what you get for tellin' the Truth Karl baby'.

    Good yuks.

  9. Maybe it's not pee...maybe it's...(ahem) something else. The caption could then go something like this:

    "Hopefully Rove won't get off on this one"

  10. Why is Rove pissing on Novak?

    I believe that it is a visual pun based on the term 'leak.'


    "I just took a leak."

    "I just leaked the identity of an undercover CIA operative so as to punish my political enemy."

  11. I understood the 'leak' reference, but the visual of one pissing on another usually infers a negative connotation toward the pissee. That does not apply vis'a'vis Rove/Novak. Therefore, I reject the apropos of the subject visual aid, and suggested a fitting alternative scenario.

    Statements attributed to Valerie Plame denigrating the suggestion that Iraq was trying to buy yellow cake from Niger suggests that her motives may have been to trash the Bush policies. As John Gibson opines, why would Bush send someone to check out this who disagreed with his policies and was married to an agent who openly disagreed with said policies. Rove warned Cooper that this African safari was not initiated by Cheney or Tenet, then outed Plame in his exuberance. I don't agree with Gibson that Rove deserves a medal.

    Dishonorable mention, perhaps.

  12. Anonymous3:56 PM

    How about:

    "Now give me the real stuff, Turd Blossom!"