Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: steve harris who wrote (691968)	7/14/2005 10:19:48 AM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

Still... some fairly weak PR defense tactics thus far: ...First, the question of whether or not Rove actually “named” Plame, or identified her as covert agent. It doesn’t matter. Atrios provides the text of the actual law: the key phrase being “… discloses any information identifying” a covert agent. ( atrios.blogspot.com ) Second, the absurd claim that Rove was just trying to discourage a reporter from writing an incorrect story -- just “doing his job,” as one surrogate put it. If that’s the case, then why was Rove’s act of good samaritanism on “double super secret background?” For a fuller explanation of what that is, Stephen Colbert explains, via Atrios. ( atrios.blogspot.com ) Was Karl hiding his “whistle blowing,” as the WSJ called it (apparently with a straight face), because he’s incredibly modest? Was he afraid he’d be fired for “just doing his job?” Does he, perhaps, believe that he’s the one that’s undercover? Then there is the claim that Wilson is a Kerry supporter. And what difference, pray, does this make? Reading the law, I don’t see a “Kerry supporter exemption” anywhere. This is one element of a wider line of reasoning that somehow what Karl did was okay because “Joe Wilson has been discredited.” Leaving aside the fact that he hasn’t been, you don’t get pick which covert agents’ identities you reveal based on the relative merits of their spouses. If the Republicans in Congress want that to be the case, they are free to amend the law, but right now this point is utterly irrelevant. In the meantime, you can go here ( STAND AGAINST THE DEMOCRATIC LYNCHING OF KARL ROVE! SEND A LETTER OF SUPPORT TO AMERICA'S #1 SON! whitehouse.org ) to write poor Turd Blossom a much needed letter of support. news.yahoo.com