Rove not to be indicted

Not such a great week for some people of a particular political leaning.

First, Zarqawi gets it, then Rove doesn't.
 
The best part was Chucky Shumer urging Fitzgerald to break the law and issue a report on his conclusions, and charging choices. What arrogance! Dean-"well he may not have done it, but he should still be punished for it". Shumer- " I want an explanation as to why Rove was not carged, after you were told to charge him" These people are a joke at best. ERIC
 
PHP: 
Please provide documentation; grand jury testimony would be good.

Please be sure to read the entire post.
 
Amazing thread... no evidence of a point of view like "okay, so Rove's not the WH official who leaked the name of a CIA operative during a time of war, but we really need to find out who leaked..." But instead just the usual political garbage - well at least "our guy" didn't get indicted...

anyone care about winning the war on terror,... or is it more important to just win the next election?...
 
As I understand it, in order for there to be a violation of the statue, Ms. Plame would have had to have been a covert agent within five years of the leak or served overseas within the last five years. I don't believe she was a covert agent by this definition.

She apparently was brought back to the US in 1994. So, she was pretty far removed from the five year window because the questionable Rove interview took place in 2003. From that time, she apparently had a desk job at Langley.

The reason some of us aren't worried about the leak is because we don't believe a leak about a covert agent actually occurred.

Also, I would like to go on the record as saying that if anyone leaks the identity of a covert agent during a time of war, the leaker should be pursued to the fullest extent of the law, Republican, Democrat of any one else.
 
Depends on what statute your referrinig to...

While some people debate about whether she was a covert agent, there's no doubt that she was an operative with a classified status, the front company she was associated with had a classified status, and the work she did with non-proliferation was classified. Exposing Plame and her work may have set back our intel regarding Iran's nuclear capabilities.

It was a shameful act, maybe treasonous, to put politics above national security and no amount of tap-dancing around legal definitions will change that.
 
Depends on what statute your referrinig to...
Click to expand...

While there may be more appicable statues, the one I have seen referred to is the Intelligence Identities Protection Act. If there are others, I don't know. There may be.

While some people debate about whether she was a covert agent, there's no doubt that she was an operative with a classified status, the front company she was associated with had a classified status, and the work she did with non-proliferation was classified. Exposing Plame and her work may have set back our intel regarding Iran's nuclear capabilities.
Click to expand...

Okay. But if she wasn't covert, then there is no broken law.

As for her classified work, it's a little hard for us to debate its value because the content is unknown to us. It may have set back our intel regarding Iran, but it may not have. We don't know. I haven't read that her work was that sensitive.

It was a shameful act, maybe treasonous, to put politics above national security and no amount of tap-dancing around legal definitions will change that.
Click to expand...

Again, if someone outs a covert agent during time of war, I think they should be dealt with according to the law. But, as I read it, that didn't happen here. She was not covert.

Perhaps some may deem this tap-dancing, but the definition was put into the law for a reason.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top