- Schaffer vs. Udall
- View From A Height
- Thinking Right
- Mt. Virtus
- Rocky Mountain Right
- Slapstick Politics
- Daily Blogster
- Hugh Hewitt
- Hot Air
- Fox News
- Real Clear Politics
- Rocky Mountain News
- Denver Post
- Debka Files
- Talking Points Memo
The Senate Race
Rocky Mountain Alliance of Blogs, 2.0
My personal musings about anything that gets on my radar screen--heavily dominated by politics.
|Oh, The Left Is All A-Twitter|
They think they have him. The Left, following the brilliant insider leadership of Lawrence O'Donnell, think they have the goods to take down . . .
Okay, backtrack, and with many hat tips to Dafydd at Captain's Quarters, Larry O'Donnell, the former Democratic Senator fro . . .oh, no wait; the former Governo . .. um, nope; how about, former Democratic Chief of Staff to a couple committees and producer/writer of The West Wing. So, a guy who's working on a TV show most of the time while doing occasional drop-ins on Chris Matthews' show, including notable melt-downs, who himself has never held elective office or run for anything, goes on the McLaughlin Group and announces, regarding the Valerie Plame issue, that the source for Matt Cooper was Karl Rove. He further went on the Huffington Post and said the story should "break" tommorow, which would have been Sunday. And, in fact, the Newsweek article is online now, and it has been greeted with a gigantic. . .
To substantiate my assessment, check out the MSNBC website, Newsweek's media partner. IT DOESN"T EVEN SHOW UP ON THE SITE. It's pretty laughable that either this guy has so little credibility, or that this story is so NON-, that the partnership doesn't even flog this story even a little bit.
Just so you know here's what NEWSWEEK says:
The e-mails surrendered by Time Inc., which are largely between Cooper and his editors, show that one of Cooper's sources was White House deputy chief of staff Karl Rove, according to two lawyers who asked not to be identified because they are representing witnesses sympathetic to the White House. Cooper and a Time spokeswoman declined to comment. But in an interview with NEWSWEEK, Rove's lawyer, Robert Luskin, confirmed that Rove had been interviewed by Cooper for the article. It is unclear, however, what passed between Cooper and Rove. . .
But according to Luskin, Rove's lawyer, Rove spoke to Cooper three or four days before Novak's column appeared. Luskin told NEWSWEEK that Rove "never knowingly disclosed classified information" and that "he did not tell any reporter that Valerie Plame worked for the CIA." Luskin declined, however, to discuss any other details. He did say that Rove himself had testified before the grand jury "two or three times" and signed a waiver authorizing reporters to testify about their conversations with him. "He has answered every question that has been put to him about his conversations with Cooper and anybody else,"
Just work you way through it . . . If Rove authorized reporters to testify about his conversations, and this all happened back in October 2003, what do you suppose are the odds that this information wouldn't have come out during the 2004 election? Seriously, what are the odds? I'll go out on a limb and say NEXT TO ZERO!
No, this a nothing story. The timing couldn't be more interesting, though, don't you think. Right as the White House is gearing up its political machine for a nomination battle. You think O'Donnell JUST got this information on Friday? Hardly. This is an old lie, put in a pocket, brought out at a moment when it could trip up the White House on its most important moment. I think O'Donnell blundered, though. He was probably counting on the President announcing his pick on Tuesday, which would have run the two stories side-by-side; as it is now, with the President delaying his announcement, the White House has a chance to blow this story out of the water and discredit ANOTHER journalist before going on the offensive over the Supreme Court.