The Internet vs. Karl Rove

Things heated up over the Independence Day weekend regarding Karl Rove’s involvement with the leaking of a secret CIA agent’s identity. The problem is that the mainstream media is NOT touching the Rove angle with a proverbial 10 foot poll. Although there is clearly something going on here, the big shots of big media are treating Rove like he’s the most feared man in the country. It appears that the only way this story is going to stay alive is if the blogosphere keeps it alive.

For weeks we’ve been hearing about Time Magazine’s Matthew Cooper and The New York Times’ Judith Miller’s failure to cooperate with federal investigators and name the source of the leak of the secret CIA agent. The mainstream media likes this story because it involves two brave soles standing up for journalistic integrity. Never mind that these two never published any stories about the secret agent, but rather the agent was outed by none other than super conservative columnist Robert Novak. While Cooper and Miller face up to 18 months in jail, oddly enough Novak has been left alone. Why is that?

Even though Cooper has refused to cooperate, Time Magazine (rarely credited as being a model of journalistic integrity) blinked and turned over all of Coopers notes to federal investigators. Reportedly, Cooper’s notes indicate that Karl Rove was a source of information, but it is not clear what information. Since this connection has been made public, it has been widely speculated throughout the blogosphere that Rove revealed the agent’s identity to Novak, either directly or via Cooper/Miller, in retaliation for the agent’s husband’s open criticism of the Bush administration’s reasons for going to war in Iraq. Did you follow that? Do we need a diagram here? Perhaps we should restart from the beginning.

There is this guy. He’s an experienced Ambassador. His name is Joseph Wilson. In 2002, the CIA asked Ambassador Wilson to investigate information given to US intelligence by Great Britain that Iraq was trying to obtain weapons grade uranium from Nigeria to make, you guessed it, Weapons of Mass Destruction. Wilson agreed. That’s his job. So, Wilson traveled to Nigeria, investigated the situation and reported back that the claims were impossible. This report was widely circulated throughout the executive branch. Wilson was done. Everyone now knew the truth.

A few months later, the Bush administration submitted a draft of the President’s State of the Union address to US intelligence. In it were the British claims about Iraq, Nigeria, uranium, and Weapons of Mass Destruction. This was a cornerstone of the justification for going to war in Iraq. But, intelligence officials had those claims removed because they simply were not true. However, when Bush delivered the address he included the now infamous line "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa." It was a lie. US Intelligence knew it was a lie. The Bush administration knew it was a lie. Ambassador Wilson knew it was a lie too.

Wilson was upset to see the claims about the Iraq / Nigeria connection used to justify the war. He asked the administration to revise their claims. The administration refused. So, he wrote an op-ed piece in the July 6th NY Times explaining everything. It made the Bush administration look really bad. It made them look like they completely made up the central reason for invading Iraq. Wilson’s piece essentially called the Bush administration liars.

A few days later, syndicated columnist and noted conservative Robert Novak blasted Wilson for his op-ed piece, but also included in his write-up that little extra tidbit that his wife, Valerie Plame, was a CIA agent. That was not public knowledge. In fact, that was quite secret information and by outing her, Novak had not only potentially put her life in danger, he may have committed a federal crime. Got that? It is a federal crime to out a secret agent.

It turns out that it is only a crime to *knowingly* reveal that someone is a secret agent. Novak can claim that he didn’t know that Valerie Plame’s status as an agent was a secret. When the feds came a knocking on Novak’s door, he just smiled and pointed to his sources, which apparently was Cooper and or Judith Miller. They provided the Plame information and they would know who originated it. It seems the feds let Novak wash his hands and walk away. But, when the feds went to see Cooper and Miller, they stated the journalistic principle of protecting one’s sources and refused to cooperate.

Now, I’ve never been to journalism school, but I must say I’ve never heard the journalistic principle to protect politicians that use you as a pawn to retaliate against their critics. The principle of not naming your source is about protecting innocent whistle blowers, not vengeful Washington power elite. Right?

It is unlikely that the Time / Cooper notes draw a direct line between Plame and Rove. All we seem to have now is guilt by association. Only Cooper and/or Miller (or possibly Novak) can actually finger the source of the Plame leak. As much as I wish they would, as much as they absolutely should, they won’t. Rove will likely get away with yet another dirty trick. After all, he got away with the McCain smears in 2000 and the Kerry Veterans (not) for Truth attacks in 2004.

Rove has just released a statement through his layer that he didn’t *knowingly* reveal any secret agents. The lawyer was careful to include the word knowingly. The man is a slippery as a snake and always seems to get away. Let’s just hope the blogosphere doesn’t let up. Let us hope that this scandal is the one that finally brings Rove down.

Need more?
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/06/politics/06leak.html
http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/20050705/cm_thenation/34581/nc:742

and my favorite comes from the 4 part Aljazeera report:
http://www.aljazeera.com/cgi-bin/review/article_full_story.asp?service_id=9008

still need more?
Google News search on Rove + Plame + Novak

This entry was posted on Wednesday, July 06, 2005 at 12:07 AM

http://googlezon.blogspot.com/2005/07/internet-vs-karl-rove.html