View Poll Results: Which one is going to jail for Treason?

Voters
42. You may not vote on this poll
  • Karl Rove

    26 61.90%
  • "Scooter" Libby

    12 28.57%
  • John Bolton

    4 9.52%
Page 3 of 21 FirstFirst 1234567813 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 409
  1. #41  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    I agree that I don't like the idea of forcing them to reveal sources (because Im a big 1st amendment and freedom of the press supporter) but if you destroy your notes and someone questions the validity of your story, how do you prove that you didnt fabricate the facts? I would want to be able to show that everything that I had was based on some factual analysis or quoted word for word from my source
    Chances are if there's going to be an accusal of fabrication, the newspaper would likely realize this the day the story ran (phone calls would come in) and the editors would normally have a meeting with the reporter and may or may not ask to see the notes. Legal counsel may or may not be involved. I never was requested to hand over my notes - there was a trust that what I wrote was the truth. A good reporter wouldn't clearly write down anything that could positively identify a "secret" source nor anything off the record in great detail.

    There is debate about this, and the legal ramifications. Here's an article:

    http://www.ajr.org/Article.asp?id=1785

    However, while it can be argued that a lack of notes might raise a flag, there could also be an argument over whether notes were fabricated from the get go. Without audio or video proof, notes are just tidbits written down- riddled with a reporter's own shorthand method (not usually following the old-fashioned shorthand style) and rarely is anything recorded in full sentence detail save for quotes.

    The problem is, notes can do more harm than good, especially when they are constructed during conversations with private sources and off-the-record details - possibly revealing a source and ruining relationships - one mistake and a reporter's entire career can be flushed right down the toilet.

    I never kept my hand-written notes for more than two weeks after a story ran - nor did I ever turn them over to anyone.

    I'm appalled Time would just agree to turn them over in this case. Regardless of the circumstances, reporters know that at times they will be scrutinized by the courts and the public and there's always a risk of being "sucked into" criminal cases. Some judges simply threaten "contempt" if the reporter doesn't oblige and sometimes they roll over (and later wind up reporting for one of those local pubs - where you see, "Sally came home to see her dad in the hospital" on the front page). It's also a common tactic by the defense if there's a case of policy filed by a governmental entity (i.e. should xxx establishment be grandfathered into a new zoning law set forth by the city - a law many think was created to keep xxx establishment out). Thinking the reporter might have inside info that would assist in the defense of the case, they'll file for a subpoena and pray the judge obliges to holding the reporter in contempt.

    Reporting is a tough job (contrary to the general publics belief). You have to know when it's time to run a story, take precautions (threatening phone calls and letters are common when you cover politics and the likes) and be willing to go to jail to protect your rights. Any reporter, editor or publisher not willing to stand under the extensive scrutiny of the government is in the wrong field.

    Pamela
    Using my treo 650 for business:
    DesignExtend.com
  2. #42  
    Quote Originally Posted by mediasi
    Reporting is a tough job (contrary to the general publics belief). You have to know when it's time to run a story, take precautions (threatening phone calls and letters are common when you cover politics and the likes) and be willing to go to jail to protect your rights. Any reporter, editor or publisher not willing to stand under the extensive scrutiny of the government is in the wrong field.

    Pamela
    Reminds me of Al Pacino's character in "The Insider".




    Thank goodness our laws have improved when it comes to 'whistleblowing' (but hey thats a whole other topic).
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  3. #43  
    Quote Originally Posted by Insertion
    He had to resign his postion in the late 80's or ealy 90's as V. Chair of the Senate Intel Commitee. He "alledgedly" leaked classified information to reporters...

    As DC said, not someone you want to trust with secret material.

    I don't remember all the details...maybe I'll Google it later...
    I will have to check this out...never heard of it before.
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  4. #44  
    Quote Originally Posted by Insertion
    I don't remember all the details...maybe I'll Google it later...
    http://www.answers.com/topic/patrick-leahy
    In 1987, Leahy resigned from his position as Vice Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee after an investigation into an alleged leak to an reporter regarding classified information. Other allegations have been made about other leaks, but the investigation was never made public.
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  5. #45  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    I will have to check this out...never heard of it before.
    I see my mouthpiece already got back to you on that. Here is some more evidence.

    Well behaved women rarely make history
  6. #46  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    Thank you. That's one less thing I have to do with my busy agenda..
    MaxiMunK.com The Forum That Asks, "Are You Not Entertained?"

    Remember: "Anyone that thinks the Treo should just work right out of the box, shouldn't own a Treo..."
  7. #47  
    Quote Originally Posted by clairegrrl
    I see my mouthpiece already got back to you on that. Here is some more evidence.
    He couldnt pass up the opportunity to raise his count to the every closer 5,000.
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  8. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
       #48  
    The noose is getting tighter.

    Matt Cooper's Source
    What Karl Rove told Time magazine's reporter


    By Michael Isikoff
    Newsweek
    July 18 issue - It was 11:07 on a Friday morning, July 11, 2003, and Time magazine correspondent Matt Cooper was tapping out an e-mail to his bureau chief, Michael Duffy. "Subject: Rove/P&C," (for personal and confidential), Cooper began. "Spoke to Rove on double super secret background for about two mins before he went on vacation..." Cooper proceeded to spell out some guidance on a story that was beginning to roil Washington. He finished, "please don't source this to rove or even WH " and suggested another reporter check with the CIA.

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8525978/site/newsweek
  9. #49  
    Novak better go down as well!
  10. #50  
    Quote Originally Posted by NRG
    The noose is getting tighter.

    Matt Cooper's Source
    What Karl Rove told Time magazine's reporter


    By Michael Isikoff
    Newsweek
    July 18 issue - It was 11:07 on a Friday morning, July 11, 2003, and Time magazine correspondent Matt Cooper was tapping out an e-mail to his bureau chief, Michael Duffy. "Subject: Rove/P&C," (for personal and confidential), Cooper began. "Spoke to Rove on double super secret background for about two mins before he went on vacation..." Cooper proceeded to spell out some guidance on a story that was beginning to roil Washington. He finished, "please don't source this to rove or even WH " and suggested another reporter check with the CIA.

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8525978/site/newsweek

    Reportedly he didn't reveal the name though... But I couldn't care less about Rove anyway. Even if he does go down, he's just an unelected political operative anyway...
    _________________
    aka Gfunkmagic

    Current device: Palm Pre
    Device graveyard: Palm Vx, Cassiopeia E100, LG Phenom HPC, Palm M515, Treo 300, Treo 600, Treo 650, Treo 700p, Axim X50v, Treo 800w



    Please don't PM me about my avatar. For more info go here.

    Restore your Pre to factory settings using webos doctor and follow these instructions
  11. #51  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    Novak better go down as well!

    For what? He's a reporter just like Judy Miller? I suppose they could go after him for his source, but that's highly unlikely now...
    _________________
    aka Gfunkmagic

    Current device: Palm Pre
    Device graveyard: Palm Vx, Cassiopeia E100, LG Phenom HPC, Palm M515, Treo 300, Treo 600, Treo 650, Treo 700p, Axim X50v, Treo 800w



    Please don't PM me about my avatar. For more info go here.

    Restore your Pre to factory settings using webos doctor and follow these instructions
  12. #52  
    Quote Originally Posted by gfunkmagic
    Reportedly he didn't reveal the name though... But I couldn't care less about Rove anyway. Even if he does go down, he's just an unelected political operative anyway...
    Yes, the most effective in the past several decades, unfortunately. At least his fanatsy of privatizing SS is going nowhere fast.
  13. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
       #53  
    Quote Originally Posted by gfunkmagic
    For what? He's a reporter just like Judy Miller? I suppose they could go after him for his source, but that's highly unlikely now...
    My thoughts are Nofacts already rolled rolled hence the reason he is not being pursued as actively as the others.
  14. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
       #54  
    Gathering the lies together:

    CIA Leak Quotes By The Associated Press
    1 hour, 2 minutes ago



    Some of the denials, other comments, at media briefings by White House spokesman Scott McClellan when asked by reporters whether President Bush's top political adviser, Karl Rove, was involved in the leak of a CIA officer's identity:

    Sept. 29, 2003

    Q: You said this morning, quote, "The president knows that Karl Rove wasn't involved." How does he know that?

    A: Well, I've made it very clear that it was a ridiculous suggestion in the first place. ... I've said that it's not true. ... And I have spoken with Karl Rove.

    -snip-

    Oct. 7, 2003

    Q: You have said that you personally went to Scooter Libby (Vice President **** Cheney's chief of staff), Karl Rove and Elliott Abrams (National Security Council official) to ask them if they were the leakers. Is that what happened? Why did you do that? And can you describe the conversations you had with them? What was the question you asked?

    A: Unfortunately, in Washington, D.C., at a time like this there are a lot of rumors and innuendo. There are unsubstantiated accusations that are made. And that's exactly what happened in the case of these three individuals. They are good individuals. They are important members of our White House team. And that's why I spoke with them, so that I could come back to you and say that they were not involved. I had no doubt with that in the beginning, but I like to check my information to make sure it's accurate before I report back to you, and that's exactly what I did

    -snip-

    http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor..._leak_quotes_1
  15. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
       #55  
    Uh Oh. Scottie pissed off the press corp.

    Spokesman Holds Tongue During Intense Grilling

    By Dana Milbank
    Post
    Tuesday, July 12, 2005; A04


    On the north lawn of the White House yesterday afternoon, gardeners were taking a chain saw and wood chipper to some tree branches. Inside the briefing room, reporters were taking press secretary Scott McClellan to the woodshed.

    It was journalists' first chance to grill McClellan on camera since coming to the conclusion that he had misled them 18 months ago when he said President Bush's top political aide, Karl Rove, had nothing to do with the unmasking of a CIA operative. The recipients of McClellan's bum steer were furious -- hectoring him more than questioning him.

    "This is ridiculous!"

    "You're in a bad spot here, Scott."

    "Have you consulted a personal attorney?"

    The 32-minute pummeling was perhaps the worst McClellan received since he got the job two years ago. His eyes were red and tired. He wiggled his foot nervously behind the lectern and robotically refused to answer no fewer than 35 questions about Rove and the outing of the CIA's Valerie Plame. Twenty-two times McClellan repeated that an "ongoing" investigation prevented him from explaining the gap between his past statements and the facts.

    In September 2003, McClellan said that anybody found to be involved in the Plame unmasking "would no longer be in this administration." He said that any suggestion of Rove's involvement was "ridiculous." But in recent days, Rove's lawyer and an internal Time magazine e-mail confirmed that Rove told Time that the wife of administration critic and former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV was with the CIA.

    This produced a frenzy in the briefing room yesterday, where McClellan's long opening statement about the 10th anniversary of the Srebrenica massacre did not distract the reporters.

    The Associated Press's Terry Hunt led off. "Does the president stand by his pledge to fire anyone involved in the leak of a name of a CIA operative?"

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...101284_pf.html
    _________________________________________________________________

    Now some may be thinking this was just a ploy to discredit Wilson for political payback. But I think it goes much deeper than that. I think this was a ploy to cover up the falseness of the intel that the WH knew was bad. They tried to discredit Joe Wilson cause he (Joe Wilson) mentioned the "Niger yellowcake" intel was untrue and as it turned out, we come to find out later that the document Cheney referred to was a forgery and a bad one at that no less. We all know Cheney is a liar when it comes to the reasons for the Iraq war or anything to do with the Iraq war (Proof Here). What we are seeing here is the tightly wound 'pack of lies' being unraveled. I am going to enjoy watching this progress in the coming weeks.
  16. #56  
    Quote Originally Posted by gfunkmagic
    Reportedly he didn't reveal the name though... But I couldn't care less about Rove anyway. Even if he does go down, he's just an unelected political operative anyway...
    The law says 'identity' not 'name'.


    A traitor as the president's closest advisor is something you couldn't care less about.

    Treason in the white house trumps a stain on a blue dress any day!
  17. #57  
    That is hilarious! I'd love to kick back and watch it unfold but I get riled up just thinking about it...

    Quote Originally Posted by NRG
    Uh Oh. Scottie pissed off the press corp.

    Spokesman Holds Tongue During Intense Grilling

    By Dana Milbank
    Post
    Tuesday, July 12, 2005; A04


    On the north lawn of the White House yesterday afternoon, gardeners were taking a chain saw and wood chipper to some tree branches. Inside the briefing room, reporters were taking press secretary Scott McClellan to the woodshed.

    It was journalists' first chance to grill McClellan on camera since coming to the conclusion that he had misled them 18 months ago when he said President Bush's top political aide, Karl Rove, had nothing to do with the unmasking of a CIA operative. The recipients of McClellan's bum steer were furious -- hectoring him more than questioning him.

    "This is ridiculous!"

    "You're in a bad spot here, Scott."

    "Have you consulted a personal attorney?"

    The 32-minute pummeling was perhaps the worst McClellan received since he got the job two years ago. His eyes were red and tired. He wiggled his foot nervously behind the lectern and robotically refused to answer no fewer than 35 questions about Rove and the outing of the CIA's Valerie Plame. Twenty-two times McClellan repeated that an "ongoing" investigation prevented him from explaining the gap between his past statements and the facts.

    In September 2003, McClellan said that anybody found to be involved in the Plame unmasking "would no longer be in this administration." He said that any suggestion of Rove's involvement was "ridiculous." But in recent days, Rove's lawyer and an internal Time magazine e-mail confirmed that Rove told Time that the wife of administration critic and former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV was with the CIA.

    This produced a frenzy in the briefing room yesterday, where McClellan's long opening statement about the 10th anniversary of the Srebrenica massacre did not distract the reporters.

    The Associated Press's Terry Hunt led off. "Does the president stand by his pledge to fire anyone involved in the leak of a name of a CIA operative?"

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...101284_pf.html
    _________________________________________________________________

    Now some may be thinking this was just a ploy to discredit Wilson for political payback. But I think it goes much deeper than that. I think this was a ploy to cover up the falseness of the intel that the WH knew was bad. They tried to discredit Joe Wilson cause he (Joe Wilson) mentioned the "Niger yellowcake" intel was untrue and as it turned out, we come to find out later that the document Cheney referred to was a forgery and a bad one at that no less. We all know Cheney is a liar when it comes to the reasons for the Iraq war or anything to do with the Iraq war (Proof Here). What we are seeing here is the tightly wound 'pack of lies' being unraveled. I am going to enjoy watching this progress in the coming weeks.
  18. #58  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    Yes, the most effective in the past several decades, unfortunately. At least his fanatsy of privatizing SS is going nowhere fast.
    Very nice. Learning something from politicians? *Stay on message* they are told. Whenever something comes up, just point everything toward a small set of issues. If you were a republican, you'd tie in terrorism some way. :-)
  19. #59  
    Quote Originally Posted by NRG
    Uh Oh. Scottie pissed off the press corp.


    Now some may be thinking this was just a ploy to discredit Wilson for political payback. But I think it goes much deeper than that. I think this was a ploy to cover up the falseness of the intel that the WH knew was bad. They tried to discredit Joe Wilson cause he (Joe Wilson) mentioned the "Niger yellowcake" intel was untrue and as it turned out, we come to find out later that the document Cheney referred to was a forgery and a bad one at that no less. We all know Cheney is a liar when it comes to the reasons for the Iraq war or anything to do with the Iraq war (Proof Here). What we are seeing here is the tightly wound 'pack of lies' being unraveled. I am going to enjoy watching this progress in the coming weeks.

    This scandal, as Frank Rich said in the NYTimes, "is worse than Watergate."

    http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/10/op...10rich.html?hp

    "...now that my colleague Judy Miller has been taken away in shackles for refusing to name the source for a story she never wrote. No reporter went to jail during Watergate. No news organization buckled like Time. No one instigated a war on phony premises. This is worse than Watergate...

    ...This scandal didn't begin, as Watergate did, simply with dirty tricks and spying on the political opposition. It began with the sending of American men and women to war in Iraq.

    Specifically, it began with the former ambassador Joseph Wilson's July 6, 2003, account on the Times Op-Ed page (and in concurrent broadcast appearances) of his 2002 C.I.A. mission to Africa to determine whether Saddam Hussein had struck a deal in Niger for uranium that might be used in nuclear weapons. Mr. Wilson concluded that there was no such deal, as my colleague Nicholas Kristof reported, without divulging Mr. Wilson's name, that spring. But the envoy's dramatic Op-Ed piece got everyone's attention: a government insider with firsthand knowledge had stepped out of the shadows of anonymity to expose the administration's game authoritatively on the record. He had made palpable what Bush critics increasingly suspected, writing that "some of the intelligence related to Iraq's nuclear weapons program was twisted to exaggerate the Iraqi threat."

    Up until that point, the White House had consistently stuck by the 16 incendiary words in President Bush's January 2003 State of the Union address: "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa." The administration had ignored all reports, not just Mr. Wilson's, that this information might well be bogus. But it still didn't retract Mr. Bush's fiction some five weeks after the State of the Union, when Mohamed ElBaradei, the director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, announced that the uranium claim was based on fake documents. Instead, we marched on to war in Iraq days later. It was not until Mr. Wilson's public recounting of his African mission more than five months after the State of the Union that George Tenet at long last released a hasty statement (on a Friday evening, just after the Wilson Op-Ed piece) conceding that "these 16 words should never have been included in the text written for the president."

    ...they told the columnist Robert Novak that Mr. Wilson had secured his (nonpaying) African mission through the nepotistic intervention of his wife, a covert C.I.A. officer whom they outed by name. The pettiness of this retribution shows just how successfully Mr. Wilson hit the administration's jugular: his revelation threatened the legitimacy of the war on which both the president's reputation and re-election campaign had been staked.

    This was another variation on a Watergate theme. Charles Colson's hit men broke into the office of Daniel Ellsberg's psychiatrist, seeking information to smear Mr. Ellsberg after he leaked the Pentagon Papers, the classified history of the Vietnam War, to The Times. But there was even greater incentive to smear Mr. Wilson than Mr. Ellsberg. Nixon compounded the Vietnam War but didn't start it. The war in Iraq, by contrast, is Mr. Bush's invention..."
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  20. #60  
    Quote Originally Posted by KRamsauer
    Very nice. Learning something from politicians? *Stay on message* they are told. Whenever something comes up, just point everything toward a small set of issues. If you were a republican, you'd tie in terrorism some way. :-)
    I mentioned that because it's always been a long standing fantasy of Rove's. You don't really think Bush has ever had an original idea do you?
Page 3 of 21 FirstFirst 1234567813 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions