Karl Rove - creepy s***bag - Page 5

scaeagles · 07-07-2005, 12:35 PM

Am I that predictable? Gosh, I feel the need to bring up marijuana usage to throw you guys off balance.....

Who knows. It could be Rove. If it is, throw him to the wolves. I would find it more likely that Rove would give the info to someone not associated with the campaign (or on the far, far outskirts of it) if he wanted the info leaked. Call him what you will, but he's smart. Too smart to be directly linked to it. And way, way to smart to tell it directly to someone at the NYT....like I said, that would become the story, and would be have been tremendously damaging to the campaign.

scaeagles · 07-12-2005, 10:52 AM

I find it interesting that the NY Times won't reveal their source, yet they are going after Rove as if he is. If he is the source, then they should come out and say so. If he is not the source, then they should not act as if he is.

The NY Times wants to have it both ways. They want to act as if Rove is the source without saying if he is or not. This is not to excuse Rove should he be the source - I have said before if he is, he should be fired and prosecuted.

wendybeth · 07-12-2005, 11:24 AM

It's obvious what they're doing (Rove's handlers)- they are slowly acclimating people to the idea that Rove might be involved, and spinning it like crazy. By the time the full extent of his involvement is divulged, they hope that people might be bored with it, or desensitized to the whole subject, etc. Look for a character assassination on Plame and her hubby as well, although they've been making snotty little comments about them all along. The spin they are putting on his e-mail is just ridiculous and strains credulity, especially with his track record.

SacTown Chronic · 07-12-2005, 11:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scaeagles

This is not to excuse Rove should he be the source - I have said before if he is, he should be fired and prosecuted.

Let your voice be heard.

wendybeth · 07-12-2005, 11:31 AM

Thanks, Sactown.

Scrooge McSam · 07-12-2005, 01:07 PM

You really enjoyed that, didn't you, Sac? LOL

scaeagles · 07-12-2005, 02:46 PM

Well, if there are going to be links to move on, I'll link a factual article from NRO -

http://www.nationalreview.com/york/york200507121626.asp

Says it better than I ever could. Rove didn't do it.

Motorboat Cruiser · 07-12-2005, 02:58 PM

scaeagles,

Any thoughts on why Scott McClellan didn't just say that Rove didn't do it in the press conference yesterday, if that is actually the case? Sure seems like he took a beating for nothing.

scaeagles · 07-12-2005, 03:07 PM

No thoughts on that, really.

wendybeth · 07-12-2005, 04:38 PM

Oh, he was trying to warn Time, to help them not publish an erroneous report....Too bad he didn't do the same for Newsweek.

Karl Rove: Martyred media samaritan.

07-07-2005, 12:35 PM	#1
scaeagles I LIKE! Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 7,819	Am I that predictable? Gosh, I feel the need to bring up marijuana usage to throw you guys off balance..... Who knows. It could be Rove. If it is, throw him to the wolves. I would find it more likely that Rove would give the info to someone not associated with the campaign (or on the far, far outskirts of it) if he wanted the info leaked. Call him what you will, but he's smart. Too smart to be directly linked to it. And way, way to smart to tell it directly to someone at the NYT....like I said, that would become the story, and would be have been tremendously damaging to the campaign.
	Submit to Quotes

07-12-2005, 10:52 AM	#2
scaeagles I LIKE! Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 7,819	I find it interesting that the NY Times won't reveal their source, yet they are going after Rove as if he is. If he is the source, then they should come out and say so. If he is not the source, then they should not act as if he is. The NY Times wants to have it both ways. They want to act as if Rove is the source without saying if he is or not. This is not to excuse Rove should he be the source - I have said before if he is, he should be fired and prosecuted.
	Submit to Quotes

07-12-2005, 11:24 AM	#3
wendybeth Nevermind Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 7,847	It's obvious what they're doing (Rove's handlers)- they are slowly acclimating people to the idea that Rove might be involved, and spinning it like crazy. By the time the full extent of his involvement is divulged, they hope that people might be bored with it, or desensitized to the whole subject, etc. Look for a character assassination on Plame and her hubby as well, although they've been making snotty little comments about them all along. The spin they are putting on his e-mail is just ridiculous and strains credulity, especially with his track record. __________________
	Submit to Quotes

07-12-2005, 11:31 AM	#5
wendybeth Nevermind Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 7,847	Thanks, Sactown. __________________
	Submit to Quotes

07-12-2005, 01:07 PM	#6
Scrooge McSam What? Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 1,635	You really enjoyed that, didn't you, Sac? LOL
	Submit to Quotes

07-12-2005, 02:46 PM	#7
scaeagles I LIKE! Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 7,819	Well, if there are going to be links to move on, I'll link a factual article from NRO - http://www.nationalreview.com/york/york200507121626.asp Says it better than I ever could. Rove didn't do it.
	Submit to Quotes

07-12-2005, 02:58 PM	#8
Motorboat Cruiser Cruiser of Motorboats Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: So Cal Posts: 3,665	scaeagles, Any thoughts on why Scott McClellan didn't just say that Rove didn't do it in the press conference yesterday, if that is actually the case? Sure seems like he took a beating for nothing.
	Submit to Quotes

07-12-2005, 03:07 PM	#9
scaeagles I LIKE! Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 7,819	No thoughts on that, really.
	Submit to Quotes

07-12-2005, 04:38 PM	#10
wendybeth Nevermind Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 7,847	Oh, he was trying to warn Time, to help them not publish an erroneous report....Too bad he didn't do the same for Newsweek. Karl Rove: Martyred media samaritan. __________________
	Submit to Quotes