Evil genius going down? II
Back on July 2, I posted that I thought the dam had actually cracked in regards to the Rove-Plame affair. Scott McClellan's White House news conference today looked more like the signs of a dam about to burst. The White House press corp has been burned one too many times it seems. From WMD to Jeff Gannon to a universal world loathing of the press "toadies" as they are referred to by much of the world's media, this press corp may just be saying, "We've had enough". One can only hope.
Reading the transcript of this event is remarkable enough (whitehouse.gov) but the actual questions show the remarkable venom some of these reporters managed to find. I congratulate them. Now lets see them follow up.
From Bill from Portland Maine's post on kos, here a few of the best questions. The last one of course is the best.
QUESTION: Does the president stand by his pledge to fire anyone involved in a leak of the name of a CIA operative?
QUESTION: Scott, can I ask you this: Did Karl Rove commit a crime?
QUESTION: Do you stand by your statement from the fall of 2003, when you were asked specifically about Karl and Elliot Abrams and Scooter Libby, and you said, I've gone to each of those gentlemen, and they have told me they are not involved in this ?
QUESTION: Scott, this is ridiculous. The notion that you're going to stand before us, after having commented with that level of detail, and tell people watching this that somehow you've decided not to talk. You've got a public record out there. Do you stand by your remarks from that podium or not?
QUESTION: You're in a bad spot here, Scott... (LAUGHTER) ... because after the investigation began---after the criminal investigation was under way---you said, October 10th, 2003, I spoke with those individuals, Rove, Abrams and Libby. As I pointed out, those individuals assured me they were not involved in this, from that podium. That's after the criminal investigation began. Now that Rove has essentially been caught red-handed peddling this information, all of a sudden you have respect for the sanctity of the criminal investigation.
QUESTION: Well, we are going to keep asking them. When did the president learn that Karl Rove had had a conversation with a news reporter about the involvement of Joseph Wilson's wife in the decision to send him to Africa?
QUESTION: Can I finish, please?
QUESTION: Does the president continue to have confidence in Mr. Rove?
QUESTION: So you're not going to respond as to whether or not the president has confidence in his deputy chief of staff?
QUESTION: Scott, I think you're getting this barrage today in part because it is now clear that 21 months ago you were up at this podium saying something that we now know to be demonstrably false. Now, are you concerned that in setting the record straight today that this could undermine the credibility of the other things you say from the podium?
QUESTION: In your dealings with the special counsel, have you consulted a personal attorney?
Reading the transcript of this event is remarkable enough (whitehouse.gov) but the actual questions show the remarkable venom some of these reporters managed to find. I congratulate them. Now lets see them follow up.
From Bill from Portland Maine's post on kos, here a few of the best questions. The last one of course is the best.
QUESTION: Does the president stand by his pledge to fire anyone involved in a leak of the name of a CIA operative?
QUESTION: Scott, can I ask you this: Did Karl Rove commit a crime?
QUESTION: Do you stand by your statement from the fall of 2003, when you were asked specifically about Karl and Elliot Abrams and Scooter Libby, and you said, I've gone to each of those gentlemen, and they have told me they are not involved in this ?
QUESTION: Scott, this is ridiculous. The notion that you're going to stand before us, after having commented with that level of detail, and tell people watching this that somehow you've decided not to talk. You've got a public record out there. Do you stand by your remarks from that podium or not?
QUESTION: You're in a bad spot here, Scott... (LAUGHTER) ... because after the investigation began---after the criminal investigation was under way---you said, October 10th, 2003, I spoke with those individuals, Rove, Abrams and Libby. As I pointed out, those individuals assured me they were not involved in this, from that podium. That's after the criminal investigation began. Now that Rove has essentially been caught red-handed peddling this information, all of a sudden you have respect for the sanctity of the criminal investigation.
QUESTION: Well, we are going to keep asking them. When did the president learn that Karl Rove had had a conversation with a news reporter about the involvement of Joseph Wilson's wife in the decision to send him to Africa?
QUESTION: Can I finish, please?
QUESTION: Does the president continue to have confidence in Mr. Rove?
QUESTION: So you're not going to respond as to whether or not the president has confidence in his deputy chief of staff?
QUESTION: Scott, I think you're getting this barrage today in part because it is now clear that 21 months ago you were up at this podium saying something that we now know to be demonstrably false. Now, are you concerned that in setting the record straight today that this could undermine the credibility of the other things you say from the podium?
QUESTION: In your dealings with the special counsel, have you consulted a personal attorney?
posted by Randall at
7/12/2005 03:16:00 AM
1 Comments:
"Evil Genius?" Come on, Randall! The guy's a nut-job with a hotline straight to Rasputin - who Alexandra thought was a genius too because he could control the Tsaravich's bleeding. Then she and her husband and all their children were murdered. Rasputin, I heard, got murdered by "friends of the crown" rather than Bolsheviks, but the results were the same. Part of him lives on, however... [The Good Part]
But he may yet hold the singular distinction of being the only "high level administration official" to have been fired from TWO Bush administrations for the same offense - leaking secret and/or classified information to reporters as a political assassination tool. Bush-I understood the gravity, as an ex-DCI and seriously involved Iran-Contra plotter. Bush-II just doesn't seem to get it. Dilution apparently isn't the solution to pollution, even of gene pools. ;)
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home