As late as last night, I felt no hope that Karl Rove would face justice. In an administration, of which he is largely credited as being "The Architect", responsibilty and truth are things to be avoided, both personally and politically. So, in the America they rule, truth and justice are seldom, if ever, seen, and responsibilty is something the other guy is supposed to take. These are a bunch as slippery as a bucket of eels.
The Democrats, individually, and as a Party have been largely impotent against The House that Rove Built. A weird combination of weakness, lack of will, a debt far too deep to Special Interests, and absolutely no idea what to do next has left most Democratic electeds looking stupid, disloyal, dishonest, and frankly, like a big bunch of appeasist invertabrates. Oh, the Democrats have aided and abetted this notion to a nearly criminal degree, but Rove has had a hand in their humiliating downward spiral. All but a handful now deserve, and get, nothing but scorn from people who, like me, have been life-long Democrats for ideological reasons... people who believe wars should be fought defensively, and only as a last resort, after all diplomatic efforts have failed; people who believe in social justice, equality, respect for human and civil rights, equal education, equal opportunity; people who believe in the seperation of Church amd State; People who hold what used to be the unwavering ideals of the REAL Democratic Party close and dear to their hearts, and weap inside every day for what this Party has become. Rove is responsible for changing the atmosphere and circumstances under which Democrats must now get elected and re-elected, that is true... but the Democrats' cynical move to the Center, which has made them collude with the other side in fear of their very political lives have elicited but disgust from true ideological Democrats. The Democratic Party has been largely rendered, save for a few truly intrepid and courageous souls, a rudderless boat in a sea of Rove-made Neo-Con filth and slime. And we are losing every election cycle because of it.
Because of this success by the Other Side, I felt that Rove might never be brought to justice. But, I awoke this morning to three articles which, when read in the order I will give them in, provide a roadmap to what could be the inevitable downfall of Karl Rove. Dare we have a glimmer of hope in our hearts? Well, you decide.
It Appears That Karl Rove Is In Serious Trouble By JOHN W. DEAN, Friday, Jul. 15, 2005
Excerpt:
The Jonathan Randel Leak Prosecution PrecedentI am referring to the prosecution and conviction of Jonathan Randel. Randel was a Drug Enforcement Agency analyst, a PhD in history, working in the Atlanta office of the DEA. Randel was convinced that British Lord Michael Ashcroft (a major contributor to Britain's Conservative Party, as well as American conservative causes) was being ignored by DEA, and its investigation of money laundering. (Lord Ashcroft is based in South Florida and the off-shore tax haven of Belize.) Randel leaked the fact that Lord Ashcroft's name was in the DEA files, and this fact soon surfaced in the London news media. Ashcroft sued, and learned the source of the information was Randel. Using his clout, soon Ashcroft had the U.S. Attorney in pursuit of Randel for his leak.
By late February 2002, the Department of Justice indicted Randel for his leaking of Lord Ashcroft's name. It was an eighteen count
"kitchen sink" indictment; they threw everything they could think of at Randel. Most relevant for Karl Rove's situation, Court One
of Randel's indictment alleged a violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 641. This is a law that prohibits theft (or
conversion for one's own use) of government records and information for non-governmental purposes. But its broad language covers leaks, and it has now been used to cover just such actions. Randel, faced with a life sentence (actually, 500 years) if convicted on all counts, on the advice of his attorney, pleaded guilty to violating Section 641. On January 9, 2003, Randel was sentenced to a year in a federal prison, followed by three years probation. This sentence prompted the U.S. Attorney to boast that the conviction of Randel made a good example of how the Bush Administration would handle leakers.
The Randel Precedent -- If Followed -- Bodes Ill For RoveKarl Rove may be able to claim that he did not know he was leaking "classified information" about a "covert agent," but
there can be no question he understood that what he was leaking was "sensitive information." The very fact that Matt Cooper called it "double super secret background" information suggests Rove knew of its sensitivity, if he did not know it was classified information (which by definition is sensitive).
United States District Court Judge Richard Story's statement to Jonathan Randel, at the time of sentencing, might have an
unpleasant ring for Karl Rove. Judge Story told Randel that he surely must have appreciated the risks in leaking DEA information.
"Anything that would affect the security of officers and of the operations of the agency would be of tremendous concern, I think, to any law-abiding citizen in this country," the judge observed. Judge Story concluded this leak of sensitive information
was "a very serious crime." "In my view," he explained, "it is a very serious offense because of the risk that comes with it, and part of that risk is because of the position" that Randel held in DEA. But the risk posed by the information Rove leaked is multiplied many times over; it occurred at a time when the nation was considering going to war over weapons of mass destruction. And Rove was risking the identity of, in attempting to discredit, a WMD proliferation expert, Valerie Plame Wilson.
Entire article:
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20050715.html--------------------
Then, move on to this article, where we find out that it is
not Judith Miller who told Rove about Plame, but Robert Novak:
Rove Says He Learned about CIA Officer's Name from Bob Novak Excerpt:
WASHINGTON, July 14 - Karl Rove, the White House senior adviser, spoke with the columnist Robert D. Novak as he was preparing an article in July 2003 that identified a C.I.A. officer who was undercover, someone who has been officially briefed on the matter said Thursday.
Mr. Rove has told investigators that he learned from the columnist the name of the C.I.A. officer, who was referred to by her maiden name, Valerie Plame, and the circumstances in which her husband, former Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, traveled to Africa to investigate possible uranium sales to Iraq, the person said.
>snip<
The conversation between Mr. Novak and Mr. Rove seemed almost certain to intensify the question about whether one of Mr. Bush's closest political advisers played a role in what appeared to be an effort to undermine Mr. Wilson's credibility after he challenged the veracity of a key point in Mr. Bush's 2003 State of the Union speech, alleging that Saddam Hussein had sought nuclear fuel in Africa.
The conversation with Mr. Novak took place three days before Mr. Rove spoke with Matthew Cooper, a Time magazine reporter, whose e-mail message about their conversation reignited the issue. In the message, whose contents were reported by Newsweek this week, Mr. Cooper said to his editors that Mr. Rove had talked about Ms. Wilson, although not by name.
Entire Article:
http://digbig.com/4dytq--------------------
The last piece (actually an Op-Ed), is from this morning's NYT, by the ever-courageous Paul Krugman:
Karl Rove's America By PAUL KRUGMAN, Published: July 15, 2005
Excerpt:
John Gibson of Fox News says that Karl Rove should be given a medal. I agree: Mr. Rove should receive a medal from the American Political Science Association for his pioneering discoveries about modern American politics. The medal can, if necessary, be delivered to his prison cell.
What Mr. Rove understood, long before the rest of us, is that we're not living in the America of the past, where even partisans sometimes changed their views when faced with the facts. Instead, we're living in a country in which there is no longer such a thing as nonpolitical truth. In particular, there are now few, if any, limits to what conservative politicians can get away with: the faithful will
follow the twists and turns of the party line with a loyalty that would have pleased the Comintern.
I first realized that we were living in Karl Rove's America during the 2000 presidential campaign, when George W. Bush began saying things about Social Security privatization and tax cuts that were simply false. At first, I thought the Bush campaign was making a big mistake - that these blatant falsehoods would be condemned by prominent Republican politicians and Republican economists, especially those who had spent years building reputations as advocates of fiscal responsibility. In fact, with hardly any exceptions they lined up to praise Mr. Bush's proposals.
>snip<
A less insightful political strategist might have hesitated right after 9/11 before using it to cast the Democrats as weak on national security. After all, there were no facts to support that accusation. But Mr. Rove understood that the facts were irrelevant. For one thing, he knew he could count on the administration's supporters to obediently accept a changing story line. Read the before-and-after columns by pro-administration pundits about Iraq: before the war they castigated the C.I.A. for understating the threat posed by Saddam's W.M.D.; after the war they castigated the C.I.A. for exaggerating the very same threat. Mr. Rove also understands, better than anyone else in American politics, the power of smear tactics. Attacks on someone who contradicts the official line don't have to be true, or even plausible, to undermine that person's effectiveness. All they have to do is get a lot of media play, and they'll create the sense that there must be something wrong with the guy.
Entire Op-Ed:
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/15/opinion/15krugman.html?hpKrugman goes on to say that these very tactics are now being used to smear Joseph Wilson as he tries to bring Rove to justice.
Maybe I'm just delusional. Maybe it's because the news of the day to come hasn't worn me down yet. Maybe I just still believe that the human soul is inherently hopeful... but reading these three pieces give me hope this morning, that justice will be done, and America's interests will finally be served. As they say: "Hope springs eternal..."
TC
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
