New email discussion between my editor at Op-Ed News and Leopold re: Rove

[stevenleser]

http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_rob_kall_060515_jason_leopold_update.htm

[in_cog_ni_to]

1. I'm with JL on this one! KKKRove IS a LIAR and always WILL BE a LIAR!

Leopold has my support and I believe every word he says. He's right. Why would ANYONE believe a WH spokesperson? That's just NUTS.

[Sydnie]

4. Couldn't agree more

why would Luskin tell TalkLeft to contact the mouthpiece and not just issue the denial himself? THEIR silence is deafening!

[emulatorloo]

10. Luskin's Lack Of Jaw-Flapping is telling, don't you think?

The one thing we have always be able to count on Luskin for was a "statement" full of spin. Suddenly he must take care of his sick cat and refer all calls to some Slick RNC/GOP spokesperson/

[Patsy Stone]

13. That cat story = spending more time with his family

:rofl:

K&R

[Sydnie]

14. the cat got his tongue

that's the only explanation, isn't it? :rofl:

:hug: to you Patsy sweetie!

[emulatorloo]

31. he is allegedly a liberal dem; why no Luskin Cat Posts in the lounge?

Maybe after all this is over, he will reveal his DU screen name and post some good pictures.

[Hepburn]

29. As lawyer I can tell you....

....he would have been better served by saying, "no comment."

[WiseButAngrySara]

7. Leopold believed WH Sources for his story. That may prove to be

equally just NUTS! I believe that Leopold believed his sources. So did Dan Rather. The more I look at KKKRove's past, the more convincing it becomes that Leopold might have been a set-up. Why did Rove cancel his AEI speech, and then show up 'smelling like a rose' this morning? Why was Tweety salivating over the potential (almost impending) Rove indictment last Thursday on IMUS, and on Friday (and one can presume, today) became mum about it?

I smell another Rove Dirty Trick here.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

20. Rove has enemies in the White House...they would be happy....

...to serve as anonymous sources.

The fact that the MSM is totally silent tells me that the story must be correct. Otherwise, they would have immediately started shredding Leopold by Friday evening.

So far, we've gotten nothing from the MSM but crickets chirping.

[Raksha]

35. Good point...and they wouldn't just have shredded Leopold...

they would have shredded the entire lefty blogosphere while they were at it! We all know how much they'd LOVE to have an excuse to do that!

[in_cog_ni_to]

30. *ahem* KKKRove did not cancel his AEI speech. He was on C-SPAN this

morning. As for Tweety on Imus salivating.....Fitz is getting his ducks in a row. SMART when dealing with the likes of KKKRove and the rest of the cabal.

[Garbo 2004]

34. Anyone on TO's mailing list? Just heard an email read on Enid Goldstein's

talk show here in Sacramento. A listener forwarded it to her. It apparently had gone to subscribers to TO's email list and was, she said, authored by Will Pitt.

She read the email which (if I got it right) said that TO had "two sources close to the Fitzgerald investigation" and also "a former high-ranking State Dept official" who had a communication with/from a participant at the meeting at Patton Boggs' offices.

FWIW. Just what I heard on the air.

[alcibiades_mystery]

40. Where's your evidence that Rove cancelled his AEI speech?

If you're referring to the AEI web page which was supposedly scrubbed, please post a before and after screen shot to demonstrate it was scrubbed.

[jaxx]

2. Thanks. I don't believe anything the Rove people have to say....ever.

[Avalux]

3. 5 sources - I believe him -

I can't conceive of why JL would fabricate such a story and he's right - when do we start listening to the WH's people?? They are all liars. The fact that an MSM 'journalist' hasn't been able to verify his story speaks volumes about their lack of skill and savvy. Glorified announcers is all they are.

[Bjornsdotter]

5. Thanks, I'm sticking with JL

...on this one, as if I would believe anything this administration would have to say about anything. :eyes:

Cheers

[bigtree]

6. .

:kick:

[bleever]

8. Thank you, Steven.

Welcome to DU!

[MelissaB]

9. snip

I have five sources on this.

[Sammy Pepys]

11. 5 sources?

And none of them have said a thing to anyone else?

This just gets more unbelievable by the minute. I'd love to think there's something to this....but damn.....

[TahitiNut]

19. Since Wilson reportedly received the same information ...

... it's not logical to assume "none of them have said a thing to anyone else". Such a leap is often indicative of a predisposition. :shrug:

[Sammy Pepys]

24. Good point...I'm still skeptical though

Another thing I noticed, going back through the posts:

This 15 hour meeting on Friday? When did it start? The story was first posted Friday at around 6 PM. Unless I'm getting my Fridays mixed up, that would've meant the meeting started in the middle of the night.

[TahitiNut]

37. I must wonder whether those are "Billable Hours"

I suspect they are. If so, and if the 'source' for that figure is some clerk in a law office somewhere, then we're dealing with the fiction of a lawyer's "billable hours." I don't think I even want to begin to paw through those entrails.

[Justice Is Comin]

38. These are the kind of specifics

in the article that unfortunately got beschmudled up in the translation from the sources. Either they didn't communicate it clearly or Jason worded it wrong.

If you read follow up, you will see that it was not clear if Fitz was there for fourteen and a half hours or only a short time, and then left while other lawyers were going over decisions regarding the charges that were coming.

You will also see that Carballo started changing his story from Luskin not being in his office to not being in his office in the morning. Also, changed his original statement about Fitzgerald being in Chicago to where he wasn't sure if Fitzgerald was in Chicago.

Leopold is downright indignant that his story is being maligned, not just sticking to it, but downright indignant. He has some powerful belief that he was not fed wrong information. It is insane for him to defend his story after all that has been hypothesized of it being wrong.

I think he has made some "excusable error" in literal specifics of his article, but I am going to stand by him as to the indictment of that ferret fucker being publicly indicted and humiliated this week.

[Sammy Pepys]

39. I think that's a huge stretch.....n/t

....

[Media_Lies_Daily]

22. If those sources want to stay employed at the White House....

...why would they go public? They know how the NeoCon Junta deals with those that become disloyal.

[karlrschneider]

27. Why would they need to go any more "public" than they allegedly

did with Leopold? That doesn't make any sense...

[MelissaB]

12. And from Steven's article

here: http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_steven_l_060515_karl_rove_indictment.htm

Again, we do not know at this point whether Leopold’s story is accurate or not and it if is not, we do not know why but I want to point out that if it turns out to not be accurate, there are a lot of possibilities. Rushing to a negative judgment of Jason is unfair until all the facts come out.

[Gregorian]

15. But why would Rove want to discredit Leopold?

That seems like an odd thing. It seems Rove would have bigger fish to fry.

And at the same time, other reporters have connections. And those five sources would certainly want to tell other reporters about the story, if it's this big.



Or in other words, I'm totally confused. :) And hopeful.

[FreeState]

21. Rove wants the blogs and independant media

Rove wants the blogs adn independant media to be discredited IMO. Im not sure if the story is true or not or if Rove is coming after the blogs and independent media that he can't control.

I see it two ways

1) Rove has been indited

or

2) Rove is trying desperately to discredit Blogs and Independent media as a last ditch effort to save himself and the failed presidency/party. (he could also me indited already with this option)

[dalaigh lllama]

36. Hmmm. Does 2+2=Rove?

I noticed some disturbing commentary at the end of the article about blogging cited here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1189042

But their new power will move blogs into the mainstream, and Wiese expects their novelty as independent voices to decline by 2008.

"By that time, campaigns and the press will have developed complex strategies for controlling spin in cyberspace," she writes in her upcoming chapter for a textbook.

(emphasis mine)

Any guesses what strategies she's referring to? This does seem like something Rove would do...

[stevenleser]

25. The particular reporter being discredited would be incidental to

taking attention away from the Leak-Gate stuff that is confirmed to be going on. It also would discredit the entire investigation IMHO. Look at what Rathergate did to the investigations regarding Bush being AWOL. All of a sudden, if you made that assertion, you looked like a crackpot even though we all know it to be true. So the document was a REPRODUCTION of the real thing. That means its true. But look how it was spun?!?!

[Snivi Yllom]

32. he does not want to discredit Leopold

Leopold is nobody to them

this is the result they were looking for

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060515/NEWS05/605150380/1007

[Midlodemocrat]

16. Thank you for posting this, Steven.

I, for one, believe Jason.

[karlrschneider]

17. But what would be the -point- of denying it if it's true?

No way can an actual indictment, if/when it's made, be covered up forever.
I can't imagine why the 'spokesman' wouldn't just say "no comment" rather than a flat denial, that makes no sense to me.

[MelissaB]

18. Maybe it buys time.

For what, I don't know. :shrug:

[TahitiNut]

23. It keeps the story from washing out Smirk's posturing for one thing.

I get this image of little Dutch Boys with appendages inserted in the dikes. :shrug:

They may think there's some time left to play brinksmanship - try to cut a deal.
Even more tinfoilhattish, perhaps some 'event' is in the offing that will consume media attention.
Absolutely nothing can be ruled out when it comes to the possible behavior of this cabal.

[karlrschneider]

26. True enough (your last) but wouldn't a "no comment" accomplish

the same thing? Jeez louise, I just don't get any of this except for one thing: -someone- is lying, that much is fer damn sure.

[longship]

28. Here's the important fact

This is from Rob Kall at OpEdNews:

We also have word that Joe Wilson, Valerie Plame's husband, also heard the same report of Rove's indictment.

Who are ya gonna believe? Rove's people? Or Joseph Wilson?

[pacalo]

33. Thanks for posting.

[npincus]

41. thanks- I'm amazed at how many of us have turned

on one of our own, someone who has worked like hell for us to get the truth out in the daylight, and are leting themselves be manipulated by the biggest gang of liars and crooks ever to run this country.

Shameful.