Apparently NYT Doing A BIG Frontpage Piece on Rove Tomorrow

[writes2000]

This is according to the Drudge Report (yes, I'm embarrassed that I went there.)

According to the summary on that website, the NYT is going after Rove big time. It claims that they are furious over the treatment of Judith Miller and they're letting it all out.

[Nite Owl]

1. Front page?

I might even buy a copy.

Welcome to DU!:hi:

[NYC Liberal]

3. Me too!

[johnfunk]

17. the NY Times should be APOLOGIZING for Miller

Let's not forget that Judith 'Kneepads for Chalabi' Miller managed to undermine a federal investigation into proto-Islamic charities tied to allegedly violent groups. Seems someone tipped off Judy Kneepads and she called the charities.

Hey, Judy -- why od you hate the war on terror so much? Rot in prison, treasonous little beeyotch.

[writes2000]

5. Thanks.

I love coming here. I'm so enraged over the Rove thing. It's great to find comfort with like-minded people.

[eleny]

9. hi and welcome to du!

[sendero]

2. Well, isn't that special....

... they were so incensed at her abject failure to get anything correct in the leadup to the invasion they published a weak mea culpa.

But now that she's violating a valid court order she's a heroine? Bullshit, she is a cheap media whore protecting her own ass.

But I suppose that an honest assessment of Rove, perhaps the lowest form of human life in politics today, is something.

[mirandapriestly]

7. Yeah, she's no hero, but ANYTHING to see Rove get it, heh heh NT

[im10ashus]

4. You can read it online now:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/11/politics/11cnd-rove.html?ei=5094&en=5040c3f3cc9a86d2&hp=&ex=1121140800&adxnnl=1&partner=homepage&adxnnlx=1121133332-b+kK9luEDJba1Hyt9+HMsw

July 11, 2005
Rove Comes Under New Scrutiny in C.I.A. Disclosure Case
By DAVID STOUT
WASHINGTON, July 11 - The White House went on the defensive today amid a barrage of questions from Democrats and reporters about the presidential adviser Karl Rove and whether he had disclosed the name of a covert intelligence operative in retaliation for criticism of the administration's Iraq policy.

President Bush's chief spokesman, Scott McClellan, declined to repeat his earlier assertions that Mr. Rove, the deputy White House chief of staff, had nothing to do with leaking the name of the operative, Valerie Plame of the Central Intelligence Agency, to get back at her husband, a former United States ambassador who had publicly challenged Bush administration policy.

Nor would Mr. McClellan repeat his earlier statements that any White House staff person who had leaked the name should be fired.

"The president directed the White House to cooperate fully with the investigation, and as part of cooperating fully with the investigation, we made a decision that we weren't going to comment on it while it is ongoing," Mr. McClellan said at a news briefing.

His comments came as Democrats began to intensify the pressure on the White House.


cont'd.

[writes2000]

8. I Hope It's More Than That.

[tuvor]

14. You should have included a warning.

A huge ad for tucker carlson's show accompanies that article.

My eyes!

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

16. You mean this:

:evilgrin:

[tuvor]

18. That was totally uncalled for.

What'd I ever do to you???

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

23. LOL.

:hurts:

[applegrove]

6. Wow. Forget the fact that they are doing a story on Rove. They are

putting something on Page 1. That is the real news!

[Lex]

19. No kidding. Excellent point! nt

[applegrove]

10. And it would be just like a 'mechanic' like Rove to free up Cooper, to

speak, and not Miller. Knowing what each of them knows. He would do that. The implication or assumption that comes out of Cooper being freed to talk about his discussion with Rove is that Miller had a different source. Manipulators play with our assumptions.

If I was the NYTimes and Cooper had been freed but not Miller - by Rove - I would be seething too.

[writes2000]

11. I Bet NYT Is Furious w/Miller's Source

It's disgusting that they won't come forward. It again shows how cowardly, how nefarious, how un-heroic these people are.

[johnfunk]

20. I bet Miller ain't talking because SHe probably gave Rove...

the 411 on Plame.

scenario:

Miller reads Joe Wilson's piece in WaPo.
Miller freaks, since Wilson's findings completely undermine all of her WMD articles. Buh-bye to the Pulitzer.
Miller calls her many intel contacts about what she can do to refute Wilson's facts, and one of them tells her that Wilson's wife is on the anti-WmD-proliferation beat with The Company.
Miller passes on the info to one of the Neocons pushing the fixed WMD intel -- or turd Blossom himself.

Can you say...
TREASON
?

[brettdale]

12. kick

kick

[im10ashus]

13. Here are the stories:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/11/politics/11cnd-rove.html?hp&ex=1121140800&en=5040c3f3cc9a86d2&ei=5094&partner=homepage

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/11/politics/11time.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/11/business/media/11carr.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/11/business/media/11paper.html

[loudsue]

26. I liked this statement in that last article you linked:

"David Boardman, managing editor of The Seattle Times, which is controlled by the Blethen family, was among several editors who wondered aloud whether the ownership of broadcast stations and cable systems, licensed by the government, was affecting editors' ability to stand firm against government pressure.

"I'm fortunate to work for an independent publisher who has no hesitation to challenge government through journalism," Mr. Boardman said."




:patriot: Go Freedom of the Press!!! :patriot:

:kick::kick::kick:

[kestrel91316]

15. Earth to NYT:

It isn't even really about Rove

It's about who with security clearance, in the know about Plame, leaked to Rove. There are folks higher up than Rove in this thing, and IMHO they should hang.

[brettdale]

21. NYT

That would be too much to hope for.

[RagAss]

22. kick.....the cell door shut !!!!!

[inanna]

24. Nominated!

Excellent read.

[hedda_foil]

25. Here's the story that Drudge is referring to. It's dated 7/12

The others are dated 7/11, though they may be included in the print edition tomorrow. Here's the latest story.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/12/politics/12rove.html?hp&ex=1121140800&en=722d41bfc0b4802a&ei=5094&partner=homepage

At White House, a Day of Silence on Rove's Role in C.I.A. Leak

y RICHARD W. STEVENSON
Published: July 12, 2005

WASHINGTON, July 11 - Nearly two years after stating that any administration official found to have been involved in leaking the name of an undercover C.I.A. officer would be fired, and assuring that Karl Rove and other senior aides to President Bush had nothing to do with the disclosure, the White House on Monday refused to answer any questions about new evidence of Mr. Rove's role in the matter.

With the White House silent, Democrats rushed in, demanding that the administration provide a full account of any involvement by Mr. Rove, one of the president's closest advisers, turning up the political heat in the case and leaving some Republicans worried about the possible effects on Mr. Bush's second-term agenda.

Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the Democratic leader, cited Mr. Bush's statements about firing anyone involved in the leak and said, "I trust they will follow through on this pledge."

...

In two contentious news briefings, the White House press secretary, Scott McClellan, would not directly address any of a barrage of questions about Mr. Rove's involvement, a day after new evidence suggested that Mr. Rove had discussed the C.I.A. officer with a reporter from Time magazine in July 2003 without identifying her by name.


<snip>