Will Tweetie be the next one to sing? Or will it be Novak? Or Armitage?
Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald has promised a "surprise" witness next week, as he rounds out the government's case in the I. (guess what that means) Lewis "Scooter" Libby perjury and obstruction of justice trial. I'm going out on a limb with some outrageous possibilities.
What about Robert Novak, to whom Rove is alleged to have blabbed prior to the July 14, 2003 publication of the infamous outing piece? We have every reason to believe Novak would rather stick needles in his eyes than throw Rove under the bus. So, unlikely it'll be Novak.
What about Armitage, former Under-Secretary of State? He's an old pal of Rove's. Arm'y made a Libbyesque effort to give Novak an interview and *cough* 'accidentally' tell Novak that Plame/Wilson sent Ambassador Joe to Niger. To quoteNewsweek , "Armitage acknowledged that he had passed along to Novak information contained in a classified State Department memo: that Wilson's wife worked on weapons-of-mass-destruction issues at the CIA. (The memo made no reference to her undercover status.) Armitage had met with Novak in his State Department office on July 8, 2003—just days before Novak published his first piece identifying Plame [and a mere two days after the July 6th Op-Ed by Joe Wilson, the the shit really hit the fan in the WH]." And rumor has it that on June 13, 2003 Arm'y blabbed to Bob Woodward about Ms. Wilson's CIA position and role in sending Ambassador Wilson to Niger [characteristically minus the bit about her covert status]. Yet, again, this wouldn't help Fitz's case against Libby.
Then there's Chris Matthews, the MSNBC poster-boy of punditry. Why him? Because thus far in these proceedings we've heard little, if anything, about Karl Rove's role in the Plame/Wilson outing. Remember that Karl is alleged to have told Tweetie that "the wife" is 'fair game'. [Interesting choice of metaphor, all things considered, since Cheney is the hunter in the White House cadre, and we all know what sorts of things HE considers fair game!] Matthews is an attractive candidate, because he isn't implicated in anything (therefore has no axe to grind; no hidden agenda to be impeached), and because the Rove comment, above all else, speaks of the malice that was focused on Ms. Wilson, and alone of all the evidence thus far produced, is the real smoking gun that says this wasn't just a bunch of political hacks trying to set the record straight, none of whom suspected that a woman working for the CIA could possibly be covert [hard to believe anyone, much less all of them, could be that stoopid]. Rove's comment removes any doubt that this was a calculated set of actions. Even Rove's choice of words speaks volumes: the wife is fair game. Coming, as it did, mere days after Novak's outing, it shows that the real target of their actions was not Wilson, but his wife, for [as they would have it] arranging the trip in the first place.
And there you have it. I'm ready to be edified, and surprised
What about Robert Novak, to whom Rove is alleged to have blabbed prior to the July 14, 2003 publication of the infamous outing piece? We have every reason to believe Novak would rather stick needles in his eyes than throw Rove under the bus. So, unlikely it'll be Novak.
What about Armitage, former Under-Secretary of State? He's an old pal of Rove's. Arm'y made a Libbyesque effort to give Novak an interview and *cough* 'accidentally' tell Novak that Plame/Wilson sent Ambassador Joe to Niger. To quote
Then there's Chris Matthews, the MSNBC poster-boy of punditry. Why him? Because thus far in these proceedings we've heard little, if anything, about Karl Rove's role in the Plame/Wilson outing. Remember that Karl is alleged to have told Tweetie that "the wife" is 'fair game'. [Interesting choice of metaphor, all things considered, since Cheney is the hunter in the White House cadre, and we all know what sorts of things HE considers fair game!] Matthews is an attractive candidate, because he isn't implicated in anything (therefore has no axe to grind; no hidden agenda to be impeached), and because the Rove comment, above all else, speaks of the malice that was focused on Ms. Wilson, and alone of all the evidence thus far produced, is the real smoking gun that says this wasn't just a bunch of political hacks trying to set the record straight, none of whom suspected that a woman working for the CIA could possibly be covert [hard to believe anyone, much less all of them, could be that stoopid]. Rove's comment removes any doubt that this was a calculated set of actions. Even Rove's choice of words speaks volumes: the wife is fair game. Coming, as it did, mere days after Novak's outing, it shows that the real target of their actions was not Wilson, but his wife, for [as they would have it] arranging the trip in the first place.
And there you have it. I'm ready to be edified, and surprised
posted by The Subversive Archaeologist at 2:44 p.m.
1 comments
