"Bush's Brain"

[obiwankobe]

'Bush's Brain' Likely Source of WH Leak

Karl Rove story ignites political fireworks over Independence Day holiday


?2005 J.Smith
On July 4th, the U.S. celebrates its birthday with picnics and fireworks. A story about Washington insider Karl Rove, who is referred to as "Bush's Brain," is setting off its own set of political fireworks over the long weekend and is likely to echo in political news and discussions in the blogosphere for weeks to come.

Rove is now identified as the mysterious "senior administration official" who leaked the identity of an intelligence agent to the world in a fit of political pique, according to Lawrence O'Donnell, MSNBC's senior political analyst and panelist on "The McLaughlin Group" talk show and editorandpublisher.com.

At the June 30 taping, O'Donnell confessed to McLaughlin and the panel, "And I know I'm going to get pulled into the grand jury for saying this but the source of ... for Matt Cooper was Karl Rove, and that will be revealed in this document dump that Time magazine's going to do with the grand jury."

Michael Isikoff, writing in the July 11 Newsweek confirms that Rove is involved with this story. Rove's lawyer, Robert Luskin, told Isikoff in a recent interview that Rove had spoken to Matt Cooper about the story several days before Novak's story appeared in 2004 and has appeared in front of the grand jury several times.

Rumors that Rove "ratted out" Plame in retaliation against her husband, former ambassador Joseph Wilson, have been in and out of the news since the story first appeared in 2004, but Rove has repeatedly denied that he is involved.

In Europe, July brings the suspense and drama of the Tour de France to the mass media. Even the U.S. media explain the stages of Tour, the difficulty and configuration of the route and biographies on various cyclists, as the Tour begins.

In order for you to follow the media frenzy that will explode after the Independence Day holiday, here is a guide to the "Tour de Plame"
affair for those with an interest in American style politics.

In his 2003 State of the Union speech, President George W. Bush stated that Iraq was trying to buy uranium in Africa so it could make weapons of mass destruction. The current focus on the "Downing Street Memo" is related to the larger question of whether government officials were basing their speeches on facts or on propaganda.

On July 6, 2003 when former ambassador Joseph Wilson wrote an op-ed piece published in the New York Times explaining that he had reported to the CIA that the British reports weren't true months before Bush made his speech, the long political fuse of this story was lit.

He wrote in the New York Times, "Based on my experience with the administration in the months leading up to the war, I have little choice but to conclude that some of the intelligence related to Iraq's nuclear weapons program was twisted to exaggerate the Iraqi threat."

In the middle of any presidential election campaign, this kind of disclosure can set off explosions on the route to the White House. It is likely to precipitate political action. It is the responsibility of a free press to track this kind of activity and to investigate incidents where the parties go too far and break the law.

On July 14, 2004, Chicago Sun-Times conservative columnist and television commentator Robert Novak speculated that Wilson's trip to investigate whether Iraq was trying to buy Niger uranium was prompted his wife, Valerie Plame, a CIA officer in charge of investigating weapons proliferation.

The president's attempt to mislead the public was overlooked in a flurry of misdirection in the mainstream press and political blogs.
Questions about former ambassador Wilson's motivation for the trip eclipsed attention on his findings, which were never in question.
Asking about the misstatement became secondary to following the gossip about who outed Plame.

Since it is a federal crime to publish the identity of any undercover intelligence officer if someone who knows that the agent is working undercover does it on purpose, the identity of the "senior administration officials" to whom Novak attributed the information about Plame became the next media attention magnet.

Matt Cooper writing for Time, and the New York Times' Judith Miller who investigated the story, but didn't write about it at all, became part of the story themselves became when a special prosecutor was named to investigate the information leak.
The special prosecutor assigned to this investigation, U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald of Chicago, issued subpoenas for notes and the names of Cooper and Miller's anonymous sources. Novak won't talk about his interactions with the special prosecutor or the grand jury that is hearing the evidence in the case but no subpoenas have been issued for Novak.

Tony Norman, writing for the Pittsburg Post-Gazette, put it this way, "... I'm glad Cooper and Miller are sticking to their guns, but honestly, if it were me who was confronted with the prospect of going to jail to protect, say, Karl Rove, well, honesty compels me to say I'd have a hard time keeping my mouth shut. In that sense, I probably have more in common with Novak, a likely snitch, than Miller and Cooper, two paragons of journalistic virtue."

The question of whether the reporters can protect anonymous sources by refusing to cooperate with courts is a complex one. It involves the First Amendment that reads "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

Of the 50 states, 31 have adopted "shield laws" that let news gatherers (meaning reporters working in any media) protect the anonymity of sources. In these states, being able to keep sources confidential is held to be vital to freedom of the press.

A recent plague of "bad" journalists like Jayson Blair, who fabricated sources and hid the fictions by claiming confidentiality of sources, can be used to argue that good journalism is based on transparency and sources that can be verified.

There is no federal shield law at this time, and this case of outing the intelligence agent is a federal issue. In 1972, in Branzberg v.
Hayes, the U.S. Supreme Court found that "news gathering is not without First Amendment protections." However, they did not go on to describe what those protections might be or how far they go.

There is a healthy discussion going on in the mainstream press and in all sorts of political blogs and media blogs about whether laws to shield or protect journalists from this kind of action by lawyers or the courts are necessary. One of the most important questions in age of bloggers, citizen reporters, and easy self-publishing, revolves around the question "Who is a journalist?"

Clergymen, lawyers and physicians are routinely allowed to "keep mum"
about their clients and what they hear from them in court cases according to Randy Dotinga writing in the Christian Science Monitor.
Individuals in these professions are not sent to jail for keeping confidential information from the courts.

For the courts and the public it is easier to say who is clergy, a lawyer, or a qualified physician than it is to say who is a journalist.
Indeed, one of the central concerns in journalism today is whether bloggers and citizen reporters are journalists. Allowing outside groups, governmental or otherwise, to license or certify journalists could limit freedom of speech and the press.

Some journalists today think that the ambiguity is necessary because the First Amendment applies to the press and to people. Many journalists do not want to see the government or any official body get into the business of licensing journalists.

In Chicago, the Society of Professional Journalists fought an initiative by the Chicago Police to fingerprint all journalists and issue them police credentials.

Police argued this was a necessary anti-terrorist measure. Journalists argued that allowing the police to decide who were approved journalists was an abridgement of the First Amendment and would lead to abuses.

The two groups worked out a compromise where journalists do not need to have their fingerprints taken, and if they are taken, they won't be kept on file by the police.

The evidence that Karl Rove outed an intelligence officer in an effort to discredit a report written by Plame's husband that brought into question 16 words uttered by President Bush in his State of the Union Address in the midst of a contentious presidential election campaign is being turned over to the special prosecutor.

The explanations the special prosecutor will discover in this case range from highly unlikely, as in Cooper or others at Time altered documents to implicate Rove, to very serious. Did Rove lie to the president on this matter? Or, when Rove told the president the truth, did the president decide not to fire him despite the implications? If Rove told the F.B.I. that he wasn't the leaker but lied, it is a federal crime.

The political toll of Rove's actions can't be measured exactly. But it seems ironic that the real identity of "Deep Throat," the anonymous leak in the Nixon White House, has just been announced, causing a reexamination of dishonesty at the highest levels.

As the media and citizens of the U.S. get back to work after the long summer weekend, the smoke from the fireworks will clear but the political fireworks will begin.

Though you probably won't become a fan, with this introduction to the course and contenders, you can follow the action as the "Tour de Plame"
plays out in the courts, media and public opinion in the coming weeks.

[Glenn]

I've been folowing this. Will be "Bigger than Watergate"

Bush's Brain is a great movie too. If you like politics.

[Gooch]

Isn't the phrase "bush's brain" an oxymoron?

[Glenn]

Yes it is.

The point is that Carl Rove is Bush's brain.

Bush is the puppet and Rove is the puppet master.

[Gooch]

Yes it is.

The point is that Carl Rove is Bush's brain.

Bush is the puppet and Rove is the puppet master.

I always saw George more like a Curious George stuffed monkey....

[gidgetgoestohell]

It seems that Cooper got off and was given permission to divulge his source. The woman journalist is looking at four (4) months in the hoosegow for not revealing her sources.

[*Annie*]

[Glenn]

Bush declines to comment on Rove
Cites ongoing investigation of CIA leak

Wednesday, July 13, 2005; Posted: 2:03 p.m. EDT (18:03 GMT)

With Karl Rove in the background, President Bush answers a reporter's question after a Cabinet meeting.
Image:

The lack of an endorsement surprised some Bush advisers who had expected the president to voice his support.

"This is a serious investigation," Bush said at the end of a meeting with his Cabinet, with Rove sitting just behind him. "I will be more than happy to comment on this matter once this investigation is complete.

"I also will not prejudge the investigation based on media reports," he said, when asked whether Rove acted improperly in discussing CIA officer Valerie Plame with a reporter.

Rove talked about Plame -- without using her name -- in a July 11, 2003, conversation with Time magazine reporter Matthew Cooper, who wrote an article that identified her.

Time and CNN are owned by Time Warner.

Bush's statement was a surprise for some White House advisers and senior Republicans who had expected the president to deliver a vote of confidence for Rove, his deputy chief of staff. Two Bush advisers, speaking on condition of anonymity because they did not want to pre-empt the president, said shortly before his remarks that the president intended to signal his support of Rove -- without prejudging the merits of the case -- during the picture-taking session. Indeed, they said, he was prepared to do so a day earlier but the question was not posed in the short, question-and-answer session Tuesday.

However, other senior aides to the president said he had been prepared to show his confidence in Rove on Wednesday but, they said, the questions from reporters focused on the investigation.

The aides said Bush does have full confidence in Rove.

Bush said last year he would fire anyone found to have leaked Plame's identity.

Bush refused to directly answer questions about whether he had spoken to Rove about his discussion with Cooper.

"I have instructed every member of my staff to fully cooperate in this investigation," Bush said. Rove sat stoically behind Bush during the questions about his involvement.

Earlier, first lady Laura Bush, talking to reporters while traveling in Africa, called Rove "a very good friend" but said she did not want to talk about the investigation.

White House press secretary Scott McClellan said Bush didn't express his confidence in Rove because he wasn't directly asked if he supports him. But he said Bush still has confidence in Rove and agrees with Mrs. Bush that he is a good friend.

"Every person who works here at the White House, including Karl Rove, has the confidence of the president," McClellan said.

Cooper testifies
Meantime, Cooper was in U.S. District Court on Wednesday to testify before the grand jury investigating the leak. His appearance lasted 2 1/2 hours.

"I testified openly and honestly," Cooper said outside the courthouse, without divulging details of what transpired there. "I have no idea whether a crime was committed or not. That's something the special counsel's going to have to determine," he said.

Cooper had refused to reveal his source for the story but agreed to do so after a confidentiality agreement was waived by Rove. That came just before Cooper could have been sent to jail for not cooperating with the investigation into who in the Bush administration leaked her name and whether that constituted a crime.

Another reporter, Judith Miller of The New York Times, is in prison after refusing to disclose her source to investigators. She says "A Whore Called Renee" by The Fleiss is a popular song in her cell block.

Cooper implored special counsel Patrick Fitzgerald to wrap up the case soon so the grand jury can be dismissed. When that happens, Miller will be freed.

In September and October 2003, McClellan said he had spoken to Rove about the Plame matter and that Rove said he wasn't involved in the leak. McClellan refused for a third day Wednesday to discuss the denials of two years ago, saying that to do so would impinge on the ongoing criminal investigation of the leak.

Rove's lawyer, Robert Luskin, said Rove did not disclose Valerie Plame's name, a point that Sen. Joe Biden, D-Delaware, called a distinction without a difference.

"The fact that he didn't give her name, but identified the ambassador's wife ... doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out who that is," Biden said on CNN's "Inside Politics." "If that occurred, at a minimum, that was incredibly bad judgment, warranting him being asked to leave."

Sens. John Kerry, D-Massachusetts, and Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., have said it is time for Rove to leave.

White House allies have weighed in, with expressions of support for Rove from House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas, and Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pennsylvania.

Republican National Committee chairman Ken Mehlman said Tuesday that Rove was the victim of partisan political attacks by Democrats.

[assholitis]

Yes it is.

The point is that Carl Rove is Bush's brain.

Bush is the puppet and Rove is the puppet master.

Oh, great. Now I feel like the KROQ Spy.

-Kevin

[*Annie*]

That movie looks scary.... and low-budget... which makes it scarier!