Turn Up the Heat

Rove under fire
White House won't answer questions on new evidence in leak

Nearly two years after stating that any administration official found to have been involved in leaking the name of an undercover CIA 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 refused on Monday to answer any questions about new evidence of Rove's role in the matter.

- Richard W. Stevenson, New York Times (via SFGate)-

Well, it is surprising, isn't it, that the White House - once full of confident denials - is now so reticent regarding the possibility of Rove and/or other Bush Admin. muckety-mucks playing roles in the outing of Valerie Plame. Surprising because this is an administration that has never let the truth, or lack thereof, get in the way of whatever evil agenda it was pushing (two small examples: Official altered reports on links to global warming and, of course, those infamously missing WOMD in Iraq). Why not simply continue to deny that Rove ever spoke to Time magazine at all, despite what Rove himself, or his attorney claim? That would certainly be in keeping with the Bush Administration's habitual refutation/distortion of the obvious.

Rove Told Reporter of Plame's Role But Didn't Name Her, Attorney Says

Rove had a short conversation with Time magazine reporter Matthew Cooper on July 11, 2003, three days before Robert D. Novak publicly exposed Plame in a column about her husband, Joseph C. Wilson IV. Wilson had come under attack from the White House for his assertions that he found no evidence Iraq was trying to buy uranium from Niger and that he reported those findings to top administration officials. Wilson publicly accused the administration of leaking his wife's identity as a means of retaliation.

- Josh White, Washington Post -

So rove mentioned Plame's role in the CIA but not her name mere days before her cover was blown? Even with the high levels of dopamine in my brain, that is stretching the bounds of coincidence just a bit. Still, it is possible that Rove is innocent as a fluffy bunny (unlikely but possible). It must be underlined, however, that if Rove did not name Plame, somebody in George W. Bush's administration did.

And even if it was only one person who spoke Plame's name to the press, the whole corrupt Bush gang is complicit.