Enter your email address to subscribe to Irregular Times and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 371 other subscribers

Irregular Times Newsletters

Click here to subscribe to any or all of our six topical e-mail newsletters:
  1. Social Movement Actions,
  2. Credulity and Faith,
  3. Election News,
  4. This Week in Congress,
  5. Tech Dispatch and
  6. our latest Political Stickers and Such

Contact Us

We can be contacted via retorts@irregulartimes.com

Under Oath

As the Karl Rove debacle gets increasingly interesting and twisty, the New York Times reminds us that:

[Prosecutor] Fitzgerald has questioned a number of high-level administration officials. Mr. Rove has testified three times to the grand jury. I. Lewis Libby, Vice President Dick Cheney’s chief of staff, has also testified. So has former Secretary of State Colin L. Powell. The prosecutor also interviewed Mr. Bush, in his White House office, and Mr. Cheney, but they were not under oath.

Given the connections of all these players to Bush and Cheney, and given what is known so far, isn’t it about time for Bush and Cheney to testify under oath? Why won’t Bush and Cheney testify under oath? What are they afraid of? What did they know, and when did they know it?

12 comments to Under Oath

  • Tom

    Sounds like deja vu all over again, to paraphrase Yogi Berra. Geez, 911 and false information regarding invading Iraq a few years AFTER he talked about it with Blair, and before that the energy meetings at the White House including Enron. It just goes on and on doesn’t it? Anybody getting impeached over it? Anybody losing their job or doing jail time BESIDES journalists and non-govt civilians? i think the Bush regime took a few pages from Idi Amin’s playbook.

  • We learn this morning that Rove testified to a Grand Jury that he did indeed confirm Valerie Plame’s name to Robert Novak, serving as a second source. I smell a Rove crime – naming names and revealing Valerie Plame’s identity not just once but at least twice, as if Rove was determined to get the information out to the public.

    If this testimony is true, who was the primary source?

    And why did the Bush Administration tell the American people that Rove had nothing to do with the Valerie Plame leak? Either Bush has intentionally lied to us, or Karl Rove lied to the President.

    In either case, Rove’s got to go.

  • AngryAmerican

    I can think of an easier question than “Why did the Bush Administration tell the American people Rove had nothing to do with the Valerie Plame leak?”
    It would be WHEN DID THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION TELL THE AMERICAN PEOPLE THE TRUTH ABOUT ANYTHING???????????????????

  • Anonymous

    No, J. Clifford, he didn’t confirm the name. He confirmed her identity. Name and identity are two very, very… ok, similar things.

  • No, Anonymous, we’re talking about a second instance here in which Karl Rove talked to Robert Novak in addition to talking to Cooper.

    These are two very, very… ok, similiar things.

  • Geoff

    Now hold on just a second. Karl Rove never “named” Valerie Plame. He “mentioned” her identity to Cooper, and “confirmed” her name to Novak. That “is” the truth, although that depends on what your definition of “is” is.

  • Mike

    Let us review, then drwa the obvious conclusions:
    1.Bush screams about weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) to the press, Congress, and anybody else that’s sucker enough to believe him, even though his lips were moving.
    2.Ambassador Plame refuted the claims made regarding Iraq’s aleged uranium enrichment program.
    3. Rove “outs” his wife as a CIA covert operative.
    Bush promises to fire anyone that does things like this
    4. Independent investigators determine that Rove did, indeed, “out” her.
    5. Bush fails to fire Rove.
    Now let’s connect the dots and follow the little trail that Dubya wishes to distract us from…you know…the one that leads right back to Dubya.
    Can anybody say,”Conspiricy”? How about “Collusion”?

  • Hoosier Texan

    Ahhh, back from vacation and re-energized!

    No Mike, don’t draw conclusions…draw on facts.

    1 Let us not forget the his wife got Plame his jobe in Niger. I think enopugh people can connect the dots there.

    2 Sorry, no solid proof yet of Rove outting her. Rove was given her name first by the reporter.

    If it turns out Rove did something wrong, fine, fire him. I think he is sneaky and underhanded anyways. A very cocky SOB…reminds me of the far left slime balls. But you still need solid proof.

  • Ralph

    BUZZZ!

    Mike and Hoosier, thank you both for playing.

    Plame is not an ambassador, she has no wife to give a “jobe” to, and there is no “conspiricy.”

    Nice try.

  • Odile

    What I never hear Republicans talk about these days is ethics and morals. Let’s not just talk about Republican legalistic defenses, please. The most important fact is that Karl Rove admits revealing the identity of a secret government agent in order to help the Bush White House score political points.

    On this point alone, he ought to be fired, whether or not a crime was committed. Karl Rove has proven himself to be morally untrustworthy to be an advisor to the President…

    …unless President Bush really wants the most morally unscrupulous people around him to work on his dirty tricks squad.

  • Petite Francine

    Yes, and let us not forget that now an aide to Vice President Dick Cheney was involved in also revealing the secret identity of Valerie Plame, the CIA undercover agent.

    I am now supposed to believe that there was no conspiracy within the Bush Administration?

    Please! I scoff.

  • Ralph

    Well, I haven’t heard any conservative Christian wingnuts come out and say they no longer share Bush’s values.

Leave a Reply

  

  

  

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>