You are perpetuating this lie at your Peril. The Plame case

http://www.americandaily.com/article/8460Playing the Valerie Plame Game
By Isaiah Z. Sterrett (07/27/05) I HAVE TO ADMIT that I haven’t been very attentive to the news lately, mainly because I just got a job in Joe Wilson’s office. He takes care of the missus—shhhh!—while I plan his “investigations.” Next week he’s off to Disney World to “find Mickey.” Look for his upcoming op-ed in the New York Times, tentatively entitled, “What I Found in Orlando.” My current favorite hobby is pretending that—unlike everyone in Washington—I actually didn’t know who Wilson’s wife is. That’s how the game works. I pretend to be shocked when anyone mentions ol’ what’s-her-name. Then I blame my incredulity on Karl Rove, whom I pretend to hate. I call this game “Being a Democrat” or, alternatively, “Chuck Schumer’s Day Off.".................Just as an indication of where this “scandal” has taken political discourse, this is what happened when Bob Novak visited CNN:INTERVIEWER CANDY CROWLEY: Well outside whether you testify—I assume you can't tell us whether you testified at the grand jury or still won't tell us. Outside of that, can you tell us whether you ever told Karl Rove about Valerie Plame's status?NOVAK: I can't tell anything I ever talked to Karl Rove about, because I don't think I ever talked to him about any subject even the time of day, on the record.CROWLEY: Stay tuned. Will you come back and tell us when you can tell us?NOVAK: That would be my pleasure.Obviously, this story is huge.

Apparently Chris has lost interest in this blockbuster.

"How the media created Rovegate"http://www.aim.org/media_monitor_print/3876_0_2_0/

quote: The tragedy is that the special counsel was not charged with investigating whether Wilson and his wife violated federal nepotism laws.

But Porter Goss can. He has been pretty quiet. One speculation that has gotten some play is that the Special Prosecutor may provide Goss with names of "unindicted co-conspirators".Oh, and by the way, "administration officials" could refer to State Dept., as well as White House. Fitzgerald seems interested in the memo that Armitage had prepared for Powell.The Times and the Post are moving away from Rove now. This could end up being very interesting. Al

There's a pretty complete chronology of all this at Counterpunch. Warning: Generally left wing site with occasional good articles.The author, a former NSC staffer, suggests Condi Rice played a part in all this.

What the heck! Might as well "git her" too !

Well, if we are going to bring up weird theories, Arianna "Huff and Puff" Huffington speculates that the original leaker is Judith Miller. Her theory goes like this: Miller writes extensively about WMD's for NYTimes and had sources in CIA. Wilson writes his op-ed in the NYTimes dissing the whole thing. Miller gets p----d because she sees that as a betrayal by her paper. Miller contacts her CIA sources who give her the connection between Plame and Wilson. Miller "tips" Libby/Rove. NYTimes would rather have her in jail than reveal it was one of thier own that was the leak. Hey, I'm just passing on the rumor. It seems everyone else is, so why not me and Huff?Al

My view: The story has lost its legs.....for now.Fitzgerald is no Starr. No perpetual leaks, news conferences, teasers, etc..Starr really was a piece of crap. Fitzgerald is doing it right. Tight lipped.chris.

LL, did it maybe ever occur to you the reason the story has disappeared is because there is no story in the first place, just a bunch of far left hysteria?

Not even remotely Apollo. Its dormant - as it was for many many months before new information trickled to the American people...
Chris.

quote:Originally posted by Lewiston Liberal:
Not even remotely Apollo. Its dormant - as it was for many many months before new information trickled to the American people...
Chris.

What new information? Please be specific. We have already debunked what you started this thread with. Please, please give us some new "facts" to debunk. Al

Al, head, sand = irrelevant.

The NRO has an article that points (as I have stated a number of times) to sources "outside" the White House - State/CIA?Al

LL- Take a nap until your alarmist clock alerts you to the next "scandal"...From nationaljournal.comROVE: A New Mystery Source Emerges

"In the same week" that Bush admin officials "told a syndicated columnist and a Time reporter" that CIA operative Valerie Plame had "initiated her husband's mission" to Niger, an admin official "provided a Washington Post reporter with a similar account." The "episodes" involving columnist Bob Novak and Time's Matt Cooper "have become the subjects of intense scrutiny in recent weeks. But little attention has been paid to what" Post reporter Walter Pincus "has recently described as a separate exchange" on 7/12/03. Pincus says on that day, "an administration official, who was talking to me confidentially about a matter involving alleged Iraqi nuclear activities, veered off the precise matter we were discussing and told me that the White House had not paid attention" to Joe Wilson's Africa trip "because it was a boondoggle arranged by his wife, an analyst with the agency who was working on weapons of mass destruction." Pincus "did not write about the exchange" until 10/03 and "has not identified his source to the public." But a "review" of Pincus's "own accounts and those of other people with detailed knowledge of the case strongly suggest that his source was neither" Dep. WH CoS Karl Rove nor VP Cheney CoS Lewis "Scooter" Libby. Pincus's "most recent account, in the current issue of Nieman Reports," makes "clear that his source had volunteered the information to him, something that people close to" Rove and Libby "have said they did not do in their conversations with reporters." Pincus wrote that he "had agreed to answer questions" from prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald only when "it turned out that my source, whom I still cannot identify publicly, had in fact disclosed to the prosecutor that he was my source, and he talked to the prosecutor about our conversation" (Jehl, New York Times, 7/28). 'Round And 'Round It Goes
Washington Post's Allen: "What is changing is our understanding of the case and who has been talked to. And it has been broader than we realized from the beginning. And the special prosecutor has been very focused on the CIA, the State Department, beyond the White House, for some time."
Washington Post's Vandehei, on Fitzgerald: "Clearly, he was looking, at least early on in the investigation, at a much larger damage control effort by the White House to protect President Bush from any blame for including those now famous 16 words in the State of the Union address. Basically, he's trying to figure out how that leak, the leak of that CIA operative's name, fit into this larger effort and what role the CIA played in this and what role the White House did."
More Vandehei: "And truth be told, nobody knows, except for Fitzgerald ... and people around him, what direction he's going. So most of the reporting, most of our reporting, is based on talking to people who've either gone before the grand jury, talked to prosecutors or represented people in those two instances. So what we can glean is what kind of questions they're being asked, what kind of testimony they're being asked to give. So I think what you're seeing in this story are just different aspects of it being explored" ("Countdown," MSNBC, 7/27). At Least His Name Is Back In The News
Sen. Joe Biden (D-DE) asked Sec/State Condoleezza Rice 7/27 whether UN Amb. nominee John Bolton "had testified" before the grand jury in the Plame investigation. Senate For. Relations Cmte Dems "say they want to determine whether Bolton was truthful when he wrote on a questionnaire for his confirmation hearing that he has not been interviewed in any recent investigations." In a letter to Rice, Biden "referenced an MSNBC report" that stated Bolton was among State Dept. officials who "gave testimony" in the case. Biden asked Rice to tell the cmte "whether Mr. Bolton did, in fact, appear before the grand jury or whether he has been interviewed or otherwise asked to provide information by the special prosecutor or his staff in connection with this matter." The request "comes just two days" before Congress leaves for recess and with the Senate out of session, Bush "could sidestep Congress and install Bolton" as a recess appointment (Sidoti, AP, 7/28). Roberts' Rules
Dems "and their allies are demanding" that Senate Intelligence Cmte chair Pat Roberts "hold hearings" on Rove's involvement in the Plame leak, but Roberts "isn't budging, saying that Rove's role" in it is "already under investigation and that his critics are playing politics." Roberts: "The sharks are in the water. Senate Intelligence has to be nonpartisan" (Bjerga, Knight-Ridder, 7/28). The Second ACT
ACT said 7/28 "it appears" that Plame "supplied the false information that she was 'retired' when she bought two tickets to a Bruce Springsteen concert last fall." An ACT official: "We would not have filled something in." Ticket buyers for the event were "asked to list employer and job" for FEC reports for the "political event." Plame's "anti-Bush ticket purchase raised eyebrows among" GOPers. Rep. Peter King (R-NY): "Valerie Plame has the right to support anyone she wants, but she and her husband can't continue to pose as nonpartisan, public-spirited citizens" (Orin, New York Post, 7/28).

Since most in this group cannot seem to tell between spin and reality, I think it is important to step back and look at the following fact: Bush, Rove and Rumsfeld were wrong about the Yellow Cake Uranium, and they might still be insisting that it was 'real' intelligence if they were not caught in their little lie by Wilson. Wilson was right; Rove, Cheney and Bush were wrong or worse.There is a pattern in AMG, and in the Right in General. You get so involved in assassinating the character of anyone who disagrees with with Mr. 'Mission Accomplished' Bush, you lose sight of the fact that the person you are attacking was right (and that your guys either lied or are criminally stupid).

...might as well bring it back !

Let's see what people with unimpeachable liberal credentials and inside-the-White House experience think...[ 08-01-2005: Message edited by: NoneDare ]

quote:Originally posted by AlAmoling:
Chris
[b]You are perpetuating this lie at your Peril.[/b]

Chris: I actually agree with you here. Rove is a liability at this point. He acted dishonorably and should go.Al-is that your Grandson going to Bolivia? I gave him $20 at Dunkin Donuts.

ksher...where's your proof they were wrong? Let's get a real expert, not Wilson, whose credentials are bogus and political.

FJ:I suppose the WH saying "we shouldn't have included it as it was not secure enough intelligence" is not enough for you.If the WH is not good enough, who is??Chris.

I recall that the White House and CIA admonished themselves for using "foreign" intelligence reports in an American State of the Union Address. They never said the information was untrue.

quote:Originally posted by Lewiston Liberal:
FJ:I suppose the WH saying "we shouldn't have included it as it was not secure enough intelligence" is not enough for you.If the WH is not good enough, who is??Chris.

Chris, the White House never said that the information was bogus (BRITS STILL STAND BY THE INTELLIGENCE - BRITS STILL STAND BY THE INTELLIGENCE - BRITS STILL STAND BY THE INTELLIGENCE), only that the use of a foreign source may not be appropriate, and that the inclusion in the State of the Union address was not necessary. The fact of the matter is that the UNANIMOUS SENATE REPORT stated that Wilson's report actually bolstered the information the CIA alreday had, and tended to confirm the intelligence from other countries. I can't believe that the left is still beating this horse. Al

The following is from the transcript of the 2003 State of the Union Address:

quote: And this Nation is leading the world in confronting and defeating the man-made evil of international terrorism.
There are days when the American people do not hear news about the war on terror. There is never a day when I do not learn of another threat, or receive reports of operations in progress, or give an order in this global war against a scattered network of killers. The war goes on, and we are winning.
To date we have arrested, or otherwise dealt with, many key commanders of al-Qaida. They include a man who directed logistics and funding for the September 11th attacks...the chief of al-Qaida operations in the Persian Gulf who planned the bombings of our embassies in East Africa and the USS Cole...an al-Qaida operations chief from Southeast Asia...a former director of al-Qaida's training camps in Afghanistan...a key al-Qaida operative in Europe..and a major al-Qaida leader in Yemen. All told, more than 3,000 suspected terrorists have been arrested in many countries. And many others have met a different fate. They are no longer a problem for the United States and our friends and allies.
We are working closely with other nations to prevent further attacks. America and coalition countries have uncovered and stopped terrorist conspiracies targeting the American embassy in Yemen...the American embassy in Singapore...a Saudi military base...and ships in the straits of Hormuz, and the straits of Gibraltar. We have broken al-Qaida cells in Hamburg, and Milan, and Madrid, and London, and Paris - as well as Buffalo, New York.
We have the terrorists on the run, and we are keeping them on the run. One by one, the terrorists are learning the meaning of American justice.
As we fight this war, we will remember where it began - here, in our own country. This government is taking unprecedented measures to protect our people and defend our homeland. We have intensified security at the borders and ports of entry...posted more than 50,000 newly trained federal screeners in airports...begun inoculating troops and first responders against smallpox...and are deploying the Nation's first early warning network of sensors to detect biological attack. And this year, for the first time, we are beginning to field a defense to protect this Nation against ballistic missiles.
I thank the Congress for supporting these measures. I ask you tonight to add to our future security with a major research and production effort to guard our people against bio-terrorism, called Project Bioshield. The budget I send you will propose almost six billion dollars to quickly make available effective vaccines and treatments against agents like anthrax, botulinum toxin, Ebola, and plague. We must assume that our enemies would use these diseases as weapons, and we must act before the dangers are upon us.
Since September 11th, our intelligence and law enforcement agencies have worked more closely than ever to track and disrupt the terrorists. The FBI is improving its ability to analyze intelligence, and transforming itself to meet new threats. And tonight, I am instructing the leaders of the FBI, Central Intelligence, Homeland Security, and the Department of Defense to develop a Terrorist Threat Integration Center, to merge and analyze all threat information in a single location. Our government must have the very best information possible, and we will use it to make sure the right people are in the right places to protect our citizens.
Our war against terror is a contest of will, in which perseverance is power. In the ruins of two towers, at the western wall of the Pentagon, on a field in Pennsylvania, this Nation made a pledge, and we renew that pledge tonight: Whatever the duration of this struggle, and whatever the difficulties, we will not permit the triumph of violence in the affairs of men...free people will set the course of history.
Today, the gravest danger in the war on terror...the gravest danger facing America and the world...is outlaw regimes that seek and possess nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons. These regimes could use such weapons for blackmail, terror, and mass murder. They could also give or sell those weapons to their terrorist allies, who would use them without the least hesitation.
This threat is new; America's duty is familiar. Throughout the 20th century, small groups of men seized control of great nations...built armies and arsenals..and set out to dominate the weak and intimidate the world. In each case, their ambitions of cruelty and murder had no limit. In each case, the ambitions of Hitlerism, militarism, and communism were defeated by the will of free peoples, by the strength of great alliances, and by the might of the United States of America. Now, in this century, the ideology of power and domination has appeared again, and seeks to gain the ultimate weapons of terror. Once again, this Nation and our friends are all that stand between a world at peace, and a world of chaos and constant alarm. Once again, we are called to defend the safety of our people, and the hopes of all mankind. And we accept this responsibility.
America is making a broad and determined effort to confront these dangers. We have called on the United Nations to fulfill its charter, and stand by its demand that Iraq disarm. We are strongly supporting the International Atomic Energy Agency in its mission to track and control nuclear materials around the world. We are working with other governments to secure nuclear materials in the former Soviet Union, and to strengthen global treaties banning the production and shipment of missile technologies and weapons of mass destruction.
In all of these efforts, however, America's purpose is more than to follow a process - it is to achieve a result: the end of terrible threats to the civilized world. All free nations have a stake in preventing sudden and catastrophic attack. We are asking them to join us, and many are doing so. Yet the course of this Nation does not depend on the decisions of others. Whatever action is required, whenever action is necessary, I will defend the freedom and security of the American people.
Different threats require different strategies. In Iran, we continue to see a government that represses its people, pursues weapons of mass destruction, and supports terror. We also see Iranian citizens risking intimidation and death as they speak out for liberty, human rights, and democracy. Iranians, like all people, have a right to choose their own government, and determine their own destiny - and the United States supports their aspirations to live in freedom.
On the Korean peninsula, an oppressive regime rules a people living in fear and starvation. Throughout the 1990s, the United States relied on a negotiated framework to keep North Korea from gaining nuclear weapons. We now know that the regime was deceiving the world, and developing those weapons all along. And today the North Korean regime is using its nuclear program to incite fear and seek concessions. America and the world will not be blackmailed. America is working with the countries of the region - South Korea, Japan, China, and Russia - to find a peaceful solution, and to show the North Korean government that nuclear weapons will bring only isolation, economic stagnation, and continued hardship. The North Korean regime will find respect in the world, and revival for its people, only when it turns away from its nuclear ambitions.
Our Nation and the world must learn the lessons of the Korean peninsula, and not allow an even greater threat to rise up in Iraq. A brutal dictator, with a history of reckless aggression..with ties to terrorism... with great potential wealth...will not be permitted to dominate a vital region and threaten the United States.
Twelve years ago, Saddam Hussein faced the prospect of being the last casualty in a war he had started and lost. To spare himself, he agreed to disarm of all weapons of mass destruction. For the next 12 years, he systematically violated that agreement. He pursued chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons even while inspectors were in his country. Nothing to date has restrained him from his pursuit of these weapons - not economic sanctions, not isolation from the civilized world, not even cruise missile strikes on his military facilities. Almost three months ago, the United Nations Security Council gave Saddam Hussein his final chance to disarm. He has shown instead his utter contempt for the United Nations, and for the opinion of the world.
The 108 UN weapons inspectors were not sent to conduct a scavenger hunt for hidden materials across a country the size of California. The job of the inspectors is to verify that Iraq's regime is disarming. It is up to Iraq to show exactly where it is hiding its banned weapons...lay those weapons out for the world to see...and destroy them as directed. Nothing like this has happened.
The United Nations concluded in 1999 that Saddam Hussein had biological weapons materials sufficient to produce over 25,000 liters of anthrax - enough doses to kill several million people. He has not accounted for that material. He has given no evidence that he has destroyed it.
The United Nations concluded that Saddam Hussein had materials sufficient to produce more than 38,000 liters of botulinum toxin - enough to subject millions of people to death by respiratory failure. He has not accounted for that material. He has given no evidence that he has destroyed it.
Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard, and VX nerve agent. In such quantities, these chemical agents also could kill untold thousands. He has not accounted for these materials. He has given no evidence that he has destroyed them.
U.S. intelligence indicates that Saddam Hussein had upwards of 30,000 munitions capable of delivering chemical agents. Inspectors recently turned up 16 of them, despite Iraq's recent declaration denying their existence. Saddam Hussein has not accounted for the remaining 29,984 of these prohibited munitions. He has given no evidence that he has destroyed them.
From three Iraqi defectors we know that Iraq, in the late 1990s, had several mobile biological weapons labs. These are designed to produce germ warfare agents, and can be moved from place to place to evade inspectors. Saddam Hussein has not disclosed these facilities. He has given no evidence that he has destroyed them.
The International Atomic Energy Agency confirmed in the 1990s that Saddam Hussein had an advanced nuclear weapons development program, had a design for a nuclear weapon, and was working on five different methods of enriching uranium for a bomb. The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa. Our intelligence sources tell us that he has attempted to purchase high strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production. Saddam Hussein has not credibly explained these activities. He clearly has much to hide.
The dictator of Iraq is not disarming. To the contrary, he is deceiving. From intelligence sources, we know, for instance, that thousands of Iraqi security personnel are at work hiding documents and materials from the UN inspectors - sanitizing inspection sites, and monitoring the inspectors themselves. Iraqi officials accompany the inspectors in order to intimidate witnesses. Iraq is blocking U-2 surveillance flights requested by the United Nations. Iraqi intelligence officers are posing as the scientists inspectors are supposed to interview. Real scientists have been coached by Iraqi officials on what to say. And intelligence sources indicate that Saddam Hussein has ordered that scientists who cooperate with UN inspectors in disarming Iraq will be killed, along with their families.
Year after year, Saddam Hussein has gone to elaborate lengths, spent enormous sums, taken great risks, to build and keep weapons of mass destruction - but why? The only possible explanation, the only possible use he could have for those weapons, is to dominate, intimidate, or attack. With nuclear arms or a full arsenal of chemical and biological weapons, Saddam Hussein could resume his ambitions of conquest in the Middle East, and create deadly havoc in the region. And this Congress and the American people must recognize another threat. Evidence from intelligence sources, secret communications, and statements by people now in custody, reveal that Saddam Hussein aids and protects terrorists, including members of al-Qaida. Secretly, and without fingerprints, he could provide one of his hidden weapons to terrorists, or help them develop their own.
Before September 11, 2001, many in the world believed that Saddam Hussein could be contained. But chemical agents and lethal viruses and shadowy terrorist networks are not easily contained. Imagine those 19 hijackers with other weapons, and other plans - this time armed by Saddam Hussein. It would take just one vial, one canister, one crate slipped into this country to bring a day of horror like none we have ever known. We will do everything in our power to make sure that day never comes.
Some have said we must not act until the threat is imminent. Since when have terrorists and tyrants announced their intentions, politely putting us on notice before they strike? If this threat is permitted to fully and suddenly emerge, all actions, all words, and all recriminations would come too late. Trusting in the sanity and restraint of Saddam Hussein is not a strategy, and it is not an option.
This dictator, who is assembling the world's most dangerous weapons, has already used them on whole villages - leaving thousands of his own citizens dead, blind, or disfigured. Iraqi refugees tell us how forced confessions are obtained - by torturing children while their parents are made to watch. International human rights groups have catalogued other methods used in the torture chambers of Iraq: electric shock, burning with hot irons, dripping acid on the skin, mutilation with electric drills, cutting out tongues, and rape.
If this is not evil, then evil has no meaning. And tonight I have a message for the brave and oppressed people of Iraq: Your enemy is not surrounding your country - your enemy is ruling your country. And the day he and his regime are removed from power will be the day of your liberation.
The world has waited 12 years for Iraq to disarm. America will not accept a serious and mounting threat to our country, our friends, and our allies. The United States will ask the UN Security Council to convene on February 5th to consider the facts of Iraq's ongoing defiance of the world. Secretary of State Powell will present information and intelligence about Iraq's illegal weapons programs; its attempts to hide those weapons from inspectors; and its links to terrorist groups. We will consult, but let there be no misunderstanding: If Saddam Hussein does not fully disarm, for the safety of our people, and for the peace of the world, we will lead a coalition to disarm him.
Tonight I also have a message for the men and women who will keep the peace, members of the American Armed Forces: Many of you are assembling in and near the Middle East, and some crucial hours may lie ahead. In those hours, the success of our cause will depend on you. Your training has prepared you. Your honor will guide you. You believe in America, and America believes in you.
Sending Americans into battle is the most profound decision a president can make. The technologies of war have changed. The risks and suffering of war have not. For the brave Americans who bear the risk, no victory is free from sorrow. This Nation fights reluctantly, because we know the cost, and we dread the days of mourning that always come.

Al

Oh. Its gets good.

quote:Rove to Testify Again to Grand Jury in CIA Leak Case (Update2)Oct. 6 (Bloomberg) -- Presidential adviser Karl Rove will testify again before a federal grand jury investigating whether Bush administration officials disclosed the identity of an undercover CIA operative to reporters, a person familiar with the case said.Rove, 54, deputy White House chief of staff and a longtime adviser to President George W. Bush, volunteered to testify and has received no assurances that he will not be indicted by the grand jury, the person said.Special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald's two-year-old investigation was initiated to determine whether officials Bush's administration violated a 1982 law designed to protect the identity of covert Central Intelligence Agency agents. The prosecutor also is examining whether any officials lied or obstructed justice in the course of the investigation.It would be Rove's fourth appearance before the grand jury. His attorney, Robert Luskin, said that Rove ``has not received any notification that he is a target of the grand jury investigation.

Bloomberg

http://www.dembloggers.com/story/2005/9/29/185511/273http://frankwarner.typepad.com/free_frank_warner/2005/09/the_plamewilson.html
http://www.drudge.com/news/74000/miller-ids-cheney-chief-staff-plame"After serving nearly three months in jail for refusing to disclose her conversations with a confidential source, New York Times reporter Judith Miller broke her silence Friday, testifying about her conversations with that source before a federal grand jury... [San Francisco Chronicle]"Chris:Newsweek has disclosed its source -- and it ISN'T ROVE.You are rather like the people that kept screaming for sanctions against south Africa, after Mandela was elected president. they didn't have a clue.If you want to consider charges against Cheney's chief of staff, who WAS the source, then fine. You really ought to pay attention to the actual story, and not the tide of leftist emotion. Even Moveon.org has the story right, and they are looking at the correct version of events. The source is the source. Not some non-source. That is non-sense.That was the origin of my sarcastic comment following the posting of that news here on
AMG:"But Rove's still guilty, right?"

quote:Originally posted by thejohnchapman:
[QB"But Rove's still guilty, right?"[/QB]

I think you'll find that the jury's still out.Your hero, Rove Inc., has something clever
up his charitable sleeve.
Stay tuned for his new grand jury testimony.

Hey LL, care to comment on this story?Rep. Tom DeLay said District Attorney Ronnie Earle, who is prosecuting him for trying to involve corporate money in Texas politics, has taken such contributions himself.
"It's real interesting he has this crusade against corporate funds. He took corporate funds, and he's taken union funds, for his own re-election. That's against the law," Mr. DeLay told The Washington Times yesterday. http://www.washtimes.com/national/20051007-120137-5865r.htm

quote: A review of Mr. Earle's campaign-finance filings in Texas shows that he has received contributions from the AFL-CIO, including a $250 donation on Aug. 29, 2000. He also has received contributions listed on the disclosure forms only as coming from the name of an incorporated entity, often a law firm.

The WT is careful - very careful - in NOT stating when the hundred dollar (GASP!) contributions were received... important since the anti-corporate contribution law is relatively recent.. I'll keep an open mind and open ears though.Chris.

TJC:Re: Rove and the source.. you're clearly smart enought to know that the new testimony is needed to corroborate or debunk (more than likely) Rove's repeated testimony...Most likely is an abstruction charge.. which I expect... against Rove.When you've testified this many times before a jury you WILL make a mistake - no matter how honest you are.Chris.

Far more careful than was Earle in indicting DeLay for a "crime" that did not exist for over a year after the activity charged occurred.