[eDebate] rove matter explodes or dies tomorrow

matt stannard stannardmatt
Sun Jun 18 21:02:03 CDT 2006


I want Rove to get his due as much as anyone, but I am curious about 
Truthout's treatment of the Jason Leopold issue.  They write:

"Mr. Leopold did not act alone in his reporting of this matter. His work, 
sources and conclusions were reviewed carefully at each step of the process. 
There is no indication that Mr. Leopold acted unethically."

However, Joe Lauria tells a different story: Leopold stole his credentials 
to get an interview--not from some mainstream corporate reporter, but from a 
progressive journalist.  That's at 
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/6/17/19123/7946.

This and other unsettling evidence about Leopold leads blogger Eternal Hope 
to conclude:

"What good will it do us to embrace Jason Leopold, ride him to victory in 
the next two elections, only to become no better than the people we pretend 
not to like?
"Instead of doing the responsible thing and admitting they were wrong, 
Truthout refuses to admit they were wrong even when they know they were 
wrong. They claim that they were operating with the best of intentions and 
that they had multiple people fact-check their story. But the problem is 
that they did not do a good job of it. The problem is that they wanted the 
story to be true, so they ignored warning signs that suggested that they 
were being played. And the reason many of us on the left thought Rove was 
about to be indicted was because we believed Leopold because he was 
reporting what we wanted to hear - not what was actually the truth."
(http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/6/18/13641/3769)

It's true that if the Democrats re-take the House, then Waxman will come to 
the rescue.  But the Dems WON'T retake the house.  Nor do they deserve to.  
They have no COHERENT opposition strategy.  They can't condemn the 
Republicans' reliance on corporate money, because they also rely on 
corporate money.  They can't condemn unethical leaks or intelligence 
manipulation because they've done plenty of that too.  They can't really 
even take a stand against election fraud because nobody really believes 
their hands are totally clean.  They can't take advantage of strong anti-war 
sentiment because they aren't a sincere anti-war party.  Clinton, who was 
one of the most crooked and opportunistic politicians of the 20th century, 
essentially ruined and fragmented the party, although he had a lot of help 
from Carter.  Nobody is willing to truly stand up to the Republicans in the 
culture wars, because the big money is just as conservative and bigotted no 
matter which party it's supporting.  And both sides can simply claim that 
their appeal to the prejudices of the "heartland" is pragmatic.

Truthfully, "Stromboli's" call for civil disobedience, channeled both 
through the debate community and other networks, is a viable and timely 
strategy, accompanied by multiple networks and fora of political 
conversation from students, workers, and others opposed not only to the 
current administration, but to the institutional, ideological and material 
conditions which make the current administration possible.  We might differ 
on tactics but I'd be more than willing to help facilitate that discussion 
and whatever might come out of it.

stannard




>From: "Jake Stromboli" <infracaninophile at hotmail.com>
>To: edebate at ndtceda.com
>CC: jvreedmore at hotmail.com
>Subject: [eDebate] rove matter explodes or dies tomorrow
>Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 20:02:01 -0500
>
>as you know truthout.org "standed down" on the rove matter friday w promise
>of a comprehensive reply tomorrow:
>
>http://forum.truthout.org/blog/
>
>"Expect a more comprehensive accounting of this matter on Monday, June 19."
>
>adding fuel to the fire, the rove team fired accusations in the washington
>post today that leopold is a cocaine addict and the entire story was
>fabricated.
>
>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/16/AR2006061601754.html
>
>was leopold set up by the rove team so that goebbels could announce that 
>the
>conservatives are winning the internet war stressing unity over liberal
>hate?
>
>
>i tend to doubt it.   the theory requires you to believe that rove sought
>out five grand jury testimonies and a last minute clearance so he could 
>burn
>progressive journalism.
>
>i think the internet ploy is another go at overhyping his exoneration and a
>feeble attempt to undue further damage to his reputation done on the
>internet.
>
>the main theories going around about what happened with the indictment.
>
>1) fitzgerald decided he couldn't make charges stick and let him off to
>focus on libby and may have got rove to turn state's evidence to make the
>libby case a slam dunk.
>
>2) fitzgerald knew he could make charges stick and presented rove with a
>sealed indictment and an offer to drop the indictment if he turns state's
>evidence against cheney or someoneelse higher up the chain.
>
>3) rove didn't do anything wrong and it took fitzgerald five runs in front
>of the grand jury to figure that out and a man with an impeccable 
>reputation
>was unnecessarily dragged through the mud.
>
>3 is out but it's cute.
>
>1 is unlikely given news today about the libby pardon prospect:
>
>http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/nation/ny-uspard0618,0,467087.story?coll=ny-leadnationalnews-headlines
>
>if you don't think fitzgerald knew this was coming, then you are out to
>lunch.  i think the obviousness of a libby pardon sans other indictments
>points to the likelihood of theory 2.  also, the idea that the 
>investigation
>is ongoing.  if fitzgerald were only indicting libby who has already been
>indicted, the investigation would most likely be over now.   fitzgerald has
>already revealed a revenge motive against the wilsons by cheney and i don't
>think he's going to let it slide and disappear through an obvious pardon
>from the president.   all of his time and investigation would be for naught
>on an underling who was not the originator of the plot.
>
>the luskin letter still remains unpublished and fitzgerald has yet to
>confirm the statements of rove's lawyer.  all of this is discernible from
>the blogs.
>
>rove's fate still hinges on the upcoming elections given the waxman motion
>for congressional investigation into his conduct but still he could go down
>in a criminal suit brought by the wilsons.   cooper has admitted in his own
>article that he found out about plame's CIA status from rove and novak 
>found
>out the same.
>
>anyway, you look at it tomorrow's statements from truthout.org loom large.
>leopold has now been accused of drug problems in the national media
>alongside the idea that he fabricated the whole story to get attention
>despite ruining his career.   the truthout subscribers are up in arms and
>want leopold to reveal his sources as he promised on the radio if he was
>deceived.   other websites are calling for the termination of truthout.
>speculation is rampant.  ash has every possible means to axe leopold and
>move on but apparently he believes the story and the idea of cooperation
>turning state's evidence against cheney and i bet you he has been digging 
>to
>get the next lead on that angle and tomorrow is going to be the biggest
>explosion yet given shenanigans of the right wing in the washington post
>taking this story to a whole other level...you can count on it that i will
>have it up on this list as soon as it is posted on truthout.
>
>one last thing that you have to take account about this administration is
>that they have poor quick fix strategies for halting slides in approval
>ratings.   the fact is that the numbers keep sliding down to an
>uncomfortable point especially the iraq war polls.   you know that the
>administration would have rather hoped the approval ratings went up after
>the beginning of the iraq war and that it would have been a successful
>policy that brought democracy.   instead you see them trying to fabricate
>rebound situations of optimism with an al-zarqawi kill, rove exoneration 
>and
>bagdhad trip all choreographed together as the koehner house talking points
>reveal.   they try this sugar coat candyland strategy all of the time and 
>it
>doesn't work.  cheney on national tv on a sunday telling the american 
>people
>that he thinks "the iraqi people will welcome their liberators".   little
>symbolic moral victories here and there but no proof or even sound
>conception that modern imperial armies have figured out how to beat 
>guerilla
>warfare tactics by resident populations.   america lost vietnam.   soviets
>lost afghanistan.   the neocons were supposed to usher in a new era of
>warfare with fancy electromagnetic weapons and increased mobility but it's
>still the same unwinnable guerilla war.    the republicans are so focused 
>on
>popular opinion at particular points in time that they are unable to
>reconsider long term policy as a real strategy.   they need the nation to
>look divided 50-50 so they can do the dirty work in florida, ohio or
>whatever swing state will be key this year.   they know that it is almost
>impossible to prove fraud on the spot like nixon knew in 1960 and the 
>public
>will defer to whatever result they achieve.
>
>the problem is that iraq is going so bad that eventually in 2 years or 4
>years an overwhelming majority of people will be against the war and
>election tampering will be less viable as the cornerstore of a rove 
>victory.
>    these periodic quick fix sugarcoats are going to become more and more
>obvious for what they are and everyone will know without a doubt in their
>mind that there is no foreseeable end to this conflict and that it is a
>veritable quagmire.   please don't wait 2 or 4 years and takeover your
>college campus soon, in the fall, so that we can accelerate the process
>through power tactics.   too many people are dying b.c you and i are not
>very creative in our resistance and we don't seek methods of confrontation
>that challenge us to be somebody we do not know.
>
>another key problem for the neocons not exploited by the democrats or any
>other opposition to asufficient enough degree is the idea presented during
>vietnam that americans are not colonists anymore.   the israeli model for
>the middle east does not work for americans b/c no significant segment of
>our population intends to live there.   we had the same problem in vietnam.
>   the israelis are fighting for "their land".   they can mobilize a 
>military
>society for that purpose.  americans are fighting for dick cheney's oil.
>it ain't gonna last.   the ideas of "democracy" and "freedom" will easily 
>go
>down the drain b/c iraq is other people's land and all of those storm
>troopers can't wait to get back to hamburgers and movies and highway
>checkpoints.   the french had a vested stake in vietnam b/c they lived
>there, old school colonial style.   americans do not have a need for living
>elsewhere.  instead a certain backward part of the population has need of
>periodic fascist interludes to prove that clean murder is still a part of
>human nature.  cut and run is not democratic feebleness against terrorists.
>cut and run is all of the systematic mass murder a people with no desire to
>live elsewhere can stomach.  thank you and good night...
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!
>http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
>
>_______________________________________________
>eDebate mailing list
>eDebate at ndtceda.com
>http://www.ndtceda.com/mailman/listinfo/edebate






More information about the Mailman mailing list