Red Rover, Red Rover

I have to admit that I really enjoy watching this new Karl Rove thing play out.

This is a brief synopsis, as I understand it (you can skip this paragraph if you know the story):

The CIA was investating a claim that Iraq was trying to buy 'yellow cake' from Niger so Valery Plame, who is married to Joseph Wilson, suggested to her boss that they send her husband to check it out. The boss apparently agreed and sent him. He went and apparently says he found no evidence (Fox and the right seem to be calling him a liar, I'm not sure why - in any case the initial claims seem to be based on a forged document). Bush gave his State of the Union address and cites the bullshit claim about Niger/'yellow cake'/Iraq and uses as evidence that we need to go to war. Then Wilson wrote an op-ed in the NY Times calling him out. The Bushies were mad pissed off and Karl Rove (and apparently others) made a bunch of calls to reporters saying the only reason he was sent is b/c his wife is in the CIA and suggested him for the trip (which I'm not sure why this is a huge deal). Trouble is she was a covert operative and they revealed her identity, so the CIA asked for an investigation. A special prosecutor was named and has been investigating for a year or two at this point and has been going after Judith Miller, who never even wrote a story and Matt Cooper, who wrote a story after Robert Novak broke the story. According to Cooper's emails, Rove was the source which causes problems b/c of the legality issues and politically b/c Bush said he'd fire whoever it was and Rove and Scott McClelland (Press Secretary) emphatically denied that the source was him.

So, my thoughts:

• Robert Novak is a bitch: He, first of all, knew he was outing this lady b/c he refers to her as an operative in this article he wrote. He also clearly cut a deal with the prosecutor to reveal the source and won't talk about it now.
• Judith Miller is a badass: She didn't write anything about this story and her only 'crime' is knowing who did it. Now, you can argue about where the lines of freedom of the press should be drawn but say what you will about the tenets of protecting your sources no matter what, but at least it's an ethos.
• Karl Rove is also a bitch: I really hate Karl Rove, he's just a mean vindictive person who will win at all costs - including spreading lies about people (see McCain, John). He is also a political genius. He definitely shouted Plame out on purpose to get back at Wilson for embarrassing the administration. I don't believe the 'oh, he didn't know she was a covert operative' argument. If he did, he wouldn't have called mad people on the DL like he did. Also many of them didn't print the story because the knew it was fucked up. Certainly, it wouldn't have been in 'double super secret background' - do these reporters and politicians really use terms like this? What a bunch of nerds. However...
• I don't know that he broke a law. The 1982 law against this type of thing is apparently very limited so it's not clear that he did anything criminal.
• Politically, Rove and Bush are in a tough spot b/c Rover denied and Bush pretty much said he'd fire whoever this was.
• Don't give me the liberal media is on a witch-hunt shit. Please. The 'liberal media' person, Miller from the NY Times, is the only one who didn't sell Rove out. Novak, the 'conservative media' guy involved, sold out quicker than the Care-Bear section of Toys-R-Us on Christmas Eve in 1985.
• They have got to be bringing a case against Rove if they're going after the press (especially people who didn't even write anything) so aggressively. If not the Prosecutor (Fitzgerald?) is a major beeitch. Also, let's not forget that depending on what Rove said to the prosecutor's office, he may have perjured himself in the course of the investigation.
• Finally, it's too bad that everyone runs to their respective partisan sides and follows their party lines. If the parties involved were switched, many would do a complete 180 here. Everyone on the news seems to be arguing about whether or not Plame had Wilson sent and whether or not that was fucked up, what he did or didn't find and whether or not Rove was being vindictive or just trying to put the story in perspective: all of that doesn't matter. Someone outed this lady, it was shady, the CIA asked for it to be investigated, Rove pulled a Shaggy ('it wasn't me!'), Bush said he'd fire whoever it was and now it turns out Rove did it.

So, there may be no crime here but the administration is definitely put in a tough situation no matter what - fire the dude that's responsible for its existence? Go back on your previous position? Both bad choices. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.