Talk:Karl Rove named as a source of Plame leak

POV
The notes are not public record. Wikinews is claiming that it is now established fact the Rove is named in the notes as the source of the leak. This is disputed by his attorney and really only speculated by O'Donnell and Isikof. The introductory paragraph should reflect this 'news' as only comments made by two pundits. The article ignores the comments made by Rove's attorney because that would make a balanced article and the authours don't want that. They want to make Rove look bad instead of providing us an escape from traditional agenda driven media.

Rove very well may be the source, but don't let your own desires for that to get in the way here. (69.23.220.138 forgot to sign at 15:58, July 3, 2005) - Please remember to sign your discussion contributions with " ~ ".


 * "Reporter's notes subpoenaed by the Supreme Court reveal United States President George W. Bush's chief political advisor Karl Rove as one of the two sources behind the leaking of the identity of undercover CIA agent Valerie Plame." Where has this been reported? (69.23.220.138 forgot to sign at 16:43, July 3, 2005)


 * Presumably in the Newsweek article "The Rove Factor?" which states "The e-mails surrendered by Time Inc., which are largely between Cooper and his editors, show that one of Cooper's sources was White House deputy chief of staff Karl Rove, according to two lawyers who asked not to be identified because they are representing witnesses sympathetic to the White House. Cooper and a Time spokeswoman declined to comment."


 * I agree though that the intro paragraph needs to be changed to reflect the source of this info (two anonymous sources and Lawrence O'Donnell). Feel free to make the change. - TalkHard 3 July 2005 20:56 (UTC)

The title as well as the article simply say that Rove has been "named".This is true.Even his lawyer's assertions which are surely self serving for his client(or should be) are included in the article. This article is NPOV in my opinion. 64.229.184.66 4 July 2005 01:11 (UTC)


 * No this is wrong. What was recently publicised is that Rove spoke to Cooper in the weeks before the leak. Rove's lawyer confirms this. That is all that is being claimed. It's O'Donnell (who is still reeling from the election) who is speculating regarding to what Rove and time spoke about. Be accurate or don't do it at all.

Restoring Honor to White House
This guy is part of the administration that said they would "Restore Honor to the White House"

No comment... (Apollo2011 forgot to sign at 23:45, July 3, 2005) - Please remember to sign your discussion contributions with " ~ ".

First sentence
The first sentence (actually first few words) seems jumbled and odd - "Reporter's notes did not subpoenaed" - as well as spelled incorrectly. I'm not sure what should be here but just wanted to point it out. - Tdempsey 4 July 2005 03:57 (UTC)
 * Thx Tdempsey. If you check under the history tab, you can compare versions and see what the latest changes are. I reverted 'did not' addition by an anonymous contributor. -Edbrown05 4 July 2005 04:41 (UTC)

It's not just O'Donnell
"'The e-mails surrendered by Time Inc., which are largely between Cooper and his editors, show that one of Cooper's sources was White House deputy chief of staff Karl Rove, according to two lawyers who asked not to be identified because they are representing witnesses sympathetic to the White House,' Isikoff writes on the Newsweek web site."

Title has been f___ed up; Rove has been named as a source so I will make the title coherent. Paulrevere2005 4 July 2005 12:13 (UTC)


 * You still don't understand. It is agreed that Rove was interviewed by Cooper. O'Donnell is the one making news by stating specifically, that he believes those notes will show Rove leaked that Plame was a CIA agent. Maybe we need to dumb it down: "Rove, notes, yes. Rove, leak, dunno".


 * Wrong again.Isikoff's quote says that Rove is a source for the leak..period. Paulrevere2005 4 July 2005 21:23 (UTC)


 * To quote isikoff: "It is unclear, however, what passed between Cooper and Rove." You're obviously not interested anyway.


 * 69.23.220.138 is correct. Isikoff does a tap dance in the Newsweek article; maybe they can pull a "didn't have sex with that woman" play. I think his lawyer, Luskin's, link to drug cartels and gold bars is much more interesting(see below)


 * You're right. Facts aren't important/

Revere, you need to read the article more carefully. The two lawyers confirm that Rove was a source for the article, NOT that Rove was a source for Plame's identity.

Rove's lawyer accused of Cosa Nostra links
Just noticed this..not a story but interesting [] [] Paulrevere2005 4 July 2005 12:29 (UTC)

Search for Rove and Plame on FOX News
A search for Rove and Plame on foxnews.com turned up this segment by John Gibson on Thursday, April 14, 2005. In that segment, Gibson downplays Rove's possible guilt as brought up by Plame's husband, Joe Wilson. He does this by mentioning that "Senator John Kerry exposed a CIA officer, by name" in a Senate Foreign Relations Committee meeting with John Bolton. A Media Matters release sheds light on this accusation, the same day, by revealing that "it was Sen. Richard Lugar (R-IN) who first mentioned the CIA officer by name during the hearing." The two Fox news articles cited in the Media Matters article seem to be verifiable distortions of the truth. And now it has been revealed that Karl Rove indeed did leak the identity of Valerie Plame. - McCart42 (talk) July 4, 2005 17:55 (UTC)
 * Another Media Matters piece on the charge that Kerry exposed an undercover CIA agent. - McCart42 (talk) July 4, 2005 18:04 (UTC)

Legal notes
The "Constitutional law" referred to in this story is not part of the Constitution of the United States, nor any statutory law. It's part of Constitutional case law, so it's more appropriate to refer to specific precedents, rather than "clauses". I assume this statement is referring to the imminent lawless action precedent set by Brandenburg v. Ohio. I'm not sure the summary given in the article is accurate. It would have been nice to have a link to the ruling that was being summarized, and possibly a direct quote, as well. -- Beland 01:14, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

Category and link
edit protected Please add this article to Category:Time (magazine) and localize a link of the same name. Thank you. Green Giant (talk) 13:02, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Added cat, w-ized. --Pi zero (talk) 04:10, 20 January 2016 (UTC)