More evidence the loony left is chasing their tail on the Valerie Plame case…
WASHINGTON, July 26 – In the same week in July 2003 in which Bush administration officials told a syndicated columnist and a Time magazine reporter that a C.I.A. officer had initiated her husband’s mission to Niger, an administration official provided a Washington Post reporter with a similar account.
The first two episodes, involving the columnist Robert D. Novak and the reporter Matthew Cooper, have become the subjects of intense scrutiny in recent weeks. But little attention has been paid to what The Post reporter, Walter Pincus, has recently described as a separate exchange on July 12, 2003.
In that exchange, Mr. Pincus says, “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 the trip to Niger by Joseph C. Wilson IV “because it was a boondoggle arranged by his wife, an analyst with the agency who was working on weapons of mass destruction.”
Mr. Wilson traveled to Niger in 2002 at the request of the C.I.A. to look into reports about Iraqi efforts to buy nuclear materials. He later accused the administration of twisting intelligence about the nuclear ambitions of Iraq, prompting an angry response from the White House.
Mr. Pincus did not write about the exchange with the administration official until October 2003, and The Washington Post itself has since reported little about it. The newspaper’s most recent story was a 737-word account last Sept. 16, in which the newspaper reported that Mr. Pincus had testified the previous day about the matter, but only after his confidential source had first “revealed his or her identity” to Mr. Fitzgerald, the special counsel conducting the C.I.A. leak inquiry.
Mr. Pincus has not identified his source to the public. But a review of Mr. Pincus’s own accounts and those of other people with detailed knowledge of the case strongly suggest that his source was neither Karl Rove, Mr. Bush’s top political adviser, nor I. Lewis Libby, the chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney, and was in fact a third administration official whose identity has not yet been publicly disclosed.
That’s what happens when you invent a culprit then invent a crime that he supposedly committed. If there was any wrongdoing -and that is still up for debate- certainly it sounds like this third official is the one the Dems should be looking for.
But since the Democrats have gone full tilt trying to get Rove at any cost, they have potentially given the real wrongdoer a pass.
If you needed any more proof that the Democrats could care less about the outting of a CIA agent and only want a head on a platter this is it. They don’t really care who said what to who (or to whom) they want Rove gone. Their irrational hated is blinding them to all reality. (again)
Let’s say Rove gets fired tomorrow. What does he do? Go fishing???? No, if Rove gets fired tomorrow he starts working the next day on the mid-term elections. Thereby guaranteeing the Dems lose even more power in the Senate. (and the House)
In chess if you have your opponent’s Queen pinned the last thing you do is let her go free. Rove is more valuable to the Dems in the Whitehouse working for a President who (let’s review) isn’t running for another term than he is on the open market.
Have you noticed the Clinonistsas -the only Dems who know how to win elections- have been largely silent on this one? They want Rove to stay where he is. The whole rest of the Democrat party is too blinded by hate to even think rationally. — Not that this is news.