These are the questions that presidential spokesman Scott McClellan was asked at his daily press briefing this afternoon in the order in which they occurred:

Watch Scotty dancing around the truth today was worth turning on the TV. Somehow, though, the GOP will successfully show that it was Joe Wilson who outed his wife just to be mean to President Bush.

But Karl….be sure to pack your shaving kit.

Crock!

The left has merely resisted the right’s age-old propensity to hide it’s rapacious looting behind our country’s flag.

Was this a clever little slam at Sen Byrd: “Klandestined Krony Karl “?

Mouse squeaked: “I have assumed” and “Lets see if I understand your argument”

The first quote is your own responsibility and on the second, you don’t.

My ‘argument’ is that Rove did not mention her name and she was not known as the wife of Wilson – publicly. My guess would be that, legally, my saying Joe Blow’s wife works for the CIA but she uses an assumed name is not a crime. And I don’t claim her identity was safe, because as I understand the situation, it was already common knowledge in many Wash INSIDE circles that she was a DC civil servant working for the CIA. Perhaps she had not been very careful about her own identity (see the swanky national magazine picture of her and perp walk). Nevertheless, I don’t know the full legal arguments either way. One side says Rove is clear; the other that he may violated certain security rules. Hey, if he is convicted of a crime – he should have to pay the appropriate price.
But as to harm done to national security, knowing what I do about where she worked and my own past associations, I don’t believe that for a second.
And as to the left’s new found concern with national security, I believe that about as much as I believe they are really worried about Congress disobeying travel rules instead of having an unprincipled vendetta against Delay.

BTW, I might be a hack (but I might not also) but I have never received anybody’s talking points. Do you? Is that why you guys make that charge so much?

Dugger

So let’s see if I understand your argument:

1) Because Valerie Plame was only known as Valerie Wilson, her identity was safe.

The problem with this of course is that Rove specifically identified her as Wilson’s wife, and specifically mentioned that she was a CIA operative working in WMD issues. How much more specific could he be without actually giving an address to her house? So, back to your original claim that this is different from actually naming her: that’s just parsing at its most ridiculous.

2) The Newsweek memo hasn’t been vouchsafed by…me? Well, I am flattered by your confidence in my abilities; as it turns out, my own contribution to the authenticity of the email is unnecessary as the email was already authenticated (if you had read the article, you would know this).

And contrary to your fervent belief, I have no feelings for Bush or his administration one way or the other. I most certainly feel no hatred. I believe Bush and his administration to be dissembling and dishonest in many of their endeavours, in much the same way that you believe them to be truthful. And if you think that this means hatred on my part, then it must equally mean a disturbing kind of love on yours.

Whatever you do, I strongly urge you not to dabble in Condi fan fiction; we already have one of those.

Here’s the deal. If he broke the law, fine – pay the price. If he didn’t , his being the successful architect of two presdiential elections is not a crime. It sure as h*ll is a viable defense if not naming the name makes the difference between legal and illegal. And spare me the moral posturing. Theres not a single poster here who does not hero-ize the likes of Ellsberg , Deep Throat, and Sen Leahy and Rockefeller-Durbin-Wyden- Levin (spy satellite leakers).

Dugger, It Only Counts When Their Side Does It
Dugger

Here s the deal….”

Translation: But what about Clinton? Whhhhhaaaaa…..

http://spaces.msn.com/members/NotCentered/

Take off your hate-Bush-blinders for a second, look around and THINK. Our gal Val was not known at Valerie Wilson – but Valerie Plame. And Mouse, not only does the above point apply, but have you personally vouch-safed the Newsweek memo? Talked to Rove, have we? How is Karl? Still having that backache? Kinda surprised he would tell you, an obscure poster, everything, but I know you wouldn’t let politically driven hate cloud your judgement.

Dugger

I quoteth: “have you personally vouch-safed the Newsweek memo?”

Translation: “Newsweek was wrong once (which is REALLY wasn’t – but I digress) so Newsweek is ALWAYS wrong.”

Parsing words and relying on “exact” definitions – Dugger did you work in the Clinton Administration?

Unless Joseph Wilson is a polygamist, I don’t think that defense is going to fly in court.

My understanding is that he didn t give out her actual name at all. A much different thing than you are saying.

How is it a “much different thing”? Rove did in fact disclose that Wilson’s wife was a CIA operative:

Rove told Cooper that Wilson’s trip had not been authorized by “DCIA” CIA Director George Tenet or Vice President Dick Cheney. Rather, “it was, KR said, wilson’s wife, who apparently works at the agency on wmd [weapons of mass destruction] issues who authorized the trip.

Wilson was a well-known diplomat; how difficult do you think it would be for any reporter to figure out his wife’s name?

Here’s a suggestion: from now on, whenever a Republican is exposed for lies, treason and fraud, pretend for moment that the Republican is a Democrat before you hit the “submit comment” button: you might find that your position may be an entirely different one.

Rove has said he didn’t “leak her name.” Luskin says the same thing. Now the tone of Mr. Cooper’s email implies that Karl told either said “Wilson’s wife” or some other “non-naming term” since Cooper uses the following phrase in his email: “it was, KR said, wilson’s wife, who apparently works at the agency on wmd [weapons of mass destruction] issues who authorized the trip.”

Dugger’s defense regarding KR using an actual “name” or not sounds allot like the “definition of ‘is’” argument to me. I think “Wilson’s wife”, or “the person Joe Wilson sleeps with” or “the prostrate-less person that married Joe Wilson” meets the definition of “naming” someone.

Do you disagree, Dugger?

Dugger