« Wilkes Gets His Subpoenas | Main | Lackey and Katrina Kash »

November 30, 2007



I for one would be interested in a bit of non-transcript of that exchange between Karl and Charlie.

It seems strange what you have reported, but I assume if there is anything to it, we will get more info. (I have been on vacation, and so now am catching up with work, and haven't been attuned to much else.)

Why do they allow Karl Rove to abuse the American public via the airwaves with his endless lies? The Plame/Wilsons must be seething. I am.

Lock this psychopath up please. How much more time will the MSM give this traitor? Christ All mighty I am so tired of these right wing radical warmongers who are responsible for starting an illegal and immoral war that has resulted in hundreds of thousand of deaths, injuries and millions displaced, betrayed an undercover agent and undermined National Security, created an environment where oil companies make record breaking oil profits, undermined our election process. When will the MSM say no to these mother father, children fuckers. Enough

Drop the warmongering liars and traitors like Rove down in the middle of Baghdad butt assed naked and let them run for the hole that Saddam was hiding out in.

Forget the hole the devil needs to build a new west wing in hell for these psychopathic killers, liars and traitors.

Rove speaks with forked tongue.

Can't help myself but Karl Rove has always reminded me of Porky Pig. Just can't wait for the day when he says "That's all folks" and they throw him behind bars.

Now that would be a day that my faith in this country might be restored a little bit. Still waiting. Know the Wilsons are.

I am not surprised that Rove lied. What I wonder about is why he engaged in a lie that was so obvious and so easily refuted. Was he testing the limits of mendacity on a softball show like Charlie Rose in prospect of his gig at Newsweek? It is always so hard with Bush types to tell if they are lying for a reason or if they are lying because they don't know how to do anything else.

Rove is determined to recast himself as an insightful politcal intellectual and reasoned politcal voice so he can rejoin the public debate.

But his reputation as a toxic, rat-f*cking dirty-trick hack, who was promoted above his level of competence from politics to policy in the White House IS NOT ON THE WANE. And he didn't do himself any favors getting caught tellig the BIG LIE on Charlie Rose.

Nice of Andy Card, whatever his motivation, to chime in and reaffirm Karl Rove's lack of credibility as truth teller and his reputation liar. Andy Card called out Turdblossom. Scott McClellan called out Bush. These folks are professional blame- layers and we're in for a whole lot more of it as this thing unravels.

Shit Stain Jodi Your personal life is nobody's problem but your own. I have not heard anyone here ask about it. I don't care if you've been on vacation or working - If you want to see the transcript of the exchange on the Charlie Rose show, get it yourself. That you don't know whether to believe what was reported here is also your problem. Get off your enormous un-inquisitive nay-saying ass and look it up yourself before posting drivel. Your whiny objections to what is posted here are a tiresome bore and I'm quite sure I'm not speaking for just myself when I say
shut the f*ck up.

What was so interesting to me about the Rove-Rose exchange was that the next words out of Rove's mouth after blaming the 2002 Congress for the rush to war in Iraq were "Harry Reid..."

And then Charlie interrupted him.

I mean, that's good. Rove was able to float the notion that the Iraq War was Congress' fault and, not only that, was the fault of Harry Reid and the Democrats. Whatever you have to say about Karl Rove, he knows how to stick in the shiv. Gotta admire such deft knife work.

Rove's claim that the Democrats pushed him and Bush into the war is the kind of blatant, self-serving lie I expect from him. Weren't the Republicans in control of both houses of Congress during the run-up to the war? And wasn't Rove one of the chief enforcers of the White House's decision to go to war during this time? So now he's suggesting the Dems were really running the show, which is such a crock. He has the smug conviction he can spin anything he says and his pals in the media will help him make it truth. If these lapdogs ever summon the courage to turn on him, I'll be glad to get the news.

And we need to be prepared for the shrill screaming Repubs as they blame the Dems for every one of their own errors, lies, and criminal actions over this decade. The "war", the Republican Recession, the housing/credit crunch, the dollar crash, global warming, escalating oil prices and resultant inflation...gosh what did I miss...oh yeah, somehow natural disasters like Katrina and the SoCal fires are surely the Dems fault as well...

It will all be blamed on Congress and the new president. Rove's performance this week was just the opening bit, testing the waters and showing the rest of these cockroaches how it's done.

The money that must be raised to deal with the disaster they've brought the country will be called "tax and spend" and be discussed that way with straight faces on the "news" programs.

We better find some really good armor and some effective voices, 'cause the press is sure not going to play fair and it's going to be a tough four years.

What SSRemover and marksb said. Plus this reminder:

10/17/2004 NYT article by Suskind:
[A Presidential aide, almost certainly Rove]: “We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you’re studying that reality– judiciously, as you will– we’ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out. We’re history’s actors… and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.”

Presumably, K-k-k-karl was only on Charlie Rose to do a little more realityCreashun. Because there IS no 'objective reality' --at least, according to RoveTheBoyGenius. Ergo, the rest of us are to be smeared, and intimated as 'loons' if we fail to buy his delusional creashuns. K-k-k-karl's probably acting as a bell and whistle to distract us from more grim details like Cheney's plans for Iran, or a multitude of other sobering facts.

It looks like marksb has the main Coming Attractions of Rove'sComingAttractionsForPreferredReality scoped out.


The full text of Proverbs 16:18: "Pride goes before destruction, a haughty spirit before a fall."

Being a Friday afternoon and all, I'm going to raise a nice Sierra Nevada Pale Ale and say "Cheers!" to that: may Rove indeed fall far and fast.

Can't help myself but Karl Rove has always reminded me of Porky Pig.

Oh, me too. And Elmer Fudd in OVP, Alfred E. Newman (or is it Howdy Doody) in the Oval Office.

I used to censor such thoughts on the rare occasions when they did occur to me. All that good, Golden Rule home training, just out the fucking window with one crooked election.

Andy Card's war sales scheme is a bigger feather in his cap compared to the rollout by US Big Three Auto of Chevy Luminas, Ford 500's, Pontiac Aztecs and Cadillac Cimmarons. That's really raising the limbo bar of standards isn't it?

It appears every Fearless Leader has his Bagdad Bob.

Poor Rove. He's fallen so far. Well, maybe I should qualify that last statement to death.

oops. Found an 'h' here on the floor.

Mm-m-m, Sierra Nevada.

I'd bet the pre-invasion military preparations tracked pretty closely with the White House pro-war persuasion campaign inside and outside Congress. Some retired generals could shed light on the matter.

that's some bad-ass snark, EW...thanks for the laugh. have a great Turkey Day!

Karl probably meant in a different way than you reported. But that would not be the way readers of this site would take it, as some of us never get benefit of the doubt especially with ROVE.

Come on, Jodi; you don't need to identify with or defend Rove. There are pure ideologues out there if that's what you seek; Rove is not one. He was a hired gun for consummate political opportunists.


I am seeking to raise this blog to a higher level. I did not vote for Rove anyway. Mom always says to "play nice." Sometimes I think I am wasting my time here and big efforts. My vacation was too exhausting to get persnickety with angry bloggers...oh well!

[Momentarily breaking my own rule of not engaging our resident irrelevency]

Oddly enough, Jodi is doing a real service here by demonstrating the fundamental problem with American democracy. Just like the not-so-estimable Joe Klein, Jodi simply can't believe that authority figures such as Mr. Rove would engage blatant lying. Let me lay this out for you Jodi

I've seen the clip in question. Here's an accurate transcript (h/t Steve Benen of TPM and Carpetbagger):

ROVE: [O]ne of the untold stories about the war is why did the United States Congress, the United States Senate, vote on the war resolution in the fall of 2002?

ROSE: Why?

ROVE: This administration was opposed to it. I’m going to talk about that in my book… [T]he administration was opposed to voting on it in the fall of 2002.

ROSE: Because?

ROVE: Because we didn’t think it belonged in the confines of the election. We thought it made it too political. We wanted it outside the confines of the election. It seemed it make things move too fast. There were things that needed to be done to bring along allies and potential allies abroad and yet…

But you were opposed to the vote.

ROVE: It happened. We don’t determine when the Congress vote on things. The Congress does.

ROSE: You wish it hadn’t happened at that time. You would have preferred it did not happen at that time.

ROVE: That’s right.

ROSE: Because your argument– your argument is you would have had maybe more inspections. You would have been able to build a broader coalition. You could have done a whole lot other things if you didn’t have to have a vote, right?

ROVE: Right, right, exactly.

[End of transcript]

This is absolutely, incontravertibly false. Andy Card says it's false. Ari Fleischer says it's false. Contemporaneous documents from the official White House web site contradict this assertion. Everybody who was conscious in 2002 knows that it is false. The banality of evil, indeed.

Now, Jodi, ask yourself these simple questions:

Why would Karl Rove make such an absurd claim? What does he have to gain? Why does say he will claim in his upcoming book that the Administration was opposed to having the vote in the Fall of 2002?

I'll help you with this. Rove is no idiot. He's enduring some short-term embarrassment. This claim, by itself, makes no sense. I suspect that it's part of a broader attack. He's leaking this part now so that when the book comes out, this bit is old news. I predict the broader attack is summed up like this:

The Democrats stabbed us in the back and made us lose in Iraq.

The rest of his smear won't be so easy to refute, but it'll be just as false. And when the book comes out, it'll convince you and Joe Klein that the Democrats lost Iraq.

Jodi says "I am seeking to raise this blog to a higher level." Now THAT is the funniest thing I have seen in a long time....

Friar Wm, once again, kudos for this: I suspect that it's part of a broader attack. [Rove's] leaking this part now so that when the book comes out, this bit is old news. I predict the broader attack is summed up like this:The Democrats stabbed us in the back and made us lose in Iraq.



It appears that someone is playing a game. I am not sure what if any identity verifications are done in this blog, but I will look.

As to Rove's paraphrase above, it can be taken different ways. As I see the above, the question is on when a vote was taken. Rove seems to be saying that the Adminstration wished to wait a while.

So what?


Seriously, he lied. No sane person disputes that. Here's what George W. Bush (I assume you would agree that he speaks for his own administration) said on September 19, 2002:

QUESTION: Mr. President, are you going to send Congress your proposed resolution today? And are you asking for a blank check, sir?
THE PRESIDENT: I am sending suggested language for a resolution. I want -- I've asked for Congress' support to enable the administration to keep the peace. And we look forward to a good, constructive debate in Congress. I appreciate the fact that the leadership recognizes we've got to move before the elections. I appreciate the strong support we're getting from both Republicans and Democrats, and look forward to working with them.

See the part I bolded? Let me repeat it so there's no mistake. On September 19, 2002, George W. Bush said, "we've got to move before the elections". Now Rove claims, "we didn’t think it belonged in the confines of the election". There is only one possible explanation. Rove lied to Charlie Rose. If you can't see that, you are willfully blind.

There are NO identity verifications. That should be rectified.

But back to the topic.

"ROSE: You wish it hadn’t happened at that time. You would have preferred it did not happen at that time.

ROVE: That’s right

Rove is saying that he would have preferred it did not happen at that time.

Ok, that was his preference. He wanted it another time. I can handle that.

What is the problem?

William Ockham ,

I didn't see your comment just before my own.

My point is that the two or three gentlemen being mentioned here, Rove, Bush, Card are probably talking past each other. I mean the comments might not be about the exact same thing,

OR that Rove is explaining his own desire at that time in the past,

Or Rove might have made a mispeak.

We shall probably hear more from him on the subject. To say he lied about it rings kind of feeble, without giving some kind of reason for him to lie. Supposed he said it was so, not that it wasn't so. No gain either way that I can see.

Maybe we should wait and read the book.

: )

A more important matter is that the war with Iraq was pushed too fast. I always thought that. I asked my brothers and father (and everyone else as well) "why the rush to war with Iraq?" "Are we expecting to be attacked by an atomic bomb from Iraq?" The answer I got from Dad was that they wanted the attack completed before the 2004 elections and then from my oldest brother a combat commander that they wanted to attack before the hot weather of the summer.


He's said more on the subject. He repeated the lie. You just don't get it. He's taking advantage of you. You just can't get your head around the idea that somebody like him would flat-out lie. That's his motive. You even recognize the war was pushed too fast and that that's important. Karl Rove was personally involved in scheduling the war for political purposes and he's trying shift the blame.

Let me explain something to you. Karl Rove is from Texas. I'm from Texas. I've watched him operate for nearly 20 years. The man will tell any lie that will advance his cause. Some people think he's a genius. I think he's a sociopath. I'll make you a challenge. Find any transcript of a public appearance by Karl Rove that's more than 50 words. I can show at least one thing that is demonstrable false. The man lies every single time he appears in public. He gets away with it because people like you excuse it.

Well, Scott Horton says it way better than I can:


He ends with:

Obviously, Rove follows the same formula he’s used since his cadet days in the Nixon campaign. Tell a falsehood, but tell it firmly, unequivocally and forcefully enough, and the weak-minded will actually believe you. Rove has proven that this formula works. Hell, he’s even elected a president using it. He is the modern sorcerer. . . or perhaps he’s just the sorcerer’s apprentice and the mess we find ourselves in today is the product of his spells—they may well be enough to affect the weak-minded, but they don’t change reality. That summarizes things very well, in fact.

Here is the video of the Charlie Rose Show with Karl Rove.

Karl Rove and Charlie Rose

I heard it. The people calling Karl Rove a liar on the grounds of that dialogue are full of mud.

Read his book. He told Charlie Rose he would explain what he was saying there, and he wasn't going to tell him the answer on the show. (my words)

Even if he did say what you claim, I am sure he will clarify in his book.


They are being cute about it and making the reasoning and thought sound somewhat like me. I am glad anyway that they can follow the gist of what I say enough to make an almost presentable statement above my name. Maybe they will pick up some good pointers.

But still Liars, Liars, Liars all!

The NEW best potential Presidential 2008 Running Mates are:

Obama + Edwards (Democrats)
Huckabee + McCain (Republicans)

At this point I like the Republicans better, but that Democrat lineup is pretty good also.

Rove is a proven liar and a traitor his actions have seriously undermined national security. The guy should be behind bars not taking up national air space.

What is the sentence for traitors?


Where is Rove a "proven liar?" If Republicans are successful at staying on message, Democrats must not assume they are up to no good. Do not make it so black and white. Try and look at the bigger picture and the D.C. power structure operates, you will be wiser. I PROMISE!!!


The comments to this entry are closed.

Where We Met

Blog powered by Typepad