The continuing Rove Watch

Let's pick up todays Rove story.

Is Rove a "subject" and other big questions (Salon.COM war room): Maybe this story doesn't need to stop at Rove. The question is, How -- and why -- did Karl Rove know that Joseph Wilson's wife worked for the CIA? Was he told this? By whom? Did someone order him to leak this information? In other words, this story has to spread at least a little to any co-conspirators he worked with.

The second point is that Roves lawyer concedes that Rove is not a target but merely a subject of the Special Investigator Fitzgerald's investigaton. This indicates Fitzgerald has someone else as the target, and Rove is merely a stepping stone to get there.

Code Rove (By Evan Derkacz, AlterNet. Posted July 13, 2005.): This article has a clear agenda, Rove committed a crime, perhaps a Treasonous crime, and he needs to pay. As such the article reminds us to keep our eye on the ball, the task of removing Rove from power.

The Republican talking points about this mess have a strategy to divide the attention into a million little issues. If "we" get involved with all the little issues, we'll lose track of the goal.

But, I ask, in the context of the previous article, isn't keeping attention soley to the task of tackling Rove dangerous in that it would leave the other conspirators in power?

Bush declines comment on Rove Cites ongoing investigation of CIA leak (Wednesday, July 13, 2005; Posted: 11:27 a.m. EDT (15:27 GMT); CNN.COM): Summarizes the whole story fairly well, focusing most on the last 3 days. The main thing it's conveying is the official coverup/distraction story.

"Thank you, Mr. Rove" (Salon.COM war room): The Wall Street Journal editorial staff apparently wants to congradulate Mr. Rove. He is, they claim, a brave whistle-blower exposing nepotism or some kinda other crap story.

Rove Case May Test Bush's Loyalty to His Closest Aides (By DAVID E. SANGER, Published: July 13, 2005; NYTIMES.COM): The President promised to fire "anyone" who was involved in this leak. The question is, if that "anyone" involves his brain, then what will he do? One question asked in the article is: It is impossible to know whether any closed-door conversations have begun in the White House about whether to find a graceful way for Mr. Rove to exit partially, or as one former official said, to "get the benefit of the brain without the proximity of the body."