So it now appears that the longstanding line that Rove "never knowingly disclosed classified information" is also no longer operative. And unfortunately for him, that was the only line that mattered...
Yesterday morning I
noted something funny about Rove's defenses over at The Stakeholder. There were of course the new silly defenses about not calling her by name and his motive being to correct the record, yada yada yada. But what was more interesting to me than just the silliness was the quesiton of why Rove was resorting to such silliness all of the sudden. It reaked of desperation.
As I wrote on the New York Times and Washington Post pieces...
So the main damage control points coming from Rove's corner are utterly irrelevant, and this cannot be a good sign for him. All the more so if what's missing is missing for a reason. Reading those stories, I can't help but notice that the only possibly relevant point is suddenly on vacation. For years, it seems, Luskin has been rinsing and repeating with the "never knowingly disclosed classified information" line. Well, as Think Progress noted, it seems quite clear that classified information was disclosed, so the only question is whether it was knowingly. The "knowingness" would be the only thing standing between Rove and a crime, theoretically. Now maybe the papers got tired of printing the same thing over and over, maybe Luskin was off his game, but I suddenly don't see that defense in either of those articles. Interesting.
Today we here from the LA Times...
Luskin declined to say whether Rove knew that Plame was a covert agent, even if he did not know her name, which analysts said was a crucial factor in determining whether the law was broken.
He certainly hasn't declined before. That sounds pretty darn close to Game, Set, Match...
