I kind of like having Karl Rove out as a public figure. We knew he was a sort of nasty guy, but it’s kind of nice to see that up close and personal. It’s obvious that he’s smart. He’s a master in the art of revers logic – starting with a conclusion and working backwards to have it sound like it makes sense whether it does or not. He’s also good at "implication." He implies rather than accuses – which gets the job done. Plant a seed, then run. But the letter [that is apparently legit] he wrote to Dan Abrams is a beauty. In his opening paragraph, he lays out his complaint:On April 7th, you again devoted a substantial part of your show to the claim of former Alabama Governor Don Siegelman that I was behind his prosecution. Your continued coverage of this issue raises questions about your journalistic standards and those of MSNBC and NBC. During your broadcast, Mr. Siegelman referred to Ms. Dana Jill Simpson as a “respected Republican political operative,” a reference it seems you accept because of the frequent attention you give her in your broadcasts.
In it, he goes meticulously through every piece of evidence against him in great detail and attacks Abrams for not checking out the truth of the evidence. Several points:
-
He is attacking Abrams for "implying" things without detailed proof. It’s a laughable accusation, because Rove is attacking Abrams for doing exactly what he [Rove] does.
-
In this long [11,756 words] letter, he never denies the accusation. There is one place where he denies a couple of specific things,And I certainly didn’t meet with anyone at the Justice Department or either of the two U.S. Attorneys in Alabama about investigating or indicting Siegelman. My involvement in the campaign was to approve a request that the President appear at a Riley campaign fundraising event, one of several score fundraising events the President did that election cycle.but not the charges Abrams and Siegelman are actually making. This direct denial is the only one in the letter [(358 words)/(11,756 words) = 3% of the letter].
Number 2. is classic Rove. I don’t know if Rove was involved in the conviction of Governor Siegelman, but Rove’s letter still makes a good example. He denies "specifics" to hide the "general." I did not say her name [Valerie Plame] means just that, nothing more. He may have said Wilson’s Wife or Valerie Wilson or yes or just nodded. So one must parse Rove’s denials very literally. All we know is that he didn’t meet with anyone in the Justice Department or the two Attorneys. His only involvement in the campaign was to approve … That leaves a million other avenues for involvement open, un-denied. He’s essentially arguing against the evidence, without denying the crime.
"If you can’t prove it, I didn’t do it."
I don’t know the truth here, but I do know that this letter is a classic Rove version of his not telling it. And if you read the whole thing, its tone is nasty, nasty, nasty. Living inside that hateful little head of his must be kind of painful…
[…] also Karl Rove’s recent letter to Dan Abrams. Abrams was accusing Rove of being involved in "getting" Alabama Governor […]