Remember the other day when I predicted that James Dobson would lie rather than give up what Karl Rove told him about the Miers nomination? Looks like I was right. Here's what Dobson says he was told:
The privileged information, Dobson said on the broadcast, was that "Harriet Miers is an evangelical Christian, that she is from a very conservative church, which is almost universally pro-life, that she had taken on the American Bar Association on the issue of abortion and fought for a policy that would not be supportive of abortion, that she had been a member of the Texas Right to Life."
Dobson said the conversation with Rove took place Oct. 1, one day before President Bush made his decision to nominate Miers and two days before the public announcement.
Why do I know he's lying? Because logically, he's either lying now or he was lying when he said he had secret information that he couldn't reveal. Why? Because everything he names above as that secret information was not secret at all at the time that he claimed to be in possession of it. Dobson made his initial statement on October 3rd, then reiterated it on the 4th. But nothing he says was so secret he couldn't reveal it was secret at all by that time. World Magazine's blog had already reported all of that stuff by then, as had many other media outlets. So he's either lying about having had "privileged" information that he shouldn't have had - and that is exactly what he said - or he's lying now about what that privileged information was. Take your pick.
- Log in to post comments
One other option would be that Rove was stroking Dobson's ego by telling Dobson that he was giving Dobson some highly confidential secret agent type classified special information that only the special secret agent type friends of the government would be privy to. Maybe Rove was lying. Or maybe they're both lying. Or maybe Bush lied to Rove, and Rove and Dobson were both duped. Man, what a bunch of goofballs those guys are.
And it certainly wasn't secret when he was blabbing about priviledged information. This was all public knowledge. And what in the above would have to be protected?
Dobson does not want to testify, so he has put on a fig leaf.
In other places, I have read that Dobson actually made statements about Meirs' religion, her attendance at the evangelical church - i.e., all the information he claims was secret - at the same time as he was crowing about the "confidential" information Rove gave him. That is even stronger proof he either lied to his organization members or is lying now.
The article I read also quotes Dobson as saying that when he met with Rove they did not discuss Roe v. Wade.
Does anybody believe THAT?