CASE CLOSED: NO, KARL, YOU WERE NOT THE DIRECTOR OF THE 1980 REAGAN CAMPAIGN IN TEXAS.

by Mark Levin on Tuesday, February 12, 2013 at 8:04pm CASE CLOSED: NO, KARL, YOU WERE NOT THE DIRECTOR OF THE 1980 REAGAN CAMPAIGN IN TEXAS. And you only got involved in the campaign, it appears, once Reagan beat Bush for the nomination and added Bush to his ticket. You actually backed Ford against Reagan in 1976 and Bush against Reagan in 1980. Michael Reagan: https://twitter.com/ReaganWorld/status/300086702830125056 https://twitter.com/ReaganWorld/status/300374259631525888 Shirley is correct Texas was my sister Maureens and my State in 1980 campaign and we never saw or met Karl Rove. Lou Cannon: http://washingtonexaminer.com/roves-ties-to-reagan-a-technicality-or-taking-too-much-credit/article/ 2521198 "You may quote me as saying he's dead wrong, and I covered every day of that campaign as you know." Tom Pauken: http://cnsnews.com/news/article/karl-rove-did-not-run-1980-reagan-campaign-texas-he-was-involved http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com/2013/02/karl-rove-says-he-directed-the-1980-reagan-campaign-intexas-oops.html/ Karl Rove campaigned in 1980 against Ronald Reagan and for George Herbert Walker Bush in the Republican presidential primary in Texas. In the general election, I never heard at the time that Karl was

running the Reagan campaign in our state. Karl was working for Gov. Clements, but the Reagan leaders in Texas were Ray Barnhart and Ernie Angelo. I knew most of the Reagan leaders around the state, and Karl was not part of that group and was viewed by the Reaganites as being part of the anti-Reagan faction in our state. During the Reagan administration, I served on various White House Fellows Selection Panels during that period. Arlen Specter's wife served on one of the panels with me. Being on a selection panel for that program is no evidence whatsoever that one was a Reagan Republican at the time." http://washingtonexaminer.com/nuclear-war-over-roves-claims-to-work-for-reagan-gipper-biographer-saysno/article/2520968 "Karl Rove campaigned in 1980 against Ronald Reagan and for George Herbert Walker Bush in the Republican presidential primary in Texas. In the general election, I never heard at the time that Karl was running the Reagan campaign in our state. Karl was working for Gov. Clements, but the Reagan leaders in Texas were Ray Barnhart and Ernie Angelo. I knew most of the Reagan leaders around the state, and Karl was not part of that group and was viewed by the Reaganites as being part of the anti-Reagan faction in our state." Gary Hoitsma: http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com/2013/02/karl-rove-says-he-directed-the-1980-reagan-campaign-intexas-oops.html/ I dont remember him being involved at the campaign headquarters in any day to day efforts. http://cnsnews.com/news/article/karl-rove-did-not-run-1980-reagan-campaign-texas-he-was-involved That was not my recollection. I was there at the campaign headquarters in 1980 and the campaign was directed by Ernie Angelo and Rick Shelby was the basic national eld director who came down and ran the day-to-day campaign. I wouldnt doubt that Karl had some, maybe, more of a gure-head role or something like that. But I dont remember him being involved at the campaign headquarters in any day to day efforts that we were involved in. Ray Barnhart: http://cnsnews.com/news/article/karl-rove-did-not-run-1980-reagan-campaign-texas-he-was-involved I dont recall that Karl was there in a leadership role quite frankly. I didnt really remember that. Roger Stone: http://washingtonexaminer.com/roves-ties-to-reagan-a-technicality-or-taking-too-much-credit/article/ 2521198 "I attended several national meetings of the Reagan campaign leadership. I have no memory of Karl Rove 'running" Texas. I never heard his name. He may have worked on a phone bank somewhere or weaseled some direct-mail business from the state party Victory fund. Rove is a Bushman-never a Reaganite." Michele Davis, in an email: I have no recollection whatsoever of Karl Rove showing up at any time, at any place during the 1980 Reagan campaign I eventually traveled full-time on LeaderShip '80, and once we hit ground in City X, I was usually found in the Staff Ofces established at the Headquarters hotel, usually reporting to the Press operation under Nofziger's direction. I never saw Rove nor heard mention of his name when it came to our times campaigning in Texas. From my recollection, I recall hearing the name Karl Rove in 1980, but it was purely in relation to some of the internal reworks taking place within the YRs. I was not a YR, but hanging around the RNC, you'd

always hear about how the satellite groups were usually more trouble than they were worth. Ernest Angelo: http://dailycaller.com/2013/02/08/did-karl-rove-really-work-for-ronald-reagan-its-complicated/ In 1980 I was Gov Reagans Texas chairman in the primary and Campaign Manager for the general election. Gov Clements endorsed Reagan after the Texas primary and was the campaign Chairman. I was a full time volunteer on site for most of the Fall campaign in Austin. I worked closely with Rick Shelby who was a Reagan Regional Political Director and was in Austin nearly full time. We had a large staff of volunteers and paid individuals. Im not much for titles but I can assure you Karl Rove was materially involved since he was working for me and Gov Clements in the campaign. Rick Shelby: http://dailycaller.com/2013/02/08/did-karl-rove-really-work-for-ronald-reagan-its-complicated/ And though Rove never technically worked on the Reagan campaign, Shelby says he served as executive director for the states Victory Committee. In that capacity, Shelby recalls that Rove played a vital role in helping raise the funds necessary for an effective voter ID and turnout program in the state. _________________________________________________________________________ http://i48.tinypic.com/jjqnoy.jpg

Print Email Text Size

Breaking News

Rove Email Leaks: Ideological War Opens in GOP

By Jeffrey Lord on 2.12.13 @ 6:11AM An info dump sent after GOP candidate nominated. Karl Rove was not happy. The conservative base of the Republican Party is not happy. The Ford/Bush-Reagan battle of ideology decades past suddenly renews. Whats going on with Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell? And yes, to wax Carvillian, it is the ideology, stupid. In fact, it is an ideological war. First, Mr. Rove and a leaked email. The date: September 14, 2010. The place: Sean Hannitys television show. The occasion: The Delaware U.S. Senate primary, won that night by conservative activist Christine ODonnell. Won by a more than respectable 6 points, 53%-47%.

The news reached Karl Rove while appearing on Sean Hannitys Fox News TV show, as seen here. Said Rove of ODonnell, who had just defeated Establishment Republican Congressman Mike Castle by a healthy 6 points in the states primary: ROVE: It does conservatives little good to support candidates who, at the end of the day, while they may be conservative in their public statements, do not evince the characteristics of rectitude and truthfulness and sincerity and character that the voters are looking for. And well see how she can answer these questions. She sure as heck didnt answer them thus far in the campaign, and now in the general election, she will be asked about them. HANNITY: I interviewed her, and I felt her explanations were far more plausible than what was played up. ROVE: Did you ask her about the people who were following her home to her headquarters, and how shes checked each night in the bushes? Did you ask her I mean, there are just a lot of nutty things shes been saying that just simply dont add up. Hannity then observed,It sounds like you dont support her. Responded Rove, emphasis in bold my own: Im for the Republican, but I gotta tell you, we were looking at eight to nine seats in the Senate; were now looking at seven to eight in my opinion. This is not a race were going to be able to win. By 9:35 the next morning, September 15, Rove was on the receiving end of the following outraged email from a Republican viewer: I was stunned by your pathetic comments on Hannity last night. I always tune in to Hannity, Fox & Friends and OReilly to hear what you have to say, but that was outrageous. Ive NEVER heard you speak that way and be so animated about Obama himself. I dont care if you like the woman or support her personally. You could have just said Im not sure she can win, but well see. She was chosen by the voters overwhelmingly to be the Republican nominee. You and others like you always say to support the Republican regardless of whether we agree with them or not. I see now thats only when they are one of the ruling class like yourself. Ive lost all respect for you after that because youve shown a genuine lack of character. I think if you watch your appearance in the light of day youll see what I mean. So long. The viewer was not only stunned by Roves on-air remarks to Hannity (which were quickly headlined by the liberal media as here with CBS), she was even more abbergasted when she got this reply directly from Rove at his email address on September 16, two days after his Hannity appearance and one day after her email had been sent to him: Wrote Rove: If we attack President Obama for putting people who cant pay their taxes into his Administration, how can we defend a Republican candidate who doesnt pay some of her taxes, her college bills, or her mortgage; has had no visible means of support; and sued a reputable conservative organization claiming she was the victim of sex discrimination? She didnt win the lawsuit: her employer said she was red for trying to run her own pr consulting rm out of their ofces while on their clock. We conservatives want conservative candidates, but we do our cause little good by nominating conservatives with serious questions about their tness and character. Here are some of the articles that helped shape my thinking, in addition to my impression after meeting her briey last year: Pasted into his email were three highly critical articles on ODonnell that appeared in the liberal Delaware area media. I have been told that the pieces Rove sent were in fact from an opposition research project on ODonnell. A project conducted by her losing primary opponent and the Delaware Republican Party. Said

the ex-ODonnell aide of Roves mailing? It was full of lies and half-truths. The recipient of Roves email, replete with opposition research on the new Republican Party nominee from her own party leadership, was infuriated. Saying this in contacting me: Back in 2010, I emailed Rove (see very bottom of what Im forwarding to you below) when he was on Hannity the day afteror night ofthe primary when C. ODonnell won. I was stunned by what he said on air and by his angry demeanor. Thats the rst I saw of his true self. But the email I got back nearly immediately (as youll note in the date/time entries) was a real stunner. I was furious. Look at the page after page of information he already had ready to email to everyone. This guy was already working tirelessly AGAINST the woman instead of just letting it play out. God forbid grass roots people ever succeed without his help. I dont know if it interests you or not, but I thought Id pass it on. Ive saved it all this time and I certainly will never forget. Yes, it does interest. And one suspects Im not the only one who will be interested. Why? Because the email goes straight to the heart of what concerns so many conservatives about both Rove and his new Conservative Victory Project. Here was the famed Architect personally sending her an email effectively a push button dump of antiODonnell material after the candidate had just won the Delaware primary by six points. The same Karl Rove that others knew had appeared in Delaware before the primary to urge Tea Party members not only to support ODonnells Establishment GOP opponent, liberal ex-governor and Congressman Mike Castle, but had quite specically stressed how critical it was to band together after the primary to ensure the winner was elected in November. In other words, after the Republican voters of Delaware had made their choice for a Tea Party candidate a choice Rove did not like and had actively campaigned against Rove had not only gone on Hannitys show to attack the winner. Two days later he was sending out a document dump of material attacking the Republican nominee for the U.S. Senate even after he had made a point of saying to Hannity Im for the Republican. In point of fact as the angry recipient of this Rove email has documented not only had Rove refused to close ranks behind the ofcial GOP nominee, something he had been urging when he assumed the Establishment Castle would be the nominee,he was actively sending out material that opposed the new Tea Party nominee. News of this email comes on the heels of several blossoming Rove controversies that appear to some conservative activists to be clear signs of a pattern of deception. Specically: Deception One: Roves claim to Foxs Bill OReilly that I was the director of the Texas campaign for Ronald Reagan in the fall of 1980. The statement was instantly disputed by Reagan staffers, beginning with Reagan biographer Craig Shirley. As the days moved forward, one Texan after another from the 1980 Reagan campaign stepped forward to report that Rove in fact had been a staunch supporter of his old boss at the Republican National Committee George Herbert Walker Bush when Bush was the Establishment GOPs Great Moderate Hope to defeat Reagan. Once Bush failed but was picked by Reagan at the August convention as his running mate then and only then was Rove involved. Getting a role in the fall Reagan-Bush campaign courtesy of his then-boss, Texas Governor Bill Clements. Deception Two: Roves effort to marginalize Iowa Republican Congressman Steve King, with Rove lieutenant Steven Law, the head of Roves Conservative Victory Project, telling the Times that: Were

concerned about Steve Kings Todd Akin problem. What problem is that? Back in August of 2012, when laffaire Akin was burning up the political hot sheets, because King had the audacity to defend his friend Akin by saying politely that he had never heard such a thing as Akin was asserting namely that a woman could not get pregnant from a rape. Saying as well of his friends controversial statement that I would be open to discussing the issue. Liberals instantly tried to make this polite admission of intellectual curiosity into something it wasnt that King agreed with Akin. When queried the next day, King ridiculed his critics for what they were trying to do, saying this, in a story the Washington Post headlined as: Steve King: Im No Todd Akin: The liberal press and their allies have again twisted my words, he said in a statement. I never said, nor do I believe, a woman, including minors, cannot get pregnant from rape, statutory rape or incest. Suggesting otherwise is ridiculous, shameful, disgusting and nothing but an attempt to falsely dene who I am. He added, I have never heard of and categorically reject the so-called medical theory that launched this controversy. So under no circumstances did Steve King ever agree with Akin. Specically, categorically saying so. And yet there is Roves Steve Law saying that were concerned about Steve Kings Todd Akin problem. Which of course raises the obvious question: If King never said he agreed with Akin and specically said he disagreed with him why is Roves group implying something else? Deception Three: The other night on Hannity, Rove was busy defending American Crossroads and the Conservative Victory Project, specically saying this of the 2012 Texas Senate primary between Tea Party favorite Ted Cruz and Establishment favorite Lieutenant Governor David Dewhurst. Said Rove: You mentioned Ted Cruz. We didnt need, nobody needed to be involved in the Texas primary. We had three good candidates and the best one won. So we didnt need to be involved in that kind of thing. The message? We Karl Rove and his friends at American Crossroads didnt need to be involved in that kind of thing. Meaning the Texas Senate primary. The problem? This report in the Dallas News from February 11, 2013 that would be just yesterday says something quite different. Heres the quote: Several long-time Rove donors and major supporters of the American Crossroads superPAC were on the wrong side in last years GOP Senate primary in Texas. They backed Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, the establishment candidate, against tea party star Ted Cruz, who won easily. Deception Four:This report from CNS News in September 2012 about Karl Roves involvement with a controversy involving the Komen Foundation and its recent tangle with the abortion lobby. The CNS report about Rove verbatim is this: (CNSNews.com) Republican consultant Karl Rove, a former deputy chief of staff in the George W. Bush administration, said that an assertion in a new book that he encouraged the Komen for the Cure breast cancer organization to restore its funding to Planned Parenthood earlier this year was not accurate. Rove did not conrm or deny that he endorsed re-funding, only that the account presented in the book was not accurate. The book, released on Sept. 11, is entitled Planned Bullyhood: The Truth About the Planned Parenthood Funding Battle with Susan G. Komen For The Cure, and was written by Komens former vice president of public policy, Karen Handel. Handel was the former Republican secretary of state for Georgia (2007-2010) and was hired at Komen in April 2011. She resigned from Komen in February 2012 after a controversy ensued following the groups decision in early 2012 to halt its $680,000 in grants to Planned Parenthood a decision that was reversed

in early February following a liberal and media backlash over the decision. Handel tells her side of the controversy in Planned Bullyhood and states in the introduction that Komen capitulated and reversed course. Komens surrender was even encouraged by conservative mainstays like Karl Rove. Later in the book, Handel reports that she was talking with Komen founder and CEO Nancy G. Brinker on Feb. 3, after Komen executives had decided to restore its grants to Planned Parenthood, one of the worlds leading abortion providers. Handel writes: If we blink now, its over and no one will know what Komen stands for, I implored. Nancys reply stunned me. Karen, Ive talked to a lot of people. And even Karl says we have to backtrack. Theres just no other way. Karl? Whos Karl? She looked at me strangely as if I should know exactly who she was talking about. She said, Karl Rove! I started laughing. Just when I thought things could not get more bizarre. What in the world did Karl Rove have to do with anything? Nancy continued, This is the only way, she reiterated. You have no idea what Ive been through over the past three days. In an e-mail to Karl Rove, CNSNews.com cited Handels story and asked the Republican political consultant whether he advised Komen to restore funding to Planned Parenthood and, if he did, to explain why. Roves chief of staff, Sheena A. Tahilramani, responded by e-mail on Sept. 11, stating, Ive discussed this with Karl and Mrs. Handels book is not accurate. In a follow-up, CNSNews.com asked for clarication and whether Rove was stating that Handels claim was false. In a Sept. 12 e-mail, Tahilramani answered, Ms. Handels account is not accurate. Although the Susan G. Komen for the Cure organization is committed to ghting and ending breast cancer, the group restored its funding to Planned Parenthood. According to its 2009-2010 annual report, Planned Parenthood received $487.4 million in tax dollars; and according to its fact sheet, Planned Parenthood performed 329,445 abortions in 2010. The organization does not do mammograms to screen for breast cancer. CNSNews.com contacted Komen CEO Nancy Brinker by e-mail on Sept. 12 asking whether Handels report was accurate but no response was provided before this story was posted. In other words, according to this story, Rove was essentially pushing the pro-choice agenda. This being a man who is a serious adviser in the pro-life party. And what is the quoted response from a Rove spokesperson? That the account is not accurate. Which is to say, as with the truth on Roves Reagan connection, on what Roves Steven Law said about Iowas Congressman Steve King and Todd Akin, the tale Rove told Hannity about we didnt need to be involved in the Texas primary when in fact his donors really were involved supporting the Establishment guy Dewhurst over the Tea Partys Ted Cruz, and what Rove was reported as quietly doing to help the prochoice Planned Parenthood in the Komen dispute not to mention this leaked email about the ODonnell candidacy well. Wow.Taken all together, this is what is called a pattern. A credibility problem And it is safe to say that when the leaked email on ODonnell is added to this combustible mix with Rove saying Im for the Republican on Hannity while quietly sending out a document dump of articles

trashing ODonnell two days later which would surely be seen as Deception Five, it is precisely this kind of thing that has Rove undermining himself. The single most important thing to understand here? This may involve Karl Rove but it isnt about Karl Rove. This is decidedly not about Karl Rove personally. But contrary to what Mr. Rove says yes indeed this is every bit about ideology. The very fact that Rove chose to name his new venture the Conservative Victory Project instead of giving it a more nebulous, ideologically hazy name as he did with American Crossroads gives the lie to this. If this controversy isnt about ideology why the felt need to gloss things up by calling the project conservative in the rst place? There is only one reason. To try and lull conservatives into the belief this project is all about conservatism when quite clearly it is not. Indeed the whole shimmy over what Rove was or was not doing back in Texas in 1980 illustrates the point. In fact, no one would care what was up with Karl Rove in 1980. But for one thing that Karl Rove knows instinctively and well. Which is surely why he seeks the identication with Reagan, even though it didnt exist until after his old boss George H.W. Bush was placed on Reagans ticket. As history has played out since 1980, Ronald Reagan has emerged as both one of Americas greatest presidents in the eyes of the American people and thus as the conservative gold standard. Karl Roves entire political history is in a very real sense a snapshot history of the GOP Establishment. Indeed, in a small but telling detail, Roves memoirs include a picture of himself as a young man with two men then Vice President Ford and RNC Chairman Bush. There is not a photo to be found of Rove with Reagan, or for that matter any photo of Reagan. The fact that Rove has now been positively identied by Texans as both a Ford supporter in 1976 and a Bush supporter in 1980 when added to his own record in the Bush 43 White House supporting expanding government in areas like education and Medicare, plus his comments about various Tea Party candidates in recent elections taken together they portray someone who is hell bent not only on supporting Establishment Republicans but defeating Reaganite conservatives wherever he can plausibly and quietly do so. Put another way, Rove is badly hurting himself with conservatives who believe he seems decidedly unable or unwilling to see that the arc of history and the idea of Big Government is not only now perceived as a direct threat to the security of the country itself that $17 trillion debt looming Greece-like but is increasingly a decided non-starter for the conservative base of the Republican Party. That where once as a young man he saw both Gerald Ford and George H.W. Bush as more electable than Ronald Reagan he now looks at Establishment candidates competing with Tea Party candidates and sees exactly the same thing. Worse still, that in seeking to advance Establishment GOP candidates he is quietly nding ways like that email on ODonnell to sabotage Tea Party candidates after they are nominated. Historically speaking, this is seen by many conservatives as one of the worst traits of Establishment elites. From the days when Republicans like Nelson Rockefeller and George Romney turned a cold shoulder to Barry Goldwater in 1964 all the way through to recent elections when party elites pushed party unity before a challenge to an Establishment candidate then turned on their heel and refused to endorse the Tea Party winner (as in Delaware and Indiana in 2010 and 2012) or even leave the GOP altogether (as the late Arlen Specter did when confronted by Pat Toomeys second challenge in 2010), the GOP Establishment has acquired a haughty my-way-or-the-highway reputation. A reputation that Mr. Rove memorably reinforced that night in September of 2010 when he launched on

Christine ODonnell angering the viewer who sent me his provocative email. So how does all of this boil down? Its safe to say in this sudden controversy that conservatives see the battle with Karl Rove as illustrative of the battle that must be fought and won if conservatives are to have any chance at all of defeating the most destructive presidency in American history an Obama presidency obsessed with literally spending the nation into bankruptcy. Making America Greece. This is not a battle that can be won if the Republican Party is populated with leaders who see themselves as doing the Big Government routine but just less so. The dime store New Deal approach. Whether out of fear of criticism from the liberal media, a desire of social acceptability in Washington or from a felt need to protect the Establishment GOP. Politically speaking, there is considerable umbrage taken by conservatives at the idea that a GOP Establishment that keeps losing presidential elections (2012, 2008, 1996, 1992, 1976) or wins them by unnecessarily narrow margins (2000 and 2004) has the chutzpa to blame conservatives for losing elections. And thats before you even get to the disaster that was 2006 (when there was no Tea Party and Karl Rove himself had free rein from the White House) or losing races with Establishment candidates in places like Hawaii, Montana, North Dakota and Massachusetts. There is concern that what Rove is seeking to do is build a Shadow Republican Party a decidedly Establishment GOP. An Establishment GOP that is effectively built in the image of all those repeatedly losing presidential candidates, not to mention the Establishment losers supported by American Crossroads in recent elections. When in fact the Tea Party and the conservative movement in general is the only reason Republicans have been winning in the rst place. Not to put too ne a point on it. but John Boehner is Speaker Boehner today because of the Tea Party. Which is another way of saying the Reagan legacy is among other things the Reagan Blueprint. A blueprint that Establishment Republicans like Mr. Rove repeatedly ignore, the election consequences of not following the Reagan blueprint for victory be damned. Its easy to respect Karl Rove for his personal loyalty to both President Bush 43 and 41. They were instrumental in bringing him to where he is today. They are good people who did many good things while in the White House. President Bush 41 is a genuine American hero, and President Bush 43 literally kept this country safe after 9/11. But the hard political fact is that conservatives see both mens domestic choices as failures. The breaking of 41s read my lips tax pledge and 43s compassionate conservative idea of growing government more, just no so much more. (Except, of course that in the latter case the spending was so through the roof can you say TARP? that it was the end of the Bush era, not just the beginning of the Obama era that launched the Tea Party.) An even harder political fact, never mentioned, is that presumably neither Bush presidency not to mention Karl Roves entire Washington career would ever have existed at all if it werent for Ronald Reagan and the conservative movement he represented. And of Senator Mitch McConnells role in all of this? Over at the Hufngton Post there is a story saying that Karl Rove got his idea from none other than the Senate Republican Leader, Kentuckys Mitch McConnell. The story reads in part: The model for the new super PAC, dubbed the Conservative Victory Project, is akin to one that McConnell has touted the need for at GOP events in recent years, two GOP fundraisers with good ties to the senator told Hufngton Post. Both asked for anonymity to speak candidly about private events and discussions. Hmmmm.

And just who is Steven Law, the guy listed as the president and CEO of Roves American Crossroads? The guy at the center of the New York Times story announcing Roves Conservative Victory Project? Thats right. Mr. Law is a former top aide to Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky the Senate Republican Leader. Theres another story making conservative rounds as well. This one from the Lexington Herald-Leader in Kentucky. Reads the headline: Several Kentucky Tea Party groups seek to defeat McConnell in 2014 You cant get much more Establishment Republican than being Mitch McConnell. This entire episode is inviting trouble. One remembers in the long ago when the Bush 41 White House was quietly discussing breaking 41s no new taxes pledge. The Bush White House sent the signal that they saw the President as politically invincible. Untouchable. The President who once had a popularity rating hovering around 90% so infuriated the conservative base he wound up with 37% of the vote as he lost to an underdog Bill Clinton in 1992. Lesson? No one is untouchable in politics. No one. Not the Establishment Republican elite. Not Senator McConnell. And not Karl Rove.