Gravitymaster 0 #1 June 13, 2006 Karl Rove won’t be prosecuted in CIA leak case Top White House aide was under scrutiny over disclosure of agent’s identity WASHINGTON - Top White House aide Karl Rove has been told by prosecutors he won’t be charged with any crimes in the investigation into leak of a CIA officer's identity, his lawyer said Tuesday. Attorney Robert Luskin said that special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald informed him of the decision on Monday, ending months of speculation about the fate of one of President Bush’s closest advisers. Rove testified five times before a grand jury. Fitzgerald has already secured a criminal indictment against Vice President Dick Cheney’s former chief of staff, I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby. “On June 12, 2006, Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald formally advised us that he does not anticipate seeking charges against Karl Rove,” Luskin said in a statement. “In deference to the pending case, we will not make any further public statements about the subject matter of the investigation,” Luskin said. “We believe the special counsel’s decision should put an end to the baseless speculation about Mr. Rove’s conduct.” __________________________________________________________________________ Hmmmm.... let's see now. How many were influenced by the Press, jumped to conclusions and had Rove indicted, convicted and sentenced to jail. Let me think. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #2 June 13, 2006 Prepare for mass self mutilation, weeping and depression"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #3 June 13, 2006 QuoteKarl Rove won’t be prosecuted in CIA leak case Top White House aide was under scrutiny over disclosure of agent’s identity WASHINGTON - Top White House aide Karl Rove has been told by prosecutors he won’t be charged with any crimes in the investigation into leak of a CIA officer's identity, his lawyer said Tuesday. Attorney Robert Luskin said that special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald informed him of the decision on Monday, ending months of speculation about the fate of one of President Bush’s closest advisers. Rove testified five times before a grand jury. Fitzgerald has already secured a criminal indictment against Vice President Dick Cheney’s former chief of staff, I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby. “On June 12, 2006, Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald formally advised us that he does not anticipate seeking charges against Karl Rove,” Luskin said in a statement. “In deference to the pending case, we will not make any further public statements about the subject matter of the investigation,” Luskin said. “We believe the special counsel’s decision should put an end to the baseless speculation about Mr. Rove’s conduct.” __________________________________________________________________________ Hmmmm.... let's see now. How many were influenced by the Press, jumped to conclusions and had Rove indicted, convicted and sentenced to jail. Let me think. And those who are guilty are always charged - those who are innocent are never charged. Please don't act as if there was no sleaze here. Look as far as Symington's pardoning or as far back as Nixon's pardoning for examples. This sleaze-pig is guilty of releasing Plume's name for backing for the Iraq war, just that he is connected.... not that difficult. I wonder if you were one the guys thinking OJ and Blake were innocent becuase they were acquitted? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #4 June 13, 2006 QuoteQuoteKarl Rove won’t be prosecuted in CIA leak case Top White House aide was under scrutiny over disclosure of agent’s identity WASHINGTON - Top White House aide Karl Rove has been told by prosecutors he won’t be charged with any crimes in the investigation into leak of a CIA officer's identity, his lawyer said Tuesday. Attorney Robert Luskin said that special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald informed him of the decision on Monday, ending months of speculation about the fate of one of President Bush’s closest advisers. Rove testified five times before a grand jury. Fitzgerald has already secured a criminal indictment against Vice President Dick Cheney’s former chief of staff, I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby. “On June 12, 2006, Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald formally advised us that he does not anticipate seeking charges against Karl Rove,” Luskin said in a statement. “In deference to the pending case, we will not make any further public statements about the subject matter of the investigation,” Luskin said. “We believe the special counsel’s decision should put an end to the baseless speculation about Mr. Rove’s conduct.” __________________________________________________________________________ Hmmmm.... let's see now. How many were influenced by the Press, jumped to conclusions and had Rove indicted, convicted and sentenced to jail. Let me think. And those who are guilty are always charged - those who are innocent are never charged. Please don't act as if there was no sleaze here. Look as far as Symington's pardoning or as far back as Nixon's pardoning for examples. This sleaze-pig is guilty of releasing Plume's name for backing for the Iraq war, just that he is connected.... not that difficult. I wonder if you were one the guys thinking OJ and Blake were innocent becuase they were acquitted? Spoken like a true elitist"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #5 June 13, 2006 From another point (In a cartoon voice) Everybody knows he was guilty don't you. After all, he is a racist, biggotted homophob republican and he works for Bush. With all of that he has to be guilt of something because he is an evil coservative but he bought his way out of it (Voice now gone) What a hoot"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #6 June 13, 2006 QuoteAnd those who are guilty are always charged - those who are innocent are never charged. Please don't act as if there was no sleaze here. Look as far as Symington's pardoning or as far back as Nixon's pardoning for examples. This sleaze-pig is guilty of releasing Plume's name for backing for the Iraq war, just that he is connected.... not that difficult. I wonder if you were one the guys thinking OJ and Blake were innocent becuase they were acquitted? OJ and Blake were charged. Are you calling Fitzgerald a sleaze-pig, too? Sour grapes I think. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Michele 1 #7 June 13, 2006 I'm wondering what happened to that guy who had $90,000 is his freezer... Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #8 June 13, 2006 QuoteI'm wondering what happened to that guy who had $90,000 is his freezer... Ciels- Michele So far he hasn't been charged or convicted of anything. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
idrankwhat 0 #9 June 13, 2006 Quote__________________________________________________________________________ Hmmmm.... let's see now. How many were influenced by the Press, jumped to conclusions and had Rove indicted, convicted and sentenced to jail. Let me think. Well you have to admit that when he lied about his involvement to prosecuters, then changed his story and admitted leaking her name during his five visits to the grand jury, one might think that he might be charged. This isn't really that surprising, considering that this administration has done such a good job of protecting itself and this is a crucial election year. Bush would be serving fries at a Texas drive through if it weren't for Rove. Now "Turdblossom" is free to bloom this fall. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #10 June 13, 2006 QuoteQuote__________________________________________________________________________ Hmmmm.... let's see now. How many were influenced by the Press, jumped to conclusions and had Rove indicted, convicted and sentenced to jail. Let me think. Well you have to admit that when he lied about his involvement to prosecuters, then changed his story and admitted leaking her name during his five visits to the grand jury, one might think that he might be charged. This isn't really that surprising, considering that this administration has done such a good job of protecting itself and this is a crucial election year. Bush would be serving fries at a Texas drive through if it weren't for Rove. Now "Turdblossom" is free to bloom this fall. Ah, more from the party of tolerance and acceptance... I guess the judges prosecutors couldn't decide what the definition of "is", is...Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
idrankwhat 0 #11 June 13, 2006 Quote Ah, more from the party of tolerance and acceptance... I guess the judges couldn't decide what the definition of "is", is... If you're referring to my use of his nickname, Bush gave that to him. For obvious reasons. And for the record, no judges were involved. That's the problem. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #12 June 13, 2006 QuoteQuote__________________________________________________________________________ Hmmmm.... let's see now. How many were influenced by the Press, jumped to conclusions and had Rove indicted, convicted and sentenced to jail. Let me think. Well you have to admit that when he lied about his involvement to prosecuters, then changed his story and admitted leaking her name during his five visits to the grand jury, one might think that he might be charged. He admitted leaking her name? Please let us know where you got this information from. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
idrankwhat 0 #13 June 13, 2006 QuoteQuoteQuote__________________________________________________________________________ Hmmmm.... let's see now. How many were influenced by the Press, jumped to conclusions and had Rove indicted, convicted and sentenced to jail. Let me think. Well you have to admit that when he lied about his involvement to prosecuters, then changed his story and admitted leaking her name during his five visits to the grand jury, one might think that he might be charged. He admitted leaking her name? Please let us know where you got this information from. Best I can do on short notice: Rove told the prosecutor that at the time he had no recollection of that short conversation with one of the scores of reporters he talks to in his job. "Cooper later testified and then a wrote a first-person account that Rove told him that Wilson's wife was in the CIA and had authorized her husband's CIA mission. Rove would later tell the grand jury that he had forgotten that conversation and remembered it only after his legal team unearthed a crucial e-mail." http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/26/AR2006042600849_2.html Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
warpedskydiver 0 #14 June 13, 2006 QuoteI'm wondering what happened to that guy who had $90,000 is his freezer... Ciels- Michele Nothing so far Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skydyvr 0 #15 June 13, 2006 QuoteI'm wondering what happened to that guy who had $90,000 is his freezer... He and Cynthia McKinney eloped to Vegas on the cash they didn't find in his mattress. . . =(_8^(1) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #16 June 13, 2006 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote__________________________________________________________________________ Hmmmm.... let's see now. How many were influenced by the Press, jumped to conclusions and had Rove indicted, convicted and sentenced to jail. Let me think. Well you have to admit that when he lied about his involvement to prosecuters, then changed his story and admitted leaking her name during his five visits to the grand jury, one might think that he might be charged. He admitted leaking her name? Please let us know where you got this information from. Best I can do on short notice: Rove told the prosecutor that at the time he had no recollection of that short conversation with one of the scores of reporters he talks to in his job. "Cooper later testified and then a wrote a first-person account that Rove told him that Wilson's wife was in the CIA and had authorized her husband's CIA mission. Rove would later tell the grand jury that he had forgotten that conversation and remembered it only after his legal team unearthed a crucial e-mail." http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/26/AR2006042600849_2.html Oh, please! You said Rove admitted leaking Plame's name. Please provide proof that Rove admitted leaking Valerie Plame's name. As agressive as Fitzgerald has been in this case, do you honestly believe he wouldn't have charged Rove as quickly as he did Libby if he thought he had lied. Give me a break! Of course, Fitzgerald is still no closer to discivering who leaked her name or even if it was leaked. Talk about grasping at straw. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
idrankwhat 0 #17 June 13, 2006 Quote Oh, please! You said Rove admitted leaking Plame's name. Please provide proof that Rove admitted leaking Valerie Plame's name. What? "Wilson's wife" doesn't count? Who's grasping at straws here? This is just sad. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zipp0 1 #18 June 13, 2006 Charged or not, Rove is scum. Zipp0 -------------------------- Chuck Norris doesn't do push-ups, he pushes the Earth down. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Channman 2 #19 June 13, 2006 This is a sad day for Liberals, damn oil money bought his freedom I suppose. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #20 June 13, 2006 QuoteQuote Oh, please! You said Rove admitted leaking Plame's name. Please provide proof that Rove admitted leaking Valerie Plame's name. What? "Wilson's wife" doesn't count? Who's grasping at straws here? This is just sad. Why wasn't Rove charged, then. Isn't that what Fitzgeralds entire case is about? Finding out who leaked Valerie Plames name. Are you actually saying he found out who leaked her name and didn't arrest the perp? I think you have been sucked in by more bad reporting from the WoPo. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zipp0 1 #21 June 13, 2006 Quote Why wasn't Rove charged, then. Turning state's evidence? Now wouldn't that just be grand? LOL Zipp0 -------------------------- Chuck Norris doesn't do push-ups, he pushes the Earth down. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
idrankwhat 0 #22 June 13, 2006 QuoteQuoteQuote Oh, please! You said Rove admitted leaking Plame's name. Please provide proof that Rove admitted leaking Valerie Plame's name. What? "Wilson's wife" doesn't count? Who's grasping at straws here? This is just sad. Why wasn't Rove charged, then. I can't tell you why. But I know this wouldn't be the first time that someone's made a deal and I'm sure it won't be the last. Besides, this administration has done one thing very successfully. They've done an outstanding job of appointing people who will protect the executive branch from investigation and they have a very loyal following in the upper leadership of Congress. Yea, I'd like to see Rove go because I don't like his political style. But my real question goes more towards why Cheney isn't being scrutinized more over this. He's already opened the door with his declassification executive privilege comments and his refusal to disclose if he's ever done it unilaterally, without Bush's knowledge. But, like everything else these days, I'm sure that's protected under "state's secrets". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #23 June 13, 2006 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote Oh, please! You said Rove admitted leaking Plame's name. Please provide proof that Rove admitted leaking Valerie Plame's name. What? "Wilson's wife" doesn't count? Who's grasping at straws here? This is just sad. Why wasn't Rove charged, then. I can't tell you why. But I know this wouldn't be the first time that someone's made a deal and I'm sure it won't be the last. Besides, this administration has done one thing very successfully. They've done an outstanding job of appointing people who will protect the executive branch from investigation and they have a very loyal following in the upper leadership of Congress. Yea, I'd like to see Rove go because I don't like his political style. But my real question goes more towards why Cheney isn't being scrutinized more over this. He's already opened the door with his declassification executive privilege comments and his refusal to disclose if he's ever done it unilaterally, without Bush's knowledge. But, like everything else these days, I'm sure that's protected under "state's secrets". You do realize Fitzgerald is an independent prosecutor, don't you? Are you now going to actually claim he was bribed? Just because you were hoping Rove would be indicted and are now disappointed there wasn't any evidence he committed a crime, is no reason to start smearing Fitzgerald. Especially when your accusations are nothing but unfounded, wild speculation at the very most. Keep grasping at those straws, though. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
idrankwhat 0 #24 June 13, 2006 Quote You do realize Fitzgerald is an independent prosecutor, don't you? Are you now going to actually claim he was bribed? Just because you were hoping Rove would be indicted and are now disappointed there wasn't any evidence he committed a crime, is no reason to start smearing Fitzgerald. Especially when your accusations are nothing but unfounded, wild speculation at the very most. Keep grasping at those straws, though. What is your problem? Quit putting words in my mouth. The only thing I alluded to was the possibility of a deal. I already showed you where Rove admitted that he conveyed the information to Cooper. He admitted it himself!!!! And for the record, Ken Starr was an "independant" counsel. Please tell me that you don't think that politics had an influence on him. Tell me straight up, your posts have nothing to do with the acutal issues at hand do they? I'm pretty sure that you simply use every issue as a vehicle for an attack on whoever is to the left of today's arbitrary "lefty" line. Admit your fetish. It's the first step towards recovery. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
narcimund 0 #25 June 13, 2006 QuoteYou do realize Fitzgerald is an independent prosecutor, don't you? Are you now going to actually claim he was bribed? Just because you were hoping Rove would be indicted and are now disappointed there wasn't any evidence he committed a crime, is no reason to start smearing Fitzgerald. Especially when your accusations are nothing but unfounded, wild speculation at the very most. Keep grasping at those straws, though. You do realize that Betty Crocker is a sweet lady, don't you? Are you now going to actually claim she's a heroin dealer? Just because you were hoping she'd come out with a low-fat german chocolate cake mix and are now disappointed there wasn't a free packet of cherry sauce, is no reason to start smearing Ms. Crocker. Especially when your accusations are nothing but unfounded, wild speculation at the very most. Keep grasping at those straws, though. First Class Citizen Twice Over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
