fitz! It’s really a state of mind.

Ok, no fighting.

hurm

This is just beginning.

Yeah, Gold Bars, what Froomkin and Jane said.

Show us the damn letter.

Nothing about the reporter from truthout who said Rove was indicted? He was interviewed this afternoon but I have no access — what did he say? Is he going to burn his lying source?

Or is that not interesting to you for some reason?

Greg Sargent at Horses Mouth has a statement from Corallo - “There were no conditions attendant to the prosecutor’s actions. There never has been any discussion about cooperation or conditions or anything of the sort. This strictly reflects the prosecutor coming to the correct conclusion that Rove has told the truth from day one. He believed him.”
www.prospect.org/horsesmouth/

come on. obviously cheney is more important in the long term, but most of us have spent the past several months dreaming of a rove indictment. this is a huge disappointment.

I was EPU’d below. It isn’t clear to me whether this link on Rove-won’t-be-indicted has been posted.

Spot on.

Sorry, here is the link.

to let rover slide to get dead eye dick… i guess it’s a good trade. i would [refer that both got “justice”

Has Larry Johnson been heard from today?

I don’t know whether WordPress or my computer ate my last comment, but I don’t see it posted. I apologize if this is redundant. I don’t know whether the following Rove-won’t-be-indicted link has been posted here:

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITI.....index.html

Another big endorsement for our favorite NED!!!

AFT Connecticut, the state’s second largest AFL-CIO union representing more than 26,000 professionals, including healthcare, higher education, and public employees, has endorsed Ned Lamont for U.S. Senate in Connecticut.

I just want to say that this phrase:

> to limbo around the truth

is very funny. To limbo “under” the truth would be more logical, but less catchy as a turn of phrase…

I think this is probably right on the mark. I also think - on the speculative tip - that Rove wouldn’t have been willing to flip if Fitz hadn’t stuck a big fat hook in him. Namely a sealed indictment. Yes, yes - I know everyone has been down on poor Jason Leopold lately, but the arguement that Karl has suddenly renounced the dark side doesn’t make sense without some Mustafa level fire under his butt.

Vyan

neurophius — please refer to Christy’s post “Some things to contemplate….” earlier today. As many of us sometimes are, you’re a little late to this party, but that’s okay….

o #7 — “He believed him.” Okay that seals it, now we know Rove’s spokespeople are full of shit, now the only question is how much. While it may be possible Fitzgerald just didn’t think he had enough to indict Rove (and I doubt that, but I’m not in his shoes) he did not bring him back five times for shits & giggles. There is no way “he believed him.” That’s just a crock.

Jane @ 19 — you beat me to it. I was going say, “Mark, ol’ buddy, you had me going until that last line.”

Luskin’s “No Deal” comment is probably true. That is why Rove testified for the fifth time, in April: to put Rove’s testimony on the record under oath. No need for a deal. Fitzpatrick has what he wants. Should Rove try to change that testimony at the Libby trial, Rove goes down for perjury. So, there is no need for a deal.

By the way, this post was very clearly written, Jane. This topic can get pretty murky but your explanation reads well and is easy to follow.

There is still the issue of the alleged “sealed vs. sealed. The undeniable liberal is no legal scholar (or any kind of scholar) but if such a case exists, wouldn’t that be the hammer over Karl’s head to continue cooperating? Just sayin……

Joshowitz 6 — Or is that not interesting to you for some reason?

I wrote:

I believed him when he said Rove had not been indicted, and I believe him now (and those who spread that particular bit of bad reporting owe us an accounting now, and should — as Jeralyn notes — fulfill their promise to out their sources or be forever banished from any charge of credibility).

This wasn’t an oblique reference to my Aunt Becky.

larry 15 — that is GREAT news. Link?

It’s become ever more apparent as time goes on and Fitzgerald releases bits of information in his filings that this was a Dick Cheney operation. Rove may have gotten involved because smearing people is his idea of a good time, but the Cheney scrawlings on Joe Wilson’s op-ed are the “blue dress” of this case.
———————————————————-
This is, I think, the big reason why Rove was NOT indicted. I think the story goes like this: Cheney and Libby knew Plame was a covert CIA agent. Either Cheney told Libby to betray her, or Libby did it on his own. Either way, Libby’s guilty of violating the spirit of the IIPA. Fitz couldn’t nail him on that charge, but he had him dead to rights on covering the whole thing up, so now Libby is looking at a very ugly trial.

Rove, on the other hand, is a different story. Dirty tricks are his specialty, so it makes sense that Libby would go to him for help smearing Wilson. But I’ve never been convinced that Rove had direct knowledge that Plame was covert. Fitz knows Rove is a weasel, but Fitz isn’t sure if Rove violated the spirit of the IIPA. In fact, Karl’s sleaziness works FOR him here, as it’s entirely plausible that Libby said, “Hey, we want to smear this guy,” and Karl went at it with his usual relish, oblivious to the fact that he was compromising national security.

The only big question left for Fitz is whether Libby acted alone or if he was following Cheney’s orders. (There are lots of smaller questions, of course. I’m still dying to know who talked to Woodward and Novak, and whether he/she is at all connected to Cheney.)

I think Jane is right, there is no indictment and probably won’t be (a disappointment to be sure), Luskin probably isn’t lying about that part. I’d be really surprised if Rove was completely in the clear on this case though, I can’t image he just got let off the hook for conspiracy and lying. Today was about Framing the issue in the minds of public (Rove? He’s off the hook!) and moving on! Period. Frame issue, mince words and move on. Anyone still talking about it is a wacko. We can’t let that happen this time! Show me the godamn letter!

One thing I know is this, I don’t know if these people will ever be beaten in a legal manner, but we sure as hell do not have to join them and let ourselves be browbeaten yet again. The left has got to learn to punch back without worrying how people are going to take it. Show me some godamn proof! I’m not falling this act again; show me some fucking proof Karl Rove has been exonerated Luskin!

TeddySanFran 18

OK, I guess I didn’t look far enough down the threads to realize that Rove news is no news. Sorry for getting excited.

Jane, you had me laughing aloud

i say it’s the economy — watch the falling stock market — watch the spiking rate of violent crime: worst increase since 1991

Does it not count if you are oblivious to compromising national security?

If Karl gave up Libby, it was with the understanding that Libby would be pardoned.

If Clinton had not pardoned Rich, this would be more interesting. As it is, Rove has won the political battle hands down.

Rove is definitely a boy genius. He has managed to take a brain-damaged clown for a surrogate and turn the country upside down. I tip my hat to him. I look forward to seeing how he will stage manage Iraq.

Aunt Becky is Novak’s source.

How’s Aunt Becky’s gout?

Rove was not indicted but he’s mainly a Bush caretaker. The lack of an indictment shows how little authority Bush has in his own White House. Bush is an empty suit, a puppet. His only chance to solo resulted in Harriet Miers.

There was a rumor flying a while back that there was a secret hearing before the judge that involved Fitz and it was rumored that Luskin was arguing against an indictment of Rove because of his crucial importance to the government or some such BS. Did anyone ever followup on that?

I’m wondering.

Is it possible that Fitz got an indictment, had it sealed, and then held it over Rove’s head until he got what he wanted? Or, is it that once an indictment is handed down the Prosecutor has no choice but to execute it? Jane, Reddhead? and help there?

hizzhoner…

Should we expect any comment from Fitz on this particular matter?

Jane at 23: time to trot out that “reading” requirement again?

Did anyone see the pool boy on tweety acting like a school-girl who just found out she is going to the prom.

Very good work today, Jane and Christy (and emptywheel).

Have faith, people, have faith. We have a pro on our side in Patrick Fitzgerald.

“Official A” is “always” indicted by this prosecutor - except in one of the most, if not the single most, high-profile investigations of our government ever conducted??

The friendly-to-Rove corporate media fell silent - suddenly ceasing all ongoing speculation about imminent developments in his case that they had been collectively predicting - the instant an unsubstantiated internet report was published about a very long negotiating session that purportedly took place involving Official A and Special Counsel Fitzgerald.

Four weeks later, a letter from the special counsel went out by fax late in the afternoon of June 12, after an important Libby case hearing was successfully concluded and the court’s chief judge (and overseer of the grand jury) was consulted by the special counsel. A follow-up call by the letter’s recipient (Attorney Luskin) after business hours (and after he had a chance to discuss the letter with his client when Rove arrived in New Hampshire) was placed to the letter writer (Fitzgerald - then on his way back to Chicago?), which was returned by the special counsel at 9 p.m. that night, when Fitzgerald had (presumably) reached his home base.

The subject of the phone conversation which followed the earlier letter? ‘Can Rove and I go public about your letter,’ special counsel, without blowing our deal/cooperation/pledge of silence? And if so, with how much information? Answer was given in the affirmative — and word subsequently went out after 9 p.m. Monday night to friendly contacts in the media, who had the news ready to go first thing Tuesday morning.

Time to turn all eyes toward the movements, and demeanor, of Vice President Richard B. Cheney (as Wilson has already done) — the first brief sighting of said subject today on CNN does not seem to weaken the above ‘faith-based’ interpretation of recent developments.

The other shoes have yet to drop.

I think it’s cruller but crueller works as poetic license.

I’d much rather Rove had to worry about going to jail. Might buy us a few tenths of a percent in a Senate race we need. Though polls (see mydd.com , too lazy to link sorry) happily now put Dewine behind in OH, and Ford even in TN.

Is it okay to hope that Fitz is able to nail Rove for something? (Yeah, I want Cheney’s head on a pike (figuratively, for the spooks who are reading this thread). But I also want a real faster-than-light spacedrive. Or a good matter transmitter.)

Show me some godamn proof! I’m not falling this act again; show me some fucking proof Karl Rove has been exonerated Luskin!
Till he does, it’s an alleged exoneration.

I still wonder about statutes of limitation. I know very little about fed law, but if I’m representing Rove, I tell him to take the 5th within any civil suit until such time as there is no longer any possiblity of a criminal action. As a general proposition, I think it’s safe to say that civil actions have shorter limitation periods, so how does this play out? File the civil suit, and have it stayed indefinitely until Rove can no longer claim 5th protection, or does a civil case get dismissed for lack of prosecution within that time?

A plea or a verdict on the merits would have opened up a civil case for discovery purposes, but this sort of non-binding letter doesn’t. This could end up hurting Wilson-Plame’s civil case, I would think. Maybe more than just ‘hurt’.

It’s gonna be a long few days listening to Repub’s crow about the “victory” and bitch about Fitzgerald. I think I’ll rent some movies.

I want Cheney in an orange jumpsuit, chains, and flip-flops.

Jane, Swopa - I’ve got a better one. Here’s what Corallo told Byron York:

There are no conditions to this action by the special prosecutor. There has never been any talk of conditions, of cooperation, of anything that could even be construed as conditions. This just simply reflects the fact that the special prosecutor found Mr. Rove to be a truthful and credible witness from the beginning.

That seals it, Rove has been cooperating all along, and bs-ing us about telling the truth to Fitzgerald! Just kidding. That’s actually an artfully ambiguous statement from Corallo, making it sound like Fitzgerald from the getgo found Rove truthful and credible, which is laughable, whereas strictly speaking it can be taken to say that Fitzgerald just isn’t prosecuting Rove for anything he said from the beginning of the inquiry. On the other hand, it’s the closest Team Rove has come to claiming that Fitzgerald has declared Rove innocent, which might not be the wisest thing to do, given what else they’ve said (though I don’t think there will be any actual consequences).

But here’s my free, albeit unrequested, advice: in turning attention to Cheney, focus not on the legal case, but on what actually happened in the real world back in summer 2003. Fitzgerald’s going to do what Fitzgerald is going to do, and nothing anyone says is going to make one bit of difference in shaping that. But what Cheney did in summer 2003 is a distinct and different matter, and it’s not only important in itself, it’s nested inside the entire question of prewar intel and the public justification for the war in a way that the legal case, as Fitzgerald has rightly argued, is not. The WaPo has actually been trying to focus attention on Cheney’s conduct repeatedly, from Gellman’s piece immediately after Libby’s indictment to the recent piece by Smith and Vandehei which got, I believe, exactly no attention from anyone.

I myself am skeptical that Cheney is going to get indicted, but regardless, Fitzgerald gives out revealing information that swings free of the sole question of whether Cheney is going to be indicted or not.

BobbyG anything but flip-flops…can you imagine what those feet look like? YUCK!

the patriot 8 — come on. obviously cheney is more important in the long term, but most of us have spent the past several months dreaming of a rove indictment. this is a huge disappointment.

Don’t count me among “most of us” then. I dream of justice being served. If you look back at Watergate, it took a very long time for that to unfold but eventually the system worked. If there are people who are incapable of perceiving anything but a straight vertical ascent as progress they need to familiarize themselves with history.

This isn’t about revenge, or schadenfreude, it’s about restoring faith in the system, about restoring the system itself. If some needed Karl Rove to be frogmarched in order to keep on the path I would say their faith is very weak and so is their will in this situation. A nice symbol perhaps, but what we are about here is something much larger. Always has been, and I hope always will be.

Hayduke at #26:

You’re one hundred percent correct. Democrats and liberal independents need to stand tall.

Show us the letter! Show us the letter! That’s the mantra.

Thank you Jane for a clear and precise post. I wrote before that this could happen and that the strutting will begin. We need to push back. There is so much at stake here, but I feat that the White House has won this round in the minds of regular folks.

I read an entry from Sheldon Drobny at Huffpost. What do you guys think about this? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/.....22922.html

I was always supicious of Fitz’ politics, and feel there is a ring of truth. He did say that he couldn’t get all the facts b/c of the obstruction. Was this a cop out? a show for the media and the lefties that really lead to nowhere and/or for neo-cons to use to say this just frivilous no “underlying crime” has been committed. Is this just another of Bush’s cronies taking the sword for fearless leader. Like Mr. Drobney’s asserts, was this just the administration serving up Libby and then saying it stops there?

Oh Jane you silly thing, Luskin’s cat ate the letter of course!
Other thoughts, has anyone heard from Rove’s spokesperson, Mark whatshisname? He was such a talkative thing before all this good news came out.

I love how Corallo says this game is over, but it was Comstock, and not him, who got assigned to flack Jerry Lewis out of jail. Sounds like they still think they might need Corallo’s services.

And I really do think we need to brainstorm an appropriate title for this role. FDL readers are the best at this kind of brainstorming. What do you call someone whose job it is to disinform the public about a crucial Republican leader’s dire legal jeopady?

Goebbels?

Jane at 46
perfect. thats why you write the blog and i just read it.

Frank @ 25 -

Next week’s Frontline (Tuesday) is apparently going to imply that Cheney/Rummy were taking the CIA out of the game with the OSP. Should be an interesting show.

Emptywheel’s theory fits what we know about the players’ characters (and I use that term loosely). Since finessing the Veep search in 2000, BigTime has been exerting what Rove can only think of as undue influence on the BoyKing. Influencing the BoyKing when he was BoyGovernor was solely Rove’s province, and the appearance of this eminence-gris with connections to DaddyKing had to rankle.

The opportunity to save the BoyKing’s regency (and himself, not incidentally) by throwing BigTime under the bus must greatly tempt Rove. If such an outcome also fit the facts of the case, Fitz becomes Rove’s co-conspirator in The Twilight of the Most Powerful Vice-Presidency Ever.

I’ll take “Resigning for Health Reasons on November 8, 2006,” for $2000, Alex.

Thanks Katie O’Beirne’s Teeth, that’s what I’ve been saying all day.

emptywheel,
Liar

Professor Foland @ 2:55 pm (#39) - According to Webster’s, you’re right about how to spell “cruller”, and I’d say you’re right about “crueller” being appropriate in some ways.

Posted by Jeralyn Merrit at TalkLeft

EXCLUSIVE: No Deal for Karl Rove

Sometimes people just don’t know when to cry “uncle.” I do. I asked Robert Luskin this morning if Karl Rove has made a deal with Fitzgerald. His response:

“There has never, ever been any discussion of a deal in any way, shape or form.”

Which is exactly what Luskin told me weeks ago. It’s over, folks. Karl Rove will not be charged with a crime. He’s cooperated with Fitzgerald by testifying to the grand jury five times and providing whatever information he had without a safety net. Without a 5k. Without assurances he would not be indicted. That’s a hell of a risk, but Luskin pulled it off. My hat’s off to Luskin.

BTW I’d rather see a Cheney indictment than a Rove indictment. Indicting Rove would hurt the republicans in the elections, sure, but indicting Cheney would help us get our troops out of Iraq.

Ya.

And it’s not like Mistah Nixon did so badly when Spiro was sent packing so that Gerald Ford could replace him.

So, if this is, indeed, the case, who might be the favoured anti-nabob of negativism to replace Mr. Cheney?

.

a gooper-scooper, emptywheel

texexspeedy #48:

If so, then mission not accomplished. Valerie Plame was outed to discredit her husband’s contention that the case for war against Iraq had been fabricated. And what do the majority of Americans believe now?

txexspeedy — Sheldon Drobney is a full-on, four-flushing idiot. The worst part about stuff like this is the defeatism that starts to pervade everything like a second-grade birthday party that just got rained on. The second worst part are the uninformed loons like Drobney who crawl out of the woodwork. He did something like this following the Libby indictment, I don’t remember what it was but it was just about the stupidest, most ill-informed piece ever written about the entire affair. I think he just topped it.

How ’bout “official organ of the glorious cultural revoloution”-whoops,thats taken,sorry JC

Josh Marshall has some thoughts:

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.c.....008732.php

emptywheel says “What do you call someone whose job it is to disinform the public about a crucial Republican leader’s dire legal jeopady?”
June 13th, 2006 at 3:01 pm

Perhaps there’s a better euphemism than this: expert damage control specialist - or perhaps a consummate dissembler.

Some more amusing Karl reflections:

http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/co.....s_close_up

Cancer @51. that is exactly what i was thinking = Goebbels?

Not so sure that is one we want to go with but that is definatly it!

The have framed the issue today, that’s what this was about. We have got to be quicker to respond. We need a Karl Rove… only not an evil one. If this issues isn’t resolved today then “KarlRove is off the hook you whacko” is all we can expect from here on out. No different that Sadamn being behind 9/11 in the minds of the masses. Dictate half truths, frame, move on. Slag anyone still talking about it.

How do we respond to this stuff?!

Jane #46,
Yes, this is true-I was in high school in DC during Watergate but there were no ‘Internets’ then and we had to only the Print/TV MSM, NYT and WaPo were also against Tricky Dick- plus there was bi-partisan support against Nixon et. al. in Congress - this is a different animal IMO.

“What do you call someone whose job it is to disinform the public about a crucial Republican leader’s dire legal jeopady?”

Bamboozlinator in Chief

Emptywheel #50:

Uh, The Rendon Group?

http://tinyurl.com/qtjg7

Jane #63 - Whew, trexspeedy freaked me out for a second. Thanks for straightening me out on that one…

I am already seeing what I want to see and that is a professional prosecutor doing his job. It would be nice to see the Karma Police take Rove into custody, but that’s not Fitz’s job. We need to look no further than Starr and his politically-motivated leaks to recognize what a travesty of justice looks like. If Rove walks without a scratch, that’s the way the cookies crumble. At least the system’s integrity has been preserved this time.

However, I agree that this is far from over, either with the Libby drama that will unfold, or with any impending civil case brought by the Wilsons. If had been in Vegas, I would have asked Joe specifically about that.

Lastly, Leopold is the last person I would want to be today.

sorry if this
salon.com tidbit has already been covered in this thread:

Update: This post initially referred to the “letter” Luskin reportedly received from Fitzgerald. However, Luskin’s statement doesn’t identify the form in which Fitzgerald’s communication came. The New York Times says it was a letter. AP refers to a phone call. Pending more information, we’ve deleted references to a “letter.”

#30 - If Karl gave up Libby, an alternative explanation that resonates with me is here:
[Emptywheel’s] Take on the Rove Announcement

Good link Pach,Karl’s rep is firmly intact,even solidified.No loss there.

My faith in the system is on life-support. OJ Simpson got away with murder. Why can’t Karl Rove get away with treason?

Justice and fairness are antiquated concepts created by people long since deceased. The laws of nature, e.g., survival of the fittest, are prevailing. And today, the fittest are the ones with the power.

Karl Rove is free to manipulate the 2006 election, and the sheep will follow whatever wedge issue he tosses up, and the media will dutifully follow the script.

Since leaving Yearly Kos, I resolved to make myself have more political conversations with the ordinary people I come in contact with day to day. Well, so far I’ve had three of them: (1) “what about those Mexicans?” (2) Republicans and Democrats are just alike, and (3) I’ll think about it and get back to you.

Crickets on this end too.

Faith-restoring justice does not preclude Schadenfreude. If we achieve the former, we can allow ourselves the latter. Especially given the homicidal fascist rat bastards under consideration.

What do you call someone whose job it is to disinform the public about a crucial Republican leader’s dire legal jeopady?

Senior White House Official?

I’m out ya all
to quote markfromireland,
“poof”

OT– What does it say about a sovereign Iraqi government when the famously celebrated democratically elected government and duly designated PM doesn’t know the preznit is in their country until he’s landed and 5 minutes before the photo op. btw– I really thought the preznit was going to collapse in a tearful epiphany while talking the the troops. Just after he looked the PM in the eyes.

sheesh.

Back OT– I have my faith firmly placed in justice, Patrick Fitzgerald, Joe and Valerie Wilson, and the truth. It will come out, one day that will dawn beautifully in the good, old USA that we all want to believe in again and restore. If we take back one or both houses of Congress in November, we can finally have the Congressional investigation that should have happened already. Fitz is doing what he can from a criminal investigative standpoint, it is up to we, the people to find out the other part of the story.

FS - those sound like pretty far fetched rumors. How were they sourced?

It is what it is on Rove and the rest of them. They hold most of the cards, the Prosecutor has done a pretty fair amount, if he pulls off anything else, that will be pretty interesting, but he may not have the ability to put on more of a case, or he may not be sold on more of a case.

I still wonder why nothing has ever crept out on the leaking of classified info by Ashcroft’s COS in the Abramoff matter, and the emails about Ashcroft being pretty much in pocket, and the Black matter and the fact that Zeidenberg works on both Abramoff and Libby. You wonder about overlaps.

It’s still all pretty small stuff next to the NSA suits, the rendition suits, etc. Those were the dismantling of America - Rove is just the dirty politics. Lots of dirty politicians in America’s history. We survive them. The willingness to destroy the country’s constituional underpinnings - - that walks back to way more doors than Rove’s.

OT - Huffpo blog about the Rendon Group.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/.....22912.html
????
You just keep wondering how it was that we had almost half of America polling a belief in the 9/11 hijackers being Iraqi and over half believing that Hussein was “behind” 9/11. A story about it coming down to a really good PR firm, with the power of the govt to punish those who go off message, makes for an interesting read at least. Plus, it’s another Judy Miller story. ;-) In part.

Bravo, Jane! So well done!

And speaking of Rove, did anyone see Biden on Tweety? If not, catch the replay in an hour or so. Surprisingly (maybe), Tweety still seems pissed about Bush declaring that any leakers in the administration would be dealt with, making the point that even though Rove was not indicted, he is still a PROVEN leaker, along with Libby - and Rove still has his job (though security clearance was never brought up, of course).

So, anyway, he asked hairpiece what he thought about Rove still being in the WH and Biden said something like, “As long as he was not indicted it’s fine with me.” WTF? He seriously said it (though not word for word) - unless my ears are still popping.

He’s just another “joe” that NOBODY’s gonna vote for - gack!

I think it will be interesting to see, as time goes on, what kind of influence Dan Abrams has on the philosophy adopted by MSNBC.

ccmask at 29:
Does it not count if you are oblivious to compromising national security?

IIPA requires knowingly disclosing a covert identity. However, being careless with classified information (that is, failing to affirmatively protect it) would get someone’s clearance revoked immediately in any administration that actually cared about national security over clinging to political power.

More Digby on Rove:

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com.....8660136081

ArthurKC 21: (I can’t figure out how to do blockquote, damn.)

‘Luskin’s “No Deal” comment is probably true. That is why Rove testified for the fifth time, in April: to put Rove’s testimony on the record under oath. No need for a deal. Fitzpatrick has what he wants. Should Rove try to change that testimony at the Libby trial, Rove goes down for perjury. So, there is no need for a deal.’

If Fitz got what he wanted back in April, why didn’t Luskin get his precious letter till now? I think it’s possible you’re right, but I can’t explain the delay.

Here’s your Ned Lamont endorsement.

Mary 83 — bad link, dang it

cross posted on TL; the sealed indictment seems the only thing to me that Mr. F has to hold Rove to his bargains. knowing a pardon could doom him, why screw with rover until after elections when he has the support of the administration, instead of the stonewall he sees now.

no, there are many surprises waiting

DB #75:

Being relatively new to this game, I’d had no idea who Jason Leopold was until a month or so ago.

I’ve listened to him twice on Ed Schultz’s radio show, and each time I was left with the impression that the dude’s a blatant self-promoter and a made-to-order mark for an operator like Rove.

If only Fat Ed knew how to conduct an interview, Leopold and truthout.org would’ve been sleeping with the journalistic fishes before he hung up the phone. Now, his best hope is that Fitz will stay clammed forever so he can claim to be “not wrong”.

I really want to know who his sources were, as I’d bet that the dots would form some nice, straight lines back into the WH. But that might be another never-know deal.

Jane said, (around 46) “This isn’t about revenge, or schadenfreude, it’s about restoring faith in the system, about restoring the system itself.”

Yeah, that’s what I was telling myself this morning. It’s a shame when the hook I hang my faith on is a Special Prosecuter… It just ain’t right.

On any case, stuff is still happening… … … the story unfolds one page at a time.

> We have a pro on our side in Patrick
> Fitzgerald.

IF Fitzgerald is truly doing his job as most here hope, then his isn’t on anyone’s “side” except for Ms. Justice.

On the other hand, I am starting to suspect that either Fitzgerald was put in as the after-parade clean-up for the Republican Party, and he is doing THAT job. One indictment, one 2006 Congressional campaign completed, one full pre-emptive pardon issued, problem gone.

OR someone is putting some serious thumbscrews to Fitzgerald to back off. Presumably the same thumbscrews which are applied to Spector and his co-Senators to get _them_ to back off.

Not Really

Pssst - If Rove is looking for his reputation, I think Tom Delay left it for him in hatcheck at some fancy french restaurant.

A Republican operative’s version of this magical pair of blue jeans that fits everyone and can be passed around on an “as needed” basis. NOt that I’m comparing Delay and Rove to an all girls high school clique. *g*

“What do you call someone whose job it is to disinform the public about a crucial Republican leader’s dire legal jeopardy?”

A consummate cosmetologist: putting lipstick on that pig !

Crueller de Vile

punaise says
June 13th, 2006 at 3:27 pm

Respectfully request that you be defenestrated for that one. Oowww!

OT again, sorry– Al Gore on L. Diddy King tonite.

Says Angie at 3:15:
What does it say about a sovereign Iraqi government when the famously celebrated democratically elected government and duly designated PM doesn’t know the preznit is in their country until he’s landed and 5 minutes before the photo op.

Wouldn’t this be a serious breach of protocol if the foreign country were a real sovereign? I imagine that back in the day it would have been taken as an act of war for the foreign head of state to set foot across the border inadequately heralded and accepted.

NR #94:

Sounds just like the “stabbed in the back by the Jews” narrative that the German general staff spun after WWI to get themselves off the hook and get their country ready for WWII.

We Vietnam vets have a similar slogan: “We were winning when I left.”

Neither narrative was true, but darned if the scapegoating didn’t feel good at the time.

I’ve been accused of being short-tempered for the past couple of days, but I would argue that there have been a bonanza of things to be short-tempered about. Put at the top of that list accusations that somehow Patrick Fitzgerald is a bag man for the GOP. I’m announcing now that I have just a little less tolerance for this site devolving into that than Kos does turning his over to the 9/11 conspiracy theorists.

Yer forewarned. Just so nobody is surprised when it happens.

Jane #47:

You are so full of bullshit, it’s coming out your ears. Not about schadenfreude? Then explain your May 5th Late Night FDL Headliner “Countdown to Ecstasy” with a picture of Rove pasted onto a frog. Gimme a break with your holier-than-thou “restoring faith in the system” baloney. I’m pissed, you’re pissed, we’re all pissed — lets just all admit it and move on.

Try this - it looks like al-Scooter at 73 beat me to the punch anyway. *g*
http://tinyurl.com/qtjg7

What if Sealed v Sealed is CIA v Cheney?

EW (3:01 pm) — damn, I’m stumped for a formal title. I’d go with “Political Organ of Propaganda”, but I just can’t get a decent price from any of the companies that embroider baseball jackets and hats for that much stitching.

Maybe if we turned it into an acronym: POOP.

Yeah, maybe I can get a better price on that, including stationary.

Re: Prostatedragon @100

I’m sure al-Maliki knew in advance. But if I were a regular Joe Iraqi, it would smell real funky. It would look like the prez of the U.S. can just make stops whennever he wants because, well, he owns it. Just another province in the American Empire.

We’ve lost CA-50 and now Rove, not a good month nor a good harbinger of the future.

Uh-oh, I think I hear the trexinator being warmed up.

Heh.

I know I am old, but this is beginning to remind me of Nixon. Nixon had a VP (Agnew). He resigned. Nixon then appointed another — not voted upon by Americans, except a VERY few in his congressional district — and even THEY voted for a Rep, NOT for him as prez. Then Nixon quits, putting Ford in the White House. He then pardons Nixon.

Deja vu, all over again? I know it is not exactly the same, but oh, how it is freaky.

If we’re still playing:
“What do you call someone whose job it is to disinform the public about a crucial Republican leader’s dire legal jeopardy?”

Has anyone taken:

“Barbara - but her friend’s call her babs”?

Rayne,yeah,I felt the floor vibrate too.

Emptywheel #51

“What do you call someone whose job it is to disinform the public about a crucial Republican leader’s dire legal jeopady?”

George?

oh, you just know it’s coming.

“OR someone is putting some serious thumbscrews to Fitzgerald to back off. Presumably the same thumbscrews which are applied to Spector and his co-Senators to get _them_ to back off.”

I believe this. I’m not slamming Fitzgerald, but it seems to me with the wealth of evidence uncovered so far in the court filings, he is not being that aggressive about this case. Hard to blame him - as his ultimate bosses are Abu and Bush. But I believe we’ll find out a hell of a lot more with the Wilson’s civil cases and/or congressional investigations.

By the way, the Dow is down for the year …
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters.....tocks.html

I hope the Consumer Price Index released tomorrow is okay, or else hold on to your a**.

Rayne 108 -

“In-COMING!!!!!”

So, giving Luskin the benefit of the doubt here, I assume his announcment means that Rove will NOT be charged with leaking Valerie Plame’s name to the media, which is the case Fitzgerald was assigned to investigate.

But can we automatically assume that Luskin’s speech also means that Rove is off the hook for OTHER crimes, such as perjury and obstruction of justice?

Afghanistan imploding, Iraq civil war, Iran, Syria, economy, domestic spying, high gasoline prices, Abramoff, Aipac, KATRINA………..all bigger than Karl Rove. They have made their bed and they will lie in it!!! Problem is, Diebold is bigger than all of the above.

This is cross posted at TalkLeft in response to Jeralyn’s interview of Luskin (Sorry, no know block quotes)
“Sorry, Jeralyn. I just don’t buy it. There’s deals and then there’s deals. I think Luskin is still spinning. I think politically, there’s no way Rove could’ve taken an actual immunity agreement because it would mean he’s guilty of something, and it would have had to be disclosed at Libby’s trial. So, in light of these new comments I now think either Luskin lied to you, or he told Fitz right off the bat that Rove had Cheney to offer in exchange for not getting prosecuted, but Rove could never take immunity or it would be the political kiss of death. Fitz then agrees simply not to charge him in exchange for his truthful cooperation, but nothing is ever memorialized, and it appears as if Rove is just a “good citizen,” doing his civic duty and hoping for the best.

Fitz is just a prosecutor to me too, and I wouldn’t put it past him and Luskin to have a “gentleman’s agreement”. Neither wins if there’s an actual immunity agreement, and they both win if Fitz gets Rove to give up Cheney and Luskin gets to look like the criminal defense lawyer with the world’s biggest balls.”
_______
And, another thing-criminal defense lawyers know that Fed. Prosecuotrs NEVER issue a “you will not be charged” letter, at least not in my 23 yrs. of experience. This so-called “letter” IF there is one, (and I think it is quite likely to simply be Fitz authorizing Luskin to make this public statement) is Fitz’s message to Libby to “come aboard now buddy, the ship is leaving.” Libby’s now got to be either on the “Cheney Goes to Jail Boat”, or he’s gonna be all alone in his misery. . .

Oops Jane, just read your post at #102, sorry.

What do you call someone whose job it is to disinform the public about a crucial Republican leader’s dire legal jeopady?

Press secretary?
Tucker Carlson?

huffy 103 — a) No it’s NOT about schadenfreude. Being about something larger doesn’t preclude schadenfreude as well, but that isn’t the bottom line. Never has been.

and b) watch your mouth. Either find another way to express yourself or take a hike. If you want to cry and piss yourself in disappointment, go over to Red State, I think they have a large supply of toilet paper on hand for all the chronic bedwetters they host. You’ll be very happy there.

Rayne #106: ROFL!

Mary #104: Great minds think alike. Or your great mind and mine that needs a new motherboard and ‘way more memory.

“Our side” as far as I’m concerned is the side of We, the American people, and truth and justice.

And “ecstacy,” as well as profound relief, in response to the arrival of true justice brought to bear at last, after being long and tragically denied, is an absolutely justified reaction from every single American.

Jane’s been fighting off a Hydra all day long, in several threads. there is carnage.

Mary at 3:36—sometimes simplest is best;-)

I think I’m going to get out of range of shrapnel and skip out to a Democratic group meeting.

Hope you folks are going to do that this week, too. Go, meetup with other progressives, plot and scheme, get your war on.

And come back when the smoke clears over the trexinator. Damn, I’ve GOT to get me one of those!!

History lesson on Fitz needed. I’d be curious to see if any part of this Rove scenario matches up with how Fitz has managed an Official A before? I think of how angry and disappointed people are and then I think of how Fitz must feel, you know the guy who’s been leading a team of truly dedicated people to get to the truth - if the indictments aren’t coming down, I can’t imagine a person with Fitz’s tenatiousness, drive & dedication not feeling like he’s been hit by a semi … then again he is tenatious.

Dang punaise. I get my mythic monsters wrong all the time. So it was a Hyd[rant] Jane’s been battling in these threads. I was ready to lay money she was giving Medusa a haircut. *g*

http://www.vroma.org/images/fl.....medusa.jpg

BOEHLERTING ALONE, YOU FOOL NO ONE.

WORKING UP THE NERVE TO ACCEPT EMAIL ANY TIME SOON?

I don’t want a letter.

I want a number.

And that number is Six.

punaise: but all the necks have been severed cleanly and swiftly — Jane’s been a regular petite Madamoiselle Guillotine today …

Mary @ 127 — Don’t say “Hydrant.” Jane’s poodles might be reading.

WHAT LETTER ???…

If you read the release it says that Gold Bars Bob`s Team was “formally advised”

“On June 12, 2006, Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald formally advised us that he does not anticipate seeking charges against Karl Rove…”

Probably happened yesterday during the conference with the judge

I`m bettin that Mr. Fitzgerald is waiting to see how well Mr. Rove “performs” over the near future (Libby trial etc) before removing his “hook” (notice the does not anticipate part)

This still has a long way to go so be sure & pack a coupla lunches

“…the West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion…but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact, non-Westerners never do.” - Samuel P. Huntington

al-Scooter 73/Mary 104 — Thanks!

I’m not hanging any hope on a civil case, because it will just get hung up with the graymail maneuverings and hit a brick wall.

This we know….

that Karl Rove was forced to admit he participated with others in the White House in the deliberate outing of an undercover CIA agent…a serious enough offense that the CIA itself asked the DOJ to investigate.

that the Bush White House and this president and vice president put settling a political grudge above the security of this country, the lives of a whole company of undercover agents at risk, and rushed into an ill-thought war that is bankrupting this country, indebting us to foreign countries financially, and cost the lives and limbs of 20,000 American military personnel…for starters….

Bush has already been indicted. It is a sealed indictment.

Damn I was typing out my ass :D (couldn’t resist that one).

Here is what I am curious to see how it plays out. The Democrats have been calling for a Congressional investigation into Rove’s involvement. The Republicans have been saying they could not do that because of Fitzgerald investigation. Now Henry Waxman is calling for the Congressional investigation again. What will the new RNC talking point be on it? I got a feeling that it will be along the lines of “Rove did no wrong - Fitzgerald proved that”, but right now we are going on hearsay. Fitzgerald has made no comment on the news today so we are just hearing information from Luskin.

There is a chance Luskin could be telling the truth and Rove is off the hook for now but PlameGate still has a lot of life left in it. As far as we know, the Libby trial could produce some new suspects. I bet Scooter isn’t too happy about being the only one going down for this twisted web so far.

I`m bettin that Mr. Fitzgerald is waiting to see how well Mr. Rove “performs” over the near future (Libby trial etc) before removing his “hook” (notice the does not anticipate part)
_____

Wel, when I first read that, I had exact same reaction. “…does not anticipate…”

Could this whole thing in fact be yet another big spin job?

daCascadian @ 133. I’m pretty sure its been reported as “letter” and “fromally advised” today. Not sure if it was changed (edited) at some point in the day or if it was 2 different reports.

Rayne, *ilson, et al., “gooper-scooper” (62) is my story and I’m sticking to it.

What do you call someone whose job it is to disinform the public about a crucial Republican leader’s dire legal jeopardy?

Repubukkake?

I’m rolling my sleeves up and starting fresh, going with the “It’s Been a Cheney Operation All Along” option, as I’ve lomgbeen inclined. Can anyone point out to me any documentation of the Veep’s Plame-related moves between the Kristof column and his writing margin notes on the photocopy of the Wilson op-ed? When, why and how did Cheney learn of the Wilson-Plame marital relationship? Who went seeking for it? Im sorry, sometimes I just lose a detail or two…

I’m with jayt at 42. Movies are what I need.
And song-mangling…. like the one that’s been going through my head all day:

unhappy…. unhappy…. very very very very very very very unhappy.

I want a Karl Rove indictment
With a long stay at Club Fed.
I want a Karl Rove indictment
To fall on double-u like lead.
I want a Karl Rove indictment–
See the bastard get his walk!
I want a Karl Rove indictment
But Gold Bars says Fitz said “not”.

More than that? We need to wait for Waas and Fitz and others to tell us what is going on here. We really don’t know — though I don’t think it’s over by a long shot. And I have no loss of faith in Fitz or the system.

But writing silly lyrics makes me less likely to chew on someone — and likely the wrong someone at that.

And in the meantime, there is no shortage of perps getting lined up for their walk. Just saunter over to TPM Muckraker, and see all the stuff about Jerry Lewis not the comedian.

That can bring a smile to your face.

And to quote another favorite movie, Dead Again, “it’s not over.”

http://tinyurl.com/qtjg7

(burp) excuse me! My that was tasty. The links, too.

SWOPA - A couple of Poodles and a big dish of water might not be a bad way to go for some hydrants.

If the poodles aren’t thirsty we can toss in some tea leaves and see who can help with the *seering* question posed on the right: Where is Karl’s reputation!

If they could work a “hey dude” in there somewhere - could be a moneymaking docudrama.

What do you call someone whose job it is to disinform the public about a crucial Republican leader’s dire legal jeopardy?

White House Press Secretary

For a great laugh, go to NRO’s The Corner and check out the 5:18 PM post from Jonah Goldberg. He’s seems to be quite angry that those of us on the left are bothering him with emails regarding this Rove story. Then go to the 3:34 post from Byron York who knows there could be no deal between Rove and Fitzgerald. How does he know this - because Corallo told him so. And of course, Byron trust every word from Team Rove!

Jane - you have gotten under their skin. Keep up the excellent work!

Fitzgerald indicating that he “doesn’t anticipate bringing charges” is not the same as saying he will definitely not bring charges, now or at some later date. If these words are an accurate reflection of Fitzgerald’s intent, he left the door to indictment open - just a crack perhaps, but open nonetheless.

And it would not surprise me, having read about Fitzgerald’s skills and his history as a prosecutor, to learn months (or years) from now that he is pitting different camps of power within the Bush administration against one another. They might well end up tearing each other down, saving Fitz from having to do it himself. What may appear today to be a small victory for Rove may eventually be revealed to be part of a larger strategy toward that end.

What I wouldn’t give to know what the jury asked Rove during that last appearance.

Remember Shuster’s report? “Hell”. “…surprised by the questions…” Wish Shuster or someone would go back and try to get some details on that appearance (if such information is available).

To answer the question. What do you call someone whose job it is to disinform the public about a crucial Republican leader’s dire legal jeopardy?

“A Partisan Framer”

Incidentally, speaking of things to be short-tempered about:

Note: Armitage will be on Charlie Rose tonight.

I’m going to be out for part of the evening, so I checked the local PBS schedule. Okay, midnight — a bit late, but at least I’ll be at home in time.

Then it occurs to me … is this a tape-delay deal where East Coasters will get a three-hour head start on analyzing Armitage’s appearance, leaving yours truly in the dust?!

Not that I’m concerned with any particular individual beating me to the proverbial punch, but just randomly I checked a local schedule in Michigan, which showed the broadcast time as 9:30 pm. Eastern time, no less.

In other words, empt — excuse me, some people will have five or six hours to digest and dissect Armitage’s words before us Westerners can do anything about it.

(*extended cursing and gnashing of teeth*)

Jamie,

“What will the new RNC talking point be on it? I got a feeling that it will be along the lines of “Rove did no wrong - Fitzgerald proved that”"

Apparently Biden got the memo too…

BIDEN: Well, I make of it that there weren’t facts to make the case against him. And I respect the prosecutor, because, obviously, there was overwhelming pressure for him to do something.

I think the hardest job for a prosecutor is not to indict. And I trust his judgment, that, if he said there weren’t the facts here to indict, that he shouldn’t. And Karl Rove, as far as I’m concerned, then, is innocent of any wrongdoing.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRA.....om.01.html

Indictment or not, Rove leaked Plame to two reporters.

Swopa: ROFL

Jane, I know these comment sections can get a little rough, but you’ve been coming off as a total tyrant these past few days. I understand where you’re coming from — the last thing we need is for half the community to commit seppuku over this shit. but I don’t think the reactions to this news have been excessively shrill/defeatist/limp-wristed. just because some of feel sick to our stomachs doesn’t mean we’ve lost sight of the big picture.

#43 jayt says, “It’s gonna be a long few days listening to Repub’s crow about the “victory” and bitch about Fitzgerald. I think I’ll rent some movies.”

You can say that again!

Some recommended flicks:

An Inconvenient Truth
V for Vendetta
Mrs. Palfrey at the Claremont (warning: contains VERY sexy guy!!)
Kinky Boots (on hearsay)

Swopa: the Internets move at the speed of light …

OT, but isn’t Al Gore supposed to be on Larry King tonight? If so, heads up!

I love it when people presume to speak for Jane’s or my state of mind.

Jane, I know these comment sections can get a little rough, but you’ve been handling them very well. With so much distractions, one could easily fall into a flame war or degrade in despressing wallow, but you’ve managed to keep the majority of FDL level-headed on staying on target of the original post.

Jane,

“I know that irresponsible types will try to exploit people’s natural mistrust of Gold Bars and his willingness to limbo around the truth, but lying about this goes well past what I think his limits are.”

Not sure how you feel about typos, but figured you’d rather know…

I can’t stop seeing this as a political ploy. Rove gets to act like he isn’t damaged as he greases the chain for the November Election. Then January comes, the Libby trial starts, and reglar voting folks, once again, never realize that they were spun.

Read the letter, Luskin.

Al Gore: CNN: 9pm ET — one hour (minus commercials)

“In-COMING!!!!”

If we had our own Karl Rove . . .

He would be spinning this into, “This is only more evidence of how this corrupt administration has been given a pass on every charge, even treason. They are all crooks and need to go now.”

Any Dems up to the task? (Besides Feingold I mean)

ccmask @ 162, I think that is pretty much it.

WaPo -

By Fred Barbash and Jim VandeHei
Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, June 13, 2006; 8:24 AM

“Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald has told White House aide Karl Rove that he does not expect to seek charges against him in connection with the CIA leak case, Rove’s lawyer said today.

In a statement this morning, Robert Luskin, Rove’s attorney, said that Fitzgerald “has formally advised us that he does not anticipate seeking charges” against Rove.

Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald has told White House aide Karl Rove that he does not expect to seek charges against him in connection with the CIA leak case, Rove’s lawyer said today.

In a statement this morning, Robert Luskin, Rove’s attorney, said that Fitzgerald “has formally advised us that he does not anticipate seeking charges” against Rove…

_____

Dunno. Smelling more and more like spin. “Does not expect” has morphed and congealed all over the news into “will NOT be” and is now “cleared.”

ramadi is being wiped off the map in the same way fallujah & its people have been

this is happening now. our days & nights

i am not at all surprised by what has happened to rove. the absence of a jurisprudential life in those united states has become more & more apparent as any form of real justice has dissapeared

this ansence of jurisprudentail life is merely mirrored by a supreme court that is essentially controlled by people who have nothing in common, nothing at all with a brandeis, a marshal or frankfurter. as legals ’scholars’ - they are caricatures of caricatures. a federal court full to the rafters with every bit of detrius that the cheney bush junta can constitute

the greater intellects of the judiciary of those united states were always connnected to the greater society

now they are merely ciphers for a system that is heavy with corruption, venality & waste

so in the sense i find the lives of the iraqui people in ramadi infinitely more important than that fatfuck rove’s sordid existence, alliance & comprimises - then it is to the war in iraq that attention needs to be focused

english common law & all its deriviations are labyrinthine because they set as always to protect the powerful & their property

i am sure this particular labrynth will begin & end in libby

The concern troll is no patriot.

Fitzy has been getting pressure in the Libby proceedings to declare as to whether or not Rove is going to be indicted. That may have precipitated this “No intention at this time” statement.

Sure that leaves a lot of room open for speculation- and the “Rove flipped on Cheney” theme is tantalizing.

Personally- I’m inclined to quit speculating on this thing and forget it until there is more hard data. There’s nothing to get traction on at this time. Pure speculation- which is fun- but doesn’t get me anywhere.

Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald has told White House aide Karl Rove that he does not expect to seek charges against him in connection with the CIA leak case…..

Maybe he will seek charges in another case…like the whig case.

the patriot 156 — I’ve provided a place for this particular discussion. I am going to be quite firm about people dragging it into every new thread, as I’ve said before. Now knock it the fuck off or I will ban you, that’s a promise. If you want to discuss it you know where to do it. I will be as firm as I have to be to keep this in check, hijack another thread and you are out of here. Do I make myself clear?

The government herewith respectfully asserts its intention to intervene in this proceedings. The answer to:

“What do you call someone whose job it is to disinform the public about a crucial Republican leader’s dire legal jeopady?”

has been duly designated a state secret.

Affidavits from Negroponte, Pace, Hayden, Mueller, Gonzales and Ben the Janitor are on file in locked room under Seal in DC. Ben has the key. Ooops. I maybe wasn’t supposed to say that part.

Any further discussion of this matter is enjoined. Violations may or will be deemed treasonous and violators will be subject to secret detention, interrogations, “they say it’s not torture but you can bet you won’t like it and don’t ask about the recording of Ashcroft singing Let the Eagle Soar” and tribunals drawn from the Pioneers Club or appointed by Ken Mehlman.

All Hail The President and have a nice day.

A partisan framer:

Karl Rove, asked to explain his manifest animosity toward founding father Thomas Jefferson as evidenced by recent scurrilous attacks, intoned barely above a whisper, “He was a partisan framer.”
“A democrat,” he added darkly.

Here is the clearest item I have seen on this all day

Make of it what you will, I have

“…I called Luskin at his office and told him I was interested to know precisely how Fitzgerald had notified him of his decision. “I’m really not going to add anything to what’s in the statement,” Luskin told me.

Why not? I asked. “The reason is, that’s what we’ve decided to do.” (There’s a $500-an-hour answer for you.)

Luskin’s office sent me a copy of his earlier statement. It reads — in its entirety — as follows:

Washington, DC-Robert Luskin, Attorney for Karl Rove today released the following statement:

“On June 12, 2006, Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald formally advised us that he does not anticipate seeking charges against Karl Rove.

“In deference to the pending case, we will not make any further public statements about the subject matter of the investigation. We believe that the Special Counsel’s decision should put an end to the baseless speculation about Mr. Rove’s conduct.”

http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/000890.php

“As long as people believe in absurdities they will continue to commit atrocities.” - Voltaire

I liken this whole (ongoing and forever) mess to the attempt to get tobacco products off the market. The propaganda machines have gotten the greater majority of smokers to make-believe that they have the right to smoke. The tobacco industry always gives to the candidates to assure influence. So, even though the 5% are correct, the 5% will never get the votes/backing to pass the required legislation to get tobacco products banned. Then, if that is not bad enough, the 5% becomes nothing more than a nuisance to the masses of smokers but also an operative to the political types who can use those things for leverage. So, the 5% hug each other for smokers not being able to smoke within 20 feet of a public entrance, even though people are still addicted to (hooked on) smoking (death via suicide).

Libby, Rove, Cheney, Bush, Rummy, and all the rest up and/or around there are all pawns and hence false targets. So Ye all cheer all that you want to and need, but it will not stop any of all that is going on each and every day in the realm of the real power brokers of these many societies. Not having sex with your spouse is not the same as a divorce/dissolution. There are many another for your spouse to enjoy(?) sexual relations with. Our marriage to banks/money/investments/games/etc has to be terminated, else all the little wars won will mean nothing at all… Never-ever.

Your satans are always your gods:-)

hijack? what the fuck? I don’t even know what you’re talking about. I posted two comments in this same thread. that’s it. where should I have posted?

jesus fucking christ. i hardly ever post and the one time I do, I get fucking blasted.

The Fat Lady has not sung.

In fact she hasn’t begun her vocal exercises even.

Yikes !!!

me thinks I need to dig this here ranger grave a little deeper…

In coming indeed

“…It is in the religion of ignorance that tyranny begins…” - Benjamin Franklin

Great news about Lamont, BTW!! Thanks for reporting.

I think we should all look forward: NEXT!

How about the Libby trial? When is it due to get going? In time for the elections??

A silver lining of this is, without the bigger Roverfish to fry, the media will concentrate all it’s attention on Libby.

emptywheel, it calls it Smeagle.

David Olsen @ 174. I never knew Rove said that. that’s a good one then accusme them of being what they hate (b/c they are exactly that)! Throw the monkey’s dung back at him!

Early election returns, Fairfax County (suburban Washington) Virginia:

Good guy: Webb 3,200
Other guy: Miller 2,150

BOOYAH!!!!!!

EW at 51
What do you call someone whose job it is to disinform the public about a crucial Republican leader’s dire legal jeopady?

Babs Comstock = Miss Direction?

Yea egregious . . . your hard work paid off! :)

I am sorry, but I cannot go along with all this denial. The investigation is over. Rove has not flipped. Is it possible that Gonzalez has squashed the indictment? Could he do that? If not, then Fitzgerald simply decided he could not indict. It is appalling. It sends that sleaze bag Rove back to the White House all puffed up with the knowledge that he can break the law, lie and steal, victimize and punish with impunity.

We have lost this one. All I am hoping for is that Plame sues the lot of them. They are all criminals and sociopaths. No more Fitz for me!

Just a question:

How is recruiting going for the CIA now?

I sure wouldn’t want to be part of this. Then again, if I were a mentally ill freak, maybe I would.

My, this makes our country safer, doesn’t it?

Sheesh, EPU’d on the Fairfax results:

Webb 8336
Miller 5388

op99 #184:

Do you suppose that’s the name of her sailboat?

asiamaybe you said that like last thread almost word for word. And a lot of people will say that nothing has changed since last time. Wait a few days and we’ll see how this progresses. Just more proof on how fast the internet is.

cry-in-you-beer troll at 186.

re: these comments and the ones from the other Rove thread.

let’s don’t get all “Kewl Kidz” in this here blogosphere folks. I’m smellin’ a little “A’ table vs. “B” table vs. “C” table startin’ to creep in.

not at my favorite blog hang. deep breaths please. carry on….

Funnier than Mike Duakakis riding in a tank.

http://news.yahoo.com/photos/s.....hdg–

-GSD

GSD 195, Spectacular find.

GSD, that pic fairly begs for a caption contest!

Jane,

Thanks for posting both your and emptywheel’s thoughts here. I am a longtime lurker here, but this was so spot-on I had to post my agreement. This seems like a good explanation for the facts as we know them at this time.

Thank You.

asiamaybe @ 185is an example of what they’ve accomplished today. How do you get from Luskin saying it has been made known to him that Karl Rove won’t be indicted that the investigation is over??? How do you take that mental leap? I’m not trying to bag, I want to know, this IS WHAT THEY DO, they force one to draw a conclusion that they never explicated said. I don’t get it, but they are masters at it.

Rove may “get off” its true but how do you take that next step and conclude the investigation is over and he either, a. hasn’t already sold people out and cut a deal over the course of 5 grand jury testimonies and b. that he won’t sell people out down the road?

Damn we are defeatist, maybe we have been politically abused one too many times?? Is that it?

Jane,

I’ve always thought a Rove indictment was problematic, so this comes as at least unsurprising. But you deserve some props for standing by your assessment of Fitzpatrick’s integrity and commitment to the process even after he declined to indict. It would have been particularly ugly if you had turned on him after this.

And from what I can tell, your assessment of Fitzgerald is substantially correct.

My guess is that there will be no indictments on this matter beyond Libby. That’s not to say that there was or wasn’t plenty of skullduggery going on, only that there’s not enough here to indict anyone else with any reasonable expectation of conviction. If you’re not going to win, why indict?

First, for Swopa. Not to worry, like Murray Waas, I’ve given up teevee (although only for the off-season, until football season starts). So we here on the east-middle coast will be relying on your analytical skills to tell us whether we’ve bolloxed the Armitage story.

And second, yup, I’m still looking for a new name for Comstock’s role. I’m an awful big fan of Gooper scooper. But I’m still looking. Remember, though, it has to be independent of Comstock, because it has to refer to Corallo as well. And that this position is not technically a WH position, since said person also has to collect Matalin’s due’s money to pay the legal bills.

Speaking of which, can we reopen the discussion of Matalin’s fundraising. Was that an attempt to reignite the fundraising in anticipation of much bigger fishies to unfry.

Well, you know, I would attack Tony Snow, but seeing that he is the victim of cancer and is recovering, that means that we can’t respond to him.

Damn, these Coulter Rules suck.

-GSD

What do you call someone whose job it is to disinform the public about a crucial Republican leader’s dire legal jeopardy?

“Stephen”

Who has worked tirelessly to inform the American public of crucial Republican leaders high crimes and misdemenours?

“Jane Hamsher”

The Death of The Internet?

RE: the pic @ #193:

“Scared shitless” comes to mind . . .

well wacko, gloat away… that’s about all Republicans do well, that and root around for scapegoats to blame their messes on? But don’t get too happy because Rove and that happy clan of incompetants in the white house are going steadily down the drain (too bad the country has to go down with them).

Mrs. Comstock as ‘Bag Lady’? like a bookie kind of thing?

Emptywheel #200:

Fixer. Or, if you prefer, James Baker IV.

Hey Stephen,… ah, so tempting. IGNORE TROLL…… IGNORE.

Not sure why this video won’t embed here?

It does show up in the preview.

al-scooter 189 -
yeah, her sailboat or maybe the Babsmobile.

Just joined the thread before bath time (my son’s not mine).

How is Aunt Becky, Jane?

Wacko,

Here’s more for the Republican Gloat Machine:

“NEW YORK - Wall Street resumed its retreat with another session of steep losses Tuesday as declines in oil and gold prices did little to calm anxiety over inflation. The selloff erased the Dow Jones industrial average’s gains so far in 2006.”

Does that put the stock below what it was when Bush came into office? You know, back when the economy was so great that Bush cut refund checks to everyone in the USA to give us “our money back”…and then later on claimed that he was handed a wounded and staggering economy in deep recession…..

-GSD

-GSD

aquart at #88; My Speculative answer:

The weeks delay was because Fitzpatrick needed time to confirm Rove’s Grand Jury testimony in April. If it proved to be false, Rove would be indicted. If Fitz proved it up, no indictment and Rove would have to repeat it at the Libby trial.

The April testimony by Rove may well have been Rove’s take on all the missing email that mysteriously turned up, placing the blame for that at the OVP and Libby. It just seems that with Fitzpatrick releasing the Wilson NYT Op-Ed with Cheney’s handwriting on it, his aim is higher than Libby and, compared to his aim, Rove is just a means to get there. Rove puts pressure on Libby now to flip on Cheney in order to avoid going into the slammer, partially on the basis of Rove’s testimony, until well after Libby’s kids have forgotten what his hug feels like.

Point well taken Hayduke. They do do that. Nevertheless, for me it is time to move on to other issues. So many investigations, so little time.

One thing that I have not seen mentioned is what effect does this Rove “exoneration” (I mean really, wtf?) have on the pending Libby trial? Do Libby’s lawyers now come forth and accuse Fitz of being on a witch hunt wrt their client? I would, if I were them and there was nothing else in the background.

In fact, if we don’t see allegations of that kind popping up in the near, near future from the Libby legal team, it could be an indication that there is still some activity coming down the pike. It’s not like the grand jury has closed its doors yet.

I could be wrong, but it’s worth thinking about.

OK,

You all are Libby’s defense team (OK, only thirty seven of you can be his defense team, the rest have to be his defense fund “advisors”).

What would you do? Stand tough? Pick door number three? Move the family to, well, uh, Namibia?

I would be searching for the right combination of words and evidence to put the fu***rs who stabbed me in the back away for a long time, because the plea window, in my experience, just opened a bit wider.

As for Pod boy dough pantys — what a wanker. Ingnorant and arrogant at the same time. So common.

STRONG INDICATIONS ROVE HAS BEEN INDICTED BY RUNAWAY GRAND JURY IN “SEALED VS. SEALED”

http://citizenspook.blogspot.c.....html#links

al-Scooter >”…that pic fairly begs for a caption contest!”

“Second Thoughts” or “What have I gotten into ?” or “I`d rather be doin a presser”…

“If your pictures aren’t good enough, you’re not close enough,” - Robert Capa

GSD @ 194:

Guess those boys were told they couldn’t sit on their helmets for the onboard photo op, because they’d muss their executive-cut Beltway hairdos…Got to look sharp for the Green Zone dustoff.

…And whyever would you want to attack our beloved White House spokesmodel?

;>)

Is that Stephen with a “ph” or Steven with an “FY?”

Darkblack, give that Snow guy a break — bag and all….

Like Carl Reiner said, “We mock the things we are to become.”

…although only for the off-season, until football season starts.

I’m much the same way, except with basketball — which explains why I’ll be offline for awhile this evening. (And my absence from the FDL caucus last Thursday.)

new thread

Prostratedragon @145. MFG, we are being taken for SUCH a ride.

imman 210 “my son’s not mine”

But that’s very generous that you are willing to raise him as your own anyway :) :)

Every
Post
Under

this one is, well….

egregious (apostrophe police)

Well, you discovered my family secret….

citizenspook, that was a great little link. Wouldn’t it be grand if sealed vs sealed is US vs Cheney?

imman, you one funny pusson

(phonetic effect all I was going for there, I swear, hon!)

Mary @ 3:15 pm (#84) - I’m just astonished that there seem to be so many PR firms like this one cropping up. How much of my tax money is being used to create propoganda?

Bartlett looks a lot like Rove in that pic.

Meanwhile, back at the ranch.

http://tinyurl.com/o9xr5

A federal appeals court panel in Manhattan questioned a lawyer for the federal government yesterday as to whether the Central Intelligence Agency had a legitimate national security interest in refusing to confirm or deny the existence of documents authorizing it to detain and interrogate terrorism suspects overseas.

Just when you think you’ve seen it all, though, something new comes out.

We’ve had the “secret law” case http://www.postgazette.com/pg/05058/462446.stm
Gilmore v. Gonzales

We’ve had the “your own words are a secret from you” case with Padilla recently
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/ne.....ws-broward

But this one has to take the cake. Lawyer: Judge, we have a really goooooooooood argument, let me tell. Really good stuff. Court: Bring it on puppy (or something like that) Lawyer: Really GOOD reasons why we are right! Court: Alrightyyyyyy! Dish! Lawyer: Uh, it’s just that, well, ummm, you’ll have to trust me on this one, your Honor. Court: Saywha? Lawyer: They’re classified - good stuff - so good, they’re secret. But trust me, if you knew what our argument was, it you’d like it.

LOL - Ok, maybe a bit exaggerated. You decide.

Although oral arguments in the appeals court are often delivered in legal shorthand, yesterday’s seemed even more opaque than usual. Almost apologetically, Mr. Skinner told the judges he was “somewhat constrained” in his ability to explain his argument and “connect the dots” because some of the C.I.A.’s reasoning in the case was classified.

Tell me we are just living the season finale of Dallas II.

Please?

As the hearing came to a close, Judge Joseph M. McLaughlin made a joke about the obscurity, quoting a Jesuit logician, Father John Gerard, who in 1597 told a British interrogator: “I do not know where he is. But if I did, I could not and would not tell you.”

The Jesuit doctrine of equivocation, Judge McLaughlin said, “lives on.”

Somehow I have a hard time framing rendition and torture and violation of laws and treaty as an extension of the Jesuit tradition, but I don’t have much imagination.

Cujo - you know the ad campaign

One Middle Eastern war, half a trillion and counting –

One solid Republican talking point, Priceless.

EPU-ed, but…
Lisa Myers said on Hardball that Rove’s attorney was verbally told, then got the letter.

Let’s see the letter.

I’ve been accused of being short-tempered for the past couple of days, but I would argue that there have been a bonanza of things to be short-tempered about. Put at the top of that list accusations that somehow Patrick Fitzgerald is a bag man for the GOP. I’m announcing now that I have just a little less tolerance for this site devolving into that than Kos does turning his over to the 9/11 conspiracy theorists.

Yer forewarned. Just so nobody is surprised when it happens.

You’re saying Patrick Fitzgerald is a hologram?

Olberman proxy smacking Rove down despite lack of indictment.

immanentize @ 220:

Now, now…Carl Reiner didn’t become Gordon Hocheiser. Snow wanted to play in the ‘entertainment branch of industry’ pool, so no kiddie vest for him when it gets over his head.

The main reason I read this blog religiously is that Jane and Christi both make me laugh, but beyond that their generally postive view that right will ultimately prevail. For someone like myself who can be somewhat cynical this kind of postitive reinforcement is almost a necessity.

I have been skeptical from the beginning that the chief architects of this whole scheme, probably Cheney and Rove together if not the entire Iraq policy group, would get what they have coming to them.

Hayduke indicates that Rove didn’t know that Plame was covert and could be excused for talking about her with reporters, Rove is too intelligent to not know that he should at least check on her status before revealing her identity. And I’m aftaid that argogast has it right on the Libby pardon, which I will not be surprised to see come before his trial actually starts. I would really like to believe that Fitz is ultimately targeting Cheney and have enough confidence in him that he will be able to reveal what these slimeballs were capable of, I just don’t think he’ll be given the chance.

Jane:

Must agree totally with your point 1. We don’t know what Fitz has. All else is speculation, some thoughtful, but much wild. Rove totally exonerated? Hardly. But a prosecutor telling a potential target that he is not planning to indict - isn’t that a legalist way of saying, based on current evidence, he really won’t indict. Anyone out there who can translate this legalese and really give us some insight? My guess is that it is like the IRS, they NEVER give you an all clear, do they? New evidence may change the decision, but if this is what was really said, isn’t Rove clear without any deal? Does a prosecutor issue such a statement in a plea bargain / state’s witness deal? Any facts, instead of wishes and regret, that can give some insight?

But Jane, ‘watch your language’? LOL. Is it the swearing or the target? Seems like lots of cussing from the writer in articles and comments… if the accusation is wrong then please, tear apart the evidence and arguement and shame the writer instead of hiding behind censoring and feined offense. Wild accusations which are disproved shame the accusors more, even if they temporarily tarnish the target (hmmm, sound at all familiar?).

Personally I find the all personal attacks boring and childish. Joe Friday had it right - just the facts. Besides, don’t you think trolls are cute and cudley and shouldn’t be referred to in such derogatory terms? QP dolls unite!

Bad humor aside, do you really think the Wilsons will file a civil suit? Discovery cuts both ways and I’m not sure that they want that pandora’s box to be unlocked. Well, maybe anger will cloud their judgement and cause them to over-reach (he’s done that before). More fun speculation.

BTW: Doesn’t anybody else think it strange that Fitz’ spokesman refused to confirm that the investigation was on-going? Why avoid the standard answer now? Is it too wild speculation to read into this that Libby is the end of the road? Why else?

“”Except for a lapse of several months, Selective Service records show presidential adviser Karl Rove escaped the draft for nearly three years at the height of the Vietnam War using student deferments. ” [Walsh, Salt Lake Tribune, 9/18/2004]

Rove’s (non-)draft history includes a period where he claimed a student deferment even though he had dropped out of school.

Copyright 2004 The Salt Lake Tribune

Salt Lake Tribune (Utah)
September 18, 2004, Saturday”

The low-life scumbag claimed a deferment even though he’d dropped out.

Guys and gals,
Talkleft is a class act in how to treat the clearing of Karl Rove. That website is calling for Jason Leopold to out his sources, who apparently lied to him. I urge this website to do the same. Sources are entitled to protection only when they do not intentionally lie in order to spin a source. In this case, they need to be exposed.

‘Is there a special place where we should got to whine and complain?’

Generally, I have found that when FDL’ers have issues, they speak with the quality control supervisor, Helen Waite.

Any problems, take it to her.

;>)

MAry Ann ait 115

They have been putting thumbscrews to him and evryone connected to him from day one. Each time he has just tucked his head and kept doing his job. Even after they pulled trigger after trigger.The careers and life plans of good people were not merely put at risk by these thugs, THEY WE ALTERED.

None of which moved him one jot off his straight path.

You have no freakin idea what you are talking about, or how much his dedication to his duty has already cost.

Hr carries the weight of those consequences on his back, and will for the rest of his life. if being a crony of GWB gets you a top job and influence, being a friend of PJF makes your career a target for the frustrated revenge of those sons of bitches who dare not strike at him directly.

The thing I fear, is the tide of public sentiment turning, the way you are turning, o that the baastards will feel comfortable enogh to Saturday Night Massacre him.

That’s why I came here everyday. To stay on top of it all. To be up to date.

Of course, then I stayed for all the wonderful people I found here.

I thought the same thing emptywheel did and for the same reasons when I heard the news. I was disappointed, not in the prosecution, but in the unfortunate circumstances that allowed Rove to do this. Although I believe that Cheney should go down for his role in this and many other things, I think that this is going to allow Team Bush to point at Cheney and his cronies and say, “It was them officer! HE was the one who sent things out of control! We’re upstanding guys, really.” And, with a bare two years left, cruise on out. Cheney was never the golden boy, the one who would be the face of all that was right and good with the Republican party like George Bush is supposed to be, and by segregating his “team” from Bush’s, they might be able to save Republicanism as a whole in a way that they wouldn’t if it “went all the way to the top”. But I don’t blame Mr. Fitzgerald at all for this. I’m sure it’s realy hard to catch and hold onto greasy, feces covered weasels and getting a hold of one of them is a huge accomplishment.

Wow. A concern troll bonanza. Welcome, LGF’ers.

Nolle prosequi

The headline today is, “Rove Won’t Be Charged in CIA Leak Case.” As reported by Toni Locy, for AP,
“Presidential adviser Karl Rove won’t be a criminal defendant in the CIA leak case, but he could still end up being grilled in court as a witness.”
This story appears to be based on a single source, to wit., Robert Luskin, attorney for Turd Blossom. Fitz is not talking.

There is only one way to put these facts together so that they make sense. Karl Rove has been given a grant of immunity.

Here’s the way it works. There are two kinds of immunity. One is “use immunity,” and people who receive it are forced to testify, but the prosecution is prevented from using their testimony against them.

The other kind of immunity is called “transactional immunity.” It means that the subject testifies, but having received immunity for the entire transaction, he or she is at no risk of prosecution, and therefore, has no Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination.

In the Federal system, the rule is that to force testimony, the prosecutor must grant transactional immunity. I’m guessing that this is what happened yesterday.

As always, there is a catch. First, obviously, a grant of immunity is not a license to commit perjury. Karl Rove may have breathed a sigh of relief today because he is not going to be indicted, but he also must have soiled his skivvies, because he is going to testify. If he lies, there is going to be heavy pressure to indict him. He has testified five times, and it is hard to feature that he will testify without contradicting something that he has already said.

The other reason that there is not unmitigated joy in Karl Rove’s black and malignant heart* is that the letter that grants immunity usually includes some language to the effect that this grant of immunity is to be null and void if the defendant testifies falsely, or fails to cooperate fully with any interview by the FBI. If the letter Luskin received is typical of similar letters I have seen, it emphasizes that it is entirely up to the U.S. Attorney to determine whether or not he has testified falsely.

If I were Luskin, I would have some real fears that my client would be unable to restrain himself from lying. But he is not the only one nervous because of today’s news.

Usually, an immunity letter such as the one I am supposing was received by Luskin doesn’t just drop out of the sky. It is only given after the recipient has made what is called “a proffer.” Basically, a proffer is an offer of testimony that takes the form: “If granted immunity, I will testify that XYZ.”

Now, Patrick Fitzgerald is what is known in the trade as a “prosecutor.” He is not, generally speaking, called an “immunizer.” He does not pass out the “Get out of jail free” cards for nothing. Whatever XYZ was, it was something that Fitzgerald must have thought was worth something.

The general strategy for a prosecuting attorney is to go up the chain. It can be up the supply chain in a drug prosecution, or it can be up the chain of command in a fraud prosecution. With Karl Rove, the chain does not go very much further up.

And here’s why this is a big bummer for Karl Rove. If he offered XYZ, and XYZ is testimony against one or both of the people up the chain from him, it really cuts down the likelihood that one of them will be in a pardoning mood on January 19, 2009.

As Michelle Malkin said in a different context: “Boo-freakin’-hoo.”

Visit the Schapira blog, What we know so far …

“%u2026 and tell ‘em Big Mitch sent ya!”

*P.S. “Black and malignant heart” is a legal term. Really.

“What do you call someone whose job it is to disinform the public about a crucial Republican leader’s dire legal jeopady? “

is Fluffer already taken ?

I have to clarify that this won’t necessarily allow Team Bush to pin it on Cheney, but it is most likely their plan. Will it succeed? Hopefully not.

I also would like to say that, based on what we have learned about the way Mr. Fitzgerald operates and his dedication to his job, if he could have nailed Rove and everyone else he would have, I have no doubt, and that he is most likely doing the best job he (or just about anyone) could do and I thank him for it. I suspect that in prosecutions sometimes that you aren’t always able to get what you want based on the amount of evidence you have and the things you are able to prove. Better something than nothing and I will take it, even as I wish for the fish that got away.

Pachacutec >”…A concern troll bonanza…”

Yea, quite the collection

Maybe time to open an exhibit & charge admission

“We are all individual molecules of a great social gas.” - Huxley

I agree that cooperation is the only possible explanation for Rove’s status as (what I presume will be) “unindicted co-conspirator.” In fact, for need of corroborating testimony, Fitzgerald may have yet another unindicted-coconspiratorship available.

cbl

No, Fluffer won’t work. It’s too close to mr. emptywheel’s nickname going back to when he lived in Japan.

I have not read all of the comments so forgive me it this has been alluded to.

Fritz had plenary authority to find the leaker. From all I read it is clear that Super Dick authorized Libby to out Ms. Plame. Super Dick claimed he had the authority to declassify secret documents and so he authorized Libby to out Ms. Plame and outing her was not illegal.

However, as we know when Fritz met ex parte with the judge who ordered Judith Miller incarcerated, the judge stated that a serious crime had been committed.

That said, even if Super Dick could declassify the info re: Ms. Plame legally (I don’t agree), Super Dick committed a serious crime in declassifing her name and that is what Fritz is up to right now; making a plan to make Super Dick soft.

Dennis Eros

Yo Carol, Jane called for that already.
Check the prior posts. Be polite and ask an educated question, or read the prior posts (not comments).

Raise the level of your game, or be humble.

T-

Mary.
Been aleep w/the flue all day. Woke up to that article about the colliquy between judge Gleeson and tha CIA lawyer. Do you know is that Judge Juhn Gleeson from EDNY? Is he sitting by designation for a 2nd circuit term?

If it is john Gleeson, I hope he gets tapped to write the decision. It’ll be a doozy. He is a guy who loves the footnotes. Pays attention ot detail and writes his own opinions. Form scratch.

He is truly one of the greats. And no stranger to snark either.

He recently issuesd a voting rights deision that has turned NY on it’s head

Mitch
you make an interesting point.
And Anon at 248

you may be on to something

ah, those grapes wouldn’t have tasted any good anyway

looseheadprop
I’m glad Mitch’s post gave you pause (as one of the well-respected commenters at the lake).

It also resonates with my non-lawyer gut feeling perception of what’s going on down the rabbit hole.

You think you could point to Mitch’s post or put one of your own up along those lines…outside of the EPU?

T-

lhp - good luck with the flu. The article says John Gleeson. It’s behind a wall, but if you can stand a trip to truthout ;-), they have it there too.

Don’t worry over Fitzgerald too much (I saw your post). WHile there are people who are bummed over the Rove thing, Fitzgerald still has very broad support. I’ve thought the whole Gonzales/FBI raid thing was PR to beef the AG up for something they have planned, but I just don’t see people buying into it.

You know I’m not an easy sell, but no one is going to be able to have any credibility attacking how this thing is being handled by him or his team. YOu do wonder what they have saved up, though, bc I have to think that both the WH and the OVP pretty much hate his guts between the NIE and the notes on the article - those are things that won’t get pardoned. ;)

IMO, even if people are bummed, there would be a pretty massive reaction if it was open and obvious that the WH was trying to remove him. Unfortunately, more and more stuff happens behind closed doors that never sees the light of day, so even though he’s not on the list of people I’m inviting to my wake, I’ll put in an extra prayer for him. And for you to have miracle midnight cure for the flu too.

EW, how about spiderman?

displaying uncommon thread discipline, I posit the following for the helicopter ride photo caption:

- Rum and Rummerer

- “Wait, there’s been a mistake … I ordered a Brooks Bros. flack blazer, not a Leslie Blitzer flak jacket…”

- “Hogaaaaan!/I know nothink, nothink, nothink”

(Sgt. Schultz, definitley not Helmet Yawn)

T-
I went over to Mitch’s blog and left him a comment. Maybe more will follow.

how ’bout “flack-hack” or flip it to “hack-flack”?

Sash, Carol, interesting that you appear only now with your oh so insightful analysis. Thank you EVER so much, and goodbye.

looseheadprop

Figured something must have you down, and didn’t figure it was Rove. A little good scotch goes a long way with the flu - though it may add to the typos . . .

Personally, I love a good footnote, and your comments about Gleeson and a good sense of snark makes this a fun possibility to think about. Sure, everyone wants a good result when they go to the judge. But when the judge can render a righteous smackdown and puncture some overblown egos while preserving a nation of laws, well gosh, that’s the time to break out the popcorn and enjoy the show.

I’ve been thinking a lot today about ex-Gov Ryan in Illinois, and I’m guessing that folks around the White House have been doing the same over the last few months. There’s nothing like watching a prosecutor take down a high profile politician to make the next politician (or twelve) sit up and pay attention. Given how Fitz handled Ryan - before, during, and after the trial - that’s can’t make Team Irving happy.

It also, IMO, is Fitz’s best protection against a Saturday Night massacre. If he had given BushCo any possible opening for an accusation of “politicizing” this case, he’d be gone and/or the pardons would already be issued. No f*ing doubt about it. The fact that he hasn’t been taken out says to me that he is still viewed as very, very dangerous to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

Shooting down a lawyer on a ranch is one thing. Shooting down Fitz, well that’s something else.

Be well, and do it soon. I’ve got a feeling we’re gonna need your clear thinking pretty soon, once we start to see more legal filings and opinions flying around. (And there’s so many beyond Irving: Safavian, Abramoff, NSA eavesdropping, Delay, Gitmo . . .)

badick @ 236

I never indicated (maybe i gave that impression but it wasn’t intentional) that Rove didn’t know Plane was covert. He is a SOB but he is not a dumb one. Looks like he won’t be charged with it but doesn’t mean he didn’t have to pay a price to not be indicted.

I wasn’t a concern troll or an LGF’er when I sent you money, now was I? I guess my opinion mattered then. I’ll diary at Kos about this later.

Can anyone point out to me any documentation of the Veep’s Plame-related moves between the Kristof column and his writing margin notes on the photocopy of the Wilson op-ed? When, why and how did Cheney learn of the Wilson-Plame marital relationship? Who went seeking for it? Im sorry, sometimes I just lose a detail or two%u2026

Many months ago, my sister went through all the clippings she had kept on the Plame case and posted them on http://littleskyblog.blogspot.com It’s not the easiest thing to read always but there’s tons of details dug out of contemporaneous newspapers and the search function makes it not onerous to use.

Mitchel Schapira 242

The other night, Rovesputin showed up in Boston for a fund raising dinner to raise money for among other things, the GOP operatives who jammed the Democratic phone banks in New Hampshire. Do you recall this little incident?

He raised Lottas dollars in One Nite for their legal bills. That should probably cover a good chuck of them. These GOP slime balls were Convicted and KKKarl, at the drop of a hat, stopped by New Hampshire and basically helped pay the legal costs off for a bunch of GOP folks who helped undermine an election.

Does this sound like something a federal witness/snitch would be allowed to do by someone like Fitzgerald?

Pay off the costs of Convicted Felons in an election tampering scheme, in his spare time?

Your logic escapes me on this as far as Rovesputin co-operating.

The man, even at this late date, can raise ten of thousands of dollars in a single nite speaking gig and thats OK with Fitz cause it has nothing to do with his case?

Most good procecutors I know of in similiar positions would be Bullshit if their Prize Witness was doing shit like that on the side.

It Undermines Credibility of a star witness for a High profile case to be bailing out fellow GOP Felons with fund raising dinners, while promising to help you catch other GOP felons.

If, under your logic, Fitz did cut him a deal for testimony, Fitz is indeed Very broad minded to let Rove undermine the Democratic process in his ’spare time’ with fund raising dinners for convicted felons.

What a sweet deal, Huh?
.

Yellowcake for everyone!

And I’m offering $5 to the first person who can name one thing, anything, Joseph Wilson found on his Niger trip that proved "false" President Bush’s 2003 State of the Union statement, "The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.”

But in the meantime I’m looking for the Wizard who can give me a brain … Toto, Toto, come here, boy !

While you wasted time on this “story” the war raged and the government imploded around us. You were wrong. It hurts you so much that you can’t handle it. Well, I have had enough of your tyranny. Go pound sand.
The Dems will never win with this kind of “leadership.”

BOO HOO! — PEEK-A-BOO, CONCERN TROLL!

Aristotle’s Tragedy says that a really good drama should hinge on a flaw that has been apparent from the start of the play finally bringing the character to a tragic end. He warns against using a Deus ex Machina, some outside unknown force that jump out of the sky to resolve the plot.

The Rove saga certainly presents us with a character who is flawed, a man who omitted his conversation with Matt Cooper in his testimony. But enter stage left a true Deus ex Machina, Viveca Novak, who alerted his lawyer, Robert Luskin, to the fact that the large hole in his story was known, and gave them time to scramble and fill in the gap with the Hadley email. Without her unnecessary input, the omission would have remained, and Fitzgerald would have had his lie.

What might have been is an abstractionRemaining a perpetual possibility
Only in a world of speculation.
T.S.Eliot Burnt Norton

Jane and Fitz!

What Luskin may be communicating is that while Rove made no deal, he did accept a Hobson’s choice.

Free Frank Wanker - Bush said a completely true and a completely misleading statement. The question arises why in a speech made to the US Congress and to the US public Bush felt the need to include information from a foreign government that the US intelligence community had debunked.

Gentlemen Jim — do we know with absolutely certain where the money went that was raised at the event with Rove in attendance? Did it go into a defense fund under the control of the RNC?

Catch my drift? For who’s defense will that money really be used?

Mitchel Shapira (242) — yeah. Makes perfect sense to me. Crystal. Jane, Christy, what do you think (if you come back to this thread)?

Pete - save your efforts. Free What’s his nose is a troll.

I’ll point out the 16 Words are so holey one could drive a pickup truck through them. Like “recently”…what did that really mean? Sometime in the late ’80’s? mid-90’s? When?

arthurKC @212

Oh, I could live with that. If Cheney is the goal, well, there’s real sweetness in that.

I just got off the phone with a highly placed source confirming Cheney’s been given notice he will be indicted within 22 business lunch hours.

If fitz is going after cheney why did he write a letter to Congressman Hinchey, almost 6 months after Hinchey and 39 other Democrats met with and sent a letter to Fitz asking him to investigate the Niger forgeries. The letter fitz finally sent hinchey stated fitz did not have the authority to investigate the Niger forgeries. Why did it take a smart prosecutor like fitz 6 months to figure that out.

Someone got to fitz or he was dirty as the lastest 911 whistleblower with a very credible video stated. The transcripts from the insiders 911 video focusing on the theft of the 200 billion in gold in the basement of the WTC as Sibyl Edmunds stated was one of the most important reasons for bushco engineering 911.

This 911 whistleblower’s story and links are under the General heading of http://www.ProgressiveIndependent.com

By no means is this the only evidence that fitz is dirty and has contacts with the bush regime cronies from his college days.

What exactly did fitz accomplish in his prosecution of Osama bin Laden and the others in the first WTC bombing?

There is no “there” there as someone quoted on FDL and the perpetuation of this farce and holding out hope and denigrating people who have finally had ENOUGH of the fitz lie is…..

Justice delayed is justice denied and fitz has wasted enough bandwidth, hope and money on this latest dog and pony show from the bush crime family.

fitz took 6 months to answer Hinchey’s letter because he hoped people would forget about the courageous attempt by 40 democrats to bring the bush criminals to justice.

fitz like john kerry in his destruction of evidence in the first part of the Iran-Contra hearings and the shredding of eyewitness accounts of the POWs and MIAs still alive in Vietnam was reported on in Village Voice Feb. 2004 and in KISS THE BOYS GOOD-BYE — fitz like kerry is damage control nothing else.

coop El Pas (Spanish) interview: Paul Pillar, ex-CIA Near-East chief
Edited on Thu May-04-06
“Bush lanz una campaa organizada de manipulacin para justificar la guerra de Irak”

(”Bush launched an organised manipulation campaign to justify the war in Iraq”)
ERNESTO EKAIZER (ENVIADO ESPECIAL) - WashingtonELPAIS.es - Internacional - 04-05-2006 - 03:46
http://www.elpais.es/articulo/.....zo/… /

(Interview by Ernesto Ekaiser, El Pas special correspondent in Washington, of Paul Pillar, Head of the C.I.A. for the Near East 2000 - 2005)

http://www.democraticundergrou.....15;208030=

Rose Elvern @ 278
Fitz never got to “prosecute” UBL. He did indict him. Long before most people were aware of UBL. As for the college days… the kid who paid his way through scrubbing toilets and painting walls, opening doors… yea, right.

Are prosecutors obligated to publicly announce who they will not be indicting each week?

No…

For you to ask Fitzy to do so is ridiculous.

Interestingly, I watched FDL’s performance at YearlyKos last night on C-Span and guffawed when Christy said that the Left needs to make sure that journalists and bloggers are held accountable.

Where’s the accountability for the liar Jason Leopold?

Regards,
St Wendeler
Another Rovian Conspiracy

P.S. Thanks for the humor yesterday. Keep it up!

Can anyone help me understand what Fitzgerald has been doing in front of the Grand Jury for the last five (I believe) months? Was he presenting evidence on someone or some action which the GJ refused to accept as sufficient (something very few grand jurys ever dare to do)? Preparing a superceding indictment for Libby? Given that he already had 2 years of investigation under his belt I find it hard to believe he would have gone to the trouble of bringing a new GJ up to speed on the whole mess, then presenting them with a wet firecracker. Did something go wrong in the process?

I suspect we will never know the full story, which I find unsettling as a Citizen.

Cranky

opps, missed one

that’s ok, Ronaldinho didn’t score yesterday either

Just dropped by to gloat.

Gloat gloat gloat!