I love the Princess Bride. It’s one of my favorites.

Oh and FITZ!

t i g r e – d ‘ e a u ! ! !

My god, George Allen is an idiot.

Dick said,”look over there. A flock of quail…and a lawyer!”

Princess Bride is a family favorite. Too funny.

BTW

Some nasty folks over in freepervile are saying the tall man in the rumpled suit should be disbarred.

I am NOT cool with that.

How appropriate, two tabs open and Watertiger on both! Dependable Renegade on the left and FDL on the right.

Cheney makes me throe up

Bustednuckles,

Eeep! I gotta go hunt for some more pix.

lhp – huh? who?

Great post…

I check out your site daily and snarf pics all the time to photoshop. So Thanks.

I believe The Snear is incapable of any type of truth/ honesty. But I am rolling with laughter at your options for that old evil fart….

You rock!

The line being spoken in the photo above: “Never get involved in a land war in Asia . . .”

I said it before, lhp: you’ve got really good taste.

punaise:

lhp – looseheadprop

I trust Dick Cheney as far as I can throe him …

Peterr, my “huh” was regarding the tall man in the rumpled suit

I’m throe-ly disgusted

3rd pic down. looks like
Stupie Mc Fuckhead just shit all over himself!

http://derenegade.blogspot.com/

Define “throes”? Define Cheney.

punaise @16, I thought you knew who lhp was, but I was throe-n by your “huh”

and re # 9, I hope it’s not catching

Punaise

Jane once called Fitz the tall man in the rumpled suit. The term got around and stuck with just about every lawyer I know. (back to why I think there are so many NYC federal practitioners lurking here)

So, I just assumed all fire pups would know it.

Someone needs to alter Noron O’Donnell’s dosage. Too perky by a power of ten.

inconceivable !!!

Watertiger Rocks

-Sec. of Defense Dick Cheney, April 1991
“Once you’ve got Baghdad, it’s not clear what you do with it. It’s not clear what kind of government you would put in place of the one that’s currently there now. Is it going to be a Shia regime, a Sunni regime or a Kurdish regime? Or one that tilts toward the Baathists, or one that tilts toward the Islamic fundamentalists? How much credibility is that government going to have if it’s set up by the United States military when it’s there? How long does the United States military have to stay to protect the people that sign on for that government, and what happens to it once we leave?

Props to needlenose, I pulled this off their site a while ago.

OT per cbl, to Congress and the Traditional Media:
It’s an “OCCUPATION,” not a “war.”

looseheadprop @ 4:36 pm (#1) – Can’t you just hear Cheney saying “inconceivable!” when he thinks about Al Qaeda in Iraq?

I tell you what, this little patriot is madder than a wet settin’ hen

I want a locked room and Mr. “we’re an Empire now” and we’ll throe-down

Cujo at 24

Fantstically funny mental image. But you have to imagine his face and the original actor’s voice. Priceless.

Water tiger. Great choice

Jahn Casper

If it’s an occupation not a war, does that mean shrubya has to give back all those war powers he’s been abusing?

Bush: Cheney is not behind the leaks from Whittington’s head. The focus on Whittington’s head ignores positive news like Whittington’s weight loss. Once again, the libral media is not reporting on parts of Whittington that didn’t get shot.

from politicalhumor.about.com

EPU’d Last Throes of Democracy, ref. Germany, Wikipedia.

I am getting a bee in my bonnet about legislation dealing with the abolition permanent temporary bypassing of Congress in a “terrorist” emergency.

There WAS relevant legislation passed, that made page A927 of the Post, but hasn’t been discussed very much. I remember thinking, well, I suppose they have to have a plan in place. Walking that back along my naive-line that puts it maybe end 2002/early 2003?

We have a parallel government set up in case of “terrorist” attack. The line of succession for president was recently changed to promote Department of Homeland InSecurity much higher on the list.

Am hoping fellow commenters can provide information about this New plan for a New government in the New all terrorist all the time future.

The Long War…that’s THEIR term. I don’t have to make this s*** up. Orwell explains the eternal war/lack of civil liberties thingie much better than I could.

And btw, this is why it matters whether you do or don’t think rogue elements of our own government are capable of creating a terrorist incident. Anthrax and beyond.

watertiger @ 4:48 pm (#21) – Someone needs to alter Noron O’Donnell’s dosage. Too perky by a power of ten.

I think she needs to get her tryptophan dosage increased. Perkiness is the least of her problems.

looseheadprop 6 – it figures. But is it remotely plausible that someone would actually try?

Norah O’Donnell: MSNBC’s White Ho Reporter. From fishbowl DC.

LHP #27:

Then he needs occupation powers. Maybe we can fast-forward to the time when he gets a new box of crayons for the coloring books going into his presidential library. That’d keep him safely occupied, unless he eats the crayons.

LHP WHAT is their theory?! Your comment is making me want to go to lawyer war — I searched Free Republic (WHY did you send me there?) and couldn’t find anything. Please be less cryptic. That kind of thing is not at all funny.

Yes, but occupation powers of which country?

To add to Spice Trader @ 22’s comment….

“It’s inconceivable that Buttercup would choose Fitz over me!!!!.”

.

Jim Ward calls her Whora.

egregious

Am I understanding you correctly? (I have been working against a deadline the last few days my laptop is having a hard drive trasplant, so I have read zero news for several days)

Are you saying there is legislation out there to by-pass Congress???

For any reason?

I know they altered the line of sucession to bump Chertoff up a bunch of notches (never let me get drunk and start telling Mike Chertoff when he was an AUSA in NY stories–did you know he was also USA in Newark? Yeah, Newark a city that just got a big increase in Homeland Security funds while DC and NYC got shafted. Coincidence?)

But where are you getting this “bypass Congress” thing from? What did I miss whilst slaving away over my writer’s blocked brief?

Immanentize

Will be back. Someone sent me a link. I clicked on it and read a thread full of bile including some jerk who wants Pat disbarred.

Didn’t offer anything I would call a theory. I will try to retrieve the link.

Back in a sec

Imm

http://www.freerepublic.com/fo…..1402/posts

Sorry to up their clicks.

I thought they already by passed Congress. Many times.And I do remember they did change the line of succession for the presidency. IIRC, they moved a military position higher up the Chain.

immanentize – Don’t go there! (freeperville) It’ll just make your brain hurt.

OT – I know everyone’s been waiting all weekend for the latest in the truthout saga, so here ya go:p

looseheadprop 21

Jane once called Fitz the tall man in the rumpled suit.

got it. now where’s that yellow hat?

OT…T/O has their latest explanation for Jason Leopold’s reporting up….in case anyone is interested.

http://forum.truthout.org/blog…..185947/499

“You’ve heard of Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld?”

“Yes”

“Morons”

I don’t think Rob Reiner or William Goldman will mind my paraphrase of the “Aristotle, Plato, Socrates” line. When Wallace Shawn says “Morons,” I laugh myself silly. First time, 20th time, 50th time, doesn’t matter. I’m gone.

Leslie in Ca

Would someone try it?

No I think there are a variety of trial ballons going up (there was an article someone sent me about–was it diGenova?, saying that Libby should be pardoned. Maybe in Newsday?)

I think there is a little movement afoot to try to tarnish him and make it easier to either pardon Libby or Saturday Night Massacre, or some other evil thing along those lines.

Every so often there is a little flurry of this crap, as if they keep testing to see if the mood of the country has shifted and if it gets legs, they will move to nueter him.

I still haven’t heard or red anything (though admittedly I have been out of the news loop for a few days) that tells me that PatFitz has declared his investigation of Rove or anyone else closed.

Did I miss that?

Anyone know if the transcript from the last Walton hearing is out yet?

Cheney was merely mistranscribed. What he said was that the insurgency was in its last Thoreaus, ie, that it was running short on pacifists.

This was totally consistent with ensuing events. Stop picking on the guy.

The whole thing’s so depressing that I’ve gone to daily catblogging. Thank God for kitties. Though, come to think of it, my most recent post was to a site that features cats who look like Hitler.

I still want to give Cheney a thoreau thrashing for what he’s done to Iraq !

JWR @ 5:10 pm (#42) – Have I ever mentioned my aversion to government secrecy? Truthout could be 100% right, or they could be completely off their meds and out of their straightjackets. We really can’t tell at this point. That’s just one of the reasons I hate government secrecy. If you can take them at their word, they appear to have done what they’re supposed to.

Hopefully, the matter will become clear, but I am starting to wonder …

Oh, and just for the record, I do understand why Fitzgerald’s people are keeping this hush-hush, or at least some of the possible ones. Government secrecy inevitably engenders this sort of thing. It should be done as little as possible, or less.

LeisureGuy: a site with Puss in Boots?

I’d just like to see HIS last throes,and soon.

*ilson46201

I still want to give Cheney a thoreau thrashing for what he’s done to Iraq !

he certainly couldn’t get a “well done” pawned.

We are no match for your intellect when snark is on the line. You’re not Sicilian, are you?

LeisureGuy,

I hear you. I have to post something fluffy each day, otherwise I’d go mad.

Well, madder.

lhp, I remember reading about having legislation passed re a newly created government in place of Congress in the event of a “terrorist emergency”, in the Washington Post, and thinking WOW that’s extreme but I guess they need to have a plan in place.

Hope someone here can help dig up the details. And Hope to God we never implement this plan.

My brain hurts!!

Just BS, nothing to fret about. The operative theory about Fitz, as we all knew, was that with the total exhoneration of Rove, there is sufficient proof that Fitz is an evil, terrible (expletive expletive) Clinton loving, gay man who must be disbarred.

I think they are either in a land war in Asia or are going up against a Scicillian when death is on the line (Is Fitz’s Mom Scicillian?)

Imm,
Fitz’s folks are both gone. And Fitzgerald is totally Irish.

punaise: your puns are sometimes transcendental to the level of chit-chat and political bandinage of so many comments here !

Haven’t read comments or link yet, but here’s Truthout’s latest on 06 cr 128.

http://forum.truthout.org/blog…..185947/499

Sicillian, Irish … I don’t care to mess with either when they are determined (particularly the women of those heritages….)

Sorry if I’m hideously repeating what’s already been discussed in a previous room, but anyone have a reaction to this weird Truthout piece on the whole Rove fiasco?

http://forum.truthout.org/blog…..185947/499

Al Gore coming up on KO now.

I find it inconceivable that anyone could still read “truthout”, much less take them seriously …

Does anybody know the set up at Truthout?

When he says “senior editors” plural, does that also imply junior editors? How big is the staff at TO?

Do they run like a newspaper?

Cause I did hear some rumors from Fed law enforcement buddies, which I have never seen/heard anywhere else. And never repeated.

I believed those rumors because I knew the exact chain of people right up to the “witness” tot he event s and everyoone in the chain and knew who was prone to exaggeration, who had an ax to grind, etc. and could supply my own grains of salt as needed.

I believe that it would be impossible for Team Fitz to have done what Leapold reported w/o some other (non Team Fitz) agents, and possibly gov’t lawyers, finding out about it b/c of staffing issues.

The thing about the TO story is, I can think of several scenarios whereby that story COULD be true, without having to stretch.

It is harder to think how such a hoax could have been purpetrated in such a way that TO could not figure it out after the fact and get their revenge for being made a laughingstock.

political bandinage

I have a scooby doo bandinage on my finger right now — but I don’t think it’s political.

Here is something for a GREAT LAUGH…Lady McCheney giving props for that degenerate Scooter…
LMFAO!

——————————————–
Former Counselor To The Vice President, Mary Matalin: “I defy you or anybody to find anybody in this town who would say that Scooter is anything but impeccably honest and a dedicated public servant who doesn’t need to be in government, yet he’s dedicated many years of his life, despite having a prosperous law practice, to public service, in bio-defense, Homeland Security, State Department, Defense Department, the Vice President… [H]e’s scrupulously honest and meticulous.” (Fox News’ “Hannity and Colmes,” 10/28/05)

I read Cheney’s remarks and I throed up…all over the Last Throes Bistro in sunny, downtown Baghdad. What a mess!!!

Maybe Dick “Last Throes” Cheney will get a mop and bucket, go over to Iraq and start cleaning up all the throeing up that he caused through his blindingly ignorant stupidity.

One can only hope that Dick Cheney finds himself pursued by a young man who keeps repeating the phrase “You killed my father! Prepare to die!”

Time for me to go mow the lawn.

Leisureguy: You have made my day better.

The Hitler Cats’ collective slogan (God forgive me): “Our bite macht frei.”

imman re determined folk don’t omit the Scottish lassies :)

ya definitely don’t want to cross us.

Immamentize,
Oh yeah, I agree.I would think that Grudge was the very first word ever uttered by prehistoric Irishmen.(of course he’s never had the last word since.) Lol.

meta @ 5:28 pm (#62) – Yes, see my #50 and scroll down from there.

Does Cheney have six fingers on his left hand?

and from the public record the Rove case for obstruction looked so plain vanilla. So straightfoward. Possibly less greymail than the Libby case.

If Luskin is right, it does not make sense.

If Luskin is right, why no confirmation from Pat?

Egregious, I recall reading it was sometime in 2001, maybe May or June. I may have seen it in Michael Ruppert’s Crossing the Rubicon. Additional powers were given, omg, to the VP.

Princess Bride has something for everyone.

For dispirited Dems:
Buttercup: We’ll never survive.
Westley: Nonsense. You’re only saying that because no one ever has.
********

For Addington & Yoo:
Prince Humperdinck: First things first, to the death.
Westley: No. To the pain.
*********

For the Dread Pirate Scooter:
Libby: No one would surrender to the Dread Pirate Irving.
***********

For Bush’s Brain:
Karl: Is very strange. I have been in the revenge business so long, now that it’s over, I don’t know what to do with the rest of my life.
Libby: Have you ever considered piracy? You’d make a wonderful Dread Pirate Scooter.
*******

2001 before Sept? Not so sure about that. My reaction to reading the Post article was, it was really out there, but I guess they needed to do it because of the terrorist attack.

Ols Sow
I know the VP got powers to classify equal to the president’s via a presidential directive

lhp

I really do not see how it can be both true that the GJ returned an indictment AND true, as Luskin said, that Fitz promised not to charge. Once the GJ returns the indictment — you are charged.

I can’t remember the exact language, but Luskin definately said Fitz said he would not now be “charged.”

The only thing I can imagine is that that Fitz promised not to FILE charges at this time. Luskin’ statements in such a senario would REALLY piss off the grand jurors and I am sure Fitz would be forced to go, hat in hand, to explain why he did not file the charges.

It is possible, but not too practical. But this is the Plame investigation….

Mary

That was excellent! Gave me the giggles

egregious — I am getting the full picture — a Scott with red hair.

Beware!!

looseheadprop @ 5:32 pm (#75) – The only thing I can think of is that he’s after someone else, and Rove’s a witness. And, no, I haven’t the faintest idea who that might be, except a list of the obvious suspects.

But from what you prosecutor types have said, that doesn’t explain the “Secret vs. Secret” nature of the case number Truthout’s referring to.

Mary @ 5:33 pm (#77) Too funny, especially the Dread Pirate Scooter.

I agree with Cujo — most sealed indictments I have had to deal with are titled: United States v Secret (Not Secret v. Secret)

Cujo: there are only 2 (3 if you include Andy Card) above Rove and Libby…

Cujo, a million thanks. Trying to read too many threads at once. Yikes.

I think it was Kristol this weekend that floated the trial balloon of issuing Libby’s pardon. What I found interesting was his feigned indignance. Sounded Rovian. He must be doing some post mortem work for Libby. The whole black is white PR campaign is underway.

I don’t watch that shit on tv, so it must be on C&L somewhere…

Set your bullshit detectors on high and lets counter the offensive on every front early and hard.

lhp, I’m inclined to agree with you and generally not inclined to don tinfoil. There must be something going on under the surface.
What the hell is that thing called? Occam’s razor?

*ilson,

I will note that Andy Card — once touted as the Republican saviour for the gubernatorial wreck in Massachusetts named Kerry Healey (ironic first name, no?) — has been completely absent. Like disappeared.

Ahhh Suzanne–

My name is……

lhp 46,

I posted a link to the Newsday story about a Libby pardon in one of the threads here – maybe you saw it there?

As for the investigation, no, I haven’t seen or heard any news that PJF has declared it over.

When you say in your #65 that you can see how the truthout story could be true, do you mean the latest one linked in this thread? In other words, does truthout’s theory of what happened (sealed indictment = unprecedented cooperation from Rove re: Cheney) have any plausibility for you?

*ilson46201 @ 5:41 pm (#86) – Someone suggested Abu, but I don’t think Rove ever reported to the WHC. Of course, even Abu would be a prize catch, him being a cabinet secretary and all. Even Addington might be interesting, especially if he can implicate Cheney.

Anyway, two was the same number I came up with the other day, but now that I think of it there might be four. Too bad two of them would have to be impeached, though.

the “pardon for Libby” story is definitely a trial balloon floated out there to see if folk would holler about it …

OK, there was some mention of Card, who it appears was at the President’s speech today at the Merchant Marine Academy, by Tony Snow:

Q So was Andy Card decisive in getting the President to come to his alma mater or would-be alma mater?

MR. SNOW: I don’t know, but I think Andy is awfully happy to be going back and this time he’s not going to be hung up on a flagpole. (Laughter.)

Q Flagpole? We don’t know that story.

MR. SNOW: I’ve just tipped part of the speech for you. (Laughter.)

Q There won’t be police waiting for him?

MR. SNOW: I don’t think so. (Laughter.) Anything else, guys? Okay, thanks.

Ha ha very funny frat shit

Jeralyn at Talkleft is uncertain about the Truthout statement http://talkleft.com/new_archives/015121.html

watertiger — fabulous! Princess Bride is one of my all time favorites and this scene with Wallace Shawn is worth the price of admission all by itself. Mwahahahaha! Thanks!

Abu of course gave the WH a 24 hour heads up to shred and delete. Not a bad target at all for Fitz if other emails exist that suggest it was more than a time delay.

Could that explain the “Secret v. Secret?”

LHP? Mary?

Arianna’s new post about Snowjob is hysterical!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…..23360.html

Donning the tin foil hat of wizardry for Imm:::

How about this?

PJF either indicts with a sealed indictment, or shows up at Luskin’s office with what’s called a criminal information (like an indictment, but no GJ, it is used when pleading guilty. The defendant waives his right to indictment by a jury of his peers, admits there is probabale causue to indict, and saves the GJ and everyone else the trouble of presenting the case). What ever deal PJF hopes to cut falls through.

PJF utters the “24 business hours” (WTF?) line and leaves.

Next AM, Bush issues a pardon which he has “classified”, or possibly had “ealed” by some judge. PJF institutes litigation to either unseal everything both documents on the grounds that the American people have a right to know, or even to attack the pardon itselve for being used in bad faith, impermissable purpose, etc.

Back when Bush Sr. issued thr propsective pardons there was a lot of lunch hour debate amoung gov’t lawyers about whether that was legal and many were shocked that Larry Walsh did not even TRY to litigate the issue.

One lunch hour I heard a very impassioned young lawyer lay out a set of point headings for what sounded like a plausable brief. PJF knows that formerly young lawyer.

——————-
Next not much of a strecth theory:

Bush or cheny or god know who issues some sort of executive order forbidding PJF from doing some act necesssary to indict or bring to trial, Rove. Oh, and classifies it.

Once again, “sealed v sealed” could be litigation to attacck either the secrecy or the action.
———–

Next not a stretch theory:
There is some piece of classifed parer that PJF needs in order to meet either his burden of proof at trial or his discovery obligations if he indicts Rove.

He tried to get it declassified, but Bushco stymied him. He knows that his case will be dismissed without the greymail document.
—————-
—————-
In all three cases there may have been an abuse of the classification power (TALK TO MARY-she is the resident expert on that)

In all three cases, if there is secret litigation going on to try to undo whatever nepharious thing they did, it could explain why the case is “sealed v sealed” instead of the usual “us v. sealed”

In all three cases Fitz could very easily have written a letter to Luskin that assured Luskin that if he could not undo whatever, that he did not anticapte seeking charges other than the onces that have been torpedoed.

In all three instances, Fitz would not yet be willing to conced or confirm that the investigation is over, cause until you have lost your final appeal, technically it ain’t over yet. Even if it is a hail mary appeal.

who said puss & boots ?

http://mfrost.typepad.com/cute…..hotos.html

punaise,
look familiar ?

http://mfrost.typepad.com/cute…..one_h.html

Keith Olbermann just named Cal Thomas the worst person in the world for his trailer park pie remark.

cbl 100 (b)- heh. our new kitten hasn’t tried that one yet….

actually immanentize, it was only about 12 hours. as I recall, he called the WH around 9pm — Andy allegedly asked if he could put off til morning (start of business) to promulgate the “dont delete nothing” memo …

*ilson #95….when Jeralyn STOPS applauding lawyers who get off obvious criminals, I will start to take HER seriously.

Re: TruthOut’s latest self apologia: Is it possible that Rove engineered the same kind of elaborate doublecross as he is alleged to have done to J.D. Hatfield, suicider author of “Fortunate Son?” Hatfield claims that Rover leaked information to him about a 1972 arrest of GWB for coke possession, then proceded to eviscerate the credibility of the dubious Hatfield, thus neutralizing the damaging information no matter how it might ever re-emerge.

http://www.bushwatch.com/hatfield.htm

Also, remember Rove bugging his own office, which the FBI investigated his client’s gubernatorial opponent for.

It would forllow a pattern of classic Rove dirty-tricksterism.

http://www.bushwatch.com/hatfield.htm

Ahhhh. An article about Deferment Dick. Deferment Dick, the COWARD who hid behind his wife’s skirts when his country called upon him.

Reminds me of someone else….Karl!!!! Karl The Coward. Draft Dodging Karl The Coward Rove! How are you two cowards doing today??

heh,heh,heh
Ghostman

lhp and all, thank you for your input. This is so incredibly confounding, it’s hard to imagine what could have possibly happened, so your scenarios are food for thought.

Ralphbon at #70: You made me laugh iced tea out my nose.

More revised dialogue . . .

[Cheney, center stage, turns to see a door open, and a man in a rumpled suit enters, brandishing a sheaf of papers]

“Hello! My name is Patrick J. Fitzgerald. You are the man who killed my country. Prepare to die . . .”

LHP You know I am not buying the secret pardon thing so we will have to bet a beer and see how it all turns out. If there were a “secret” pardon, not just a prosep[ective pardon like that by Bush I, I suspect the litigation continues. No court would decide such an issue immediately.

So, that leaves the information idea. But US a
Atorneys can only issue an information for non-felonies, so I would suspect that the deal was done before an information was presented….

I admit my serious but obviously limited experience just cannot round the square here.

Peterr,
We may have to get that on a tee shirt.

I think Maty has just sucessfully renamed Irving. I totally groove on “dread pirate scooter”

Since many people including myself have often on FDL applauded Johnathan Turley for his insight and analysis and honesty…TAKE A GANDER…Let me know what you all think?
——————————————-

Legal scholar Jonathan Turley, a George Washington University law professor who has closely followed the case, said he was surprised by the move.

“The decision not to indict Rove only reflects the view that Scooter Libby is the designated defendant in this scandal,” Turley said.

And Turley, who has represented clients in cases prosecuted by Fitzgerald’s office in Chicago, said, “This is not an investigation that seems in character for Fitzgerald.”

“His office tends to indict everyone and let God sort them out,” Turley said. “And Rove was given so many opportunities to correct his testimony. It seemed like there was a virtual turnstile on the grand jury door. I’ve never seen Fitzgerald give a witness so much time to work his way out of a criminal charge.”

Imm

You can use a criminal information for a felony if the defendant waives his right to indictment. The same way a defendant can waive their right to a petit jury trial and have a bench trial.

The requirement for a GJ indcitment is a RIGHT posessed by the accused which the accused can knowingly choose to waive

neurophius @ 5:54 pm (#101) – If he’d just said “conservative” instead of “trailer trash” we’d be saying he’d stated the obvious. You have to wonder what (substance) was on Ole’ Cal’s mind.

Franco,

“Get[ting] off obvious criminals” is called the constitution of the United States. Every time an accused is acquitted by a jury, absent jury tampering, it is a great victory for a system that relies on citizens to decide issues complex and mundane.

Embrace it in all its imperfect wonder.

I’m glad lhp. YOu sounded like you needed a laugh.

Don’t worry about the Freepers. Weren’t they saying the same thing when he did indict?

I don’t really understand the GJ process and have never had to work with it, but you just can not convince me that a GJ indicted, then hears that their prosecutor says he is not going to press charges – and no one says anything. It’s one thing if they are told an indictment is under seal, but to hear public statements that their Prosecutor has said he isn’t charging and none of them say anything?

I don’t buy that. I buy something sealed, with the GJ in on it, but not that Luskin would be so stupid as to issue lies or think he won’t be called on it.

Something is going on, though, and it is very weird that no MSM is pushing LUskin for production of the letter (btw – is that something that could be obtained by a FOIA request? It’s not confidential between counsel, but is it govt docs if it is from a Spec. Pros investigation? I don’t know anything about FOIAs either).

Between not pushing the letter, and Luskin himself not asking for the Prosecutor’s office to publically verify his statement (and didn’t journalists used to require two sources for info like that?), you have to wonder. Luskin & Corallo (Ashcroft’s old spokesman)are also very adamant that there has been no plea.

Didn’t the President say that the investigation is over?

I dunno. There was some serious timing going on with the statement coming right after the Monday discovery hearing, and no one on Libby’s teams seeming to press (as they have in the past) for when the Rove issues on discovery would be addressed at that hearing.

If Rove is just dropping out of the picture and the narrative is nearing “and they pardoned happily ever after” then it would only make sense for the Prosecutor to make a public statement. ?

I think it’s all very cloak and daggerish sounding, but I don’t hold out a lot of hope that we’ll find anything much out. It will be frustrating if there is never a public statement by the Prosecutor’s office as to the status of the investigation or Rove, but frustrating is just another word for the Bushyears.

So right now you have the Prosecution saying they aren’t calling Rove, Libby saying they might, the Judge saying he thought something was about to happen vis a vis Rove and would rule after that to continue to preserve GJ secrecy for now, a GJ that hasn’t said a word about Rove walking (and I don’t care about secrecy – that wouldn’t happen if the Prosecutor failed to pursue an indictment they returned IMO), a part of the Prosecutor’s team wrapping the Safavian case, TO getting statements from “Kimberly Nerheim” ?? instead of Samborn, a sealed v. sealed weird case floating around, some kind of weird posturing going on between Gonzales and Cheney’s office and COngress re: Jefferson (looks like Judge Hogan will rule on that pretty quick – but I’m mostly interested in what he thinks about the turnover of the info to the Sol. Gen ??), rulings in Walton’s court that make it clear that, despite the broad language in the grant to the Spec. Prosecutor, he is subject to supervision and even changes in his grants of authority through the Margolis – McNulty chain, etc. etc.

It’s like Mardi Gras – lots of color and even some random titillation – but trying to make sense of it all will give you a headache.

But the Dread Pirate Roberts (incarnation #4, IIRC) is Cary Elwes! Dread Pirate Scooter? I don’t think so.

He’s more like Prince Humperdink’s henchman, that Our Heroes confront at the locked door to the castle. After all the guards run away, he protests that he doesn’t have the key to the door. Disbelieving, Montoya tells Fezzik to rip his head off, at which point – surprise, surprise – he changes his tune: “Oh, you mean this key. . .”

I am getting the full picture – a Scott with red hair.

Beware!!

Don’t worry, immanentize, anyone who can stare down the Grand Wizard and win is ok in my book.

Yeah, “Dread Pirate Scooter” is hilarious – I’m still laughing. And I like Peterr’s revision too. (Though as Pach would no doubt remind us, it should not only be PJF in that scene [or not him at all], but all of us, advancing en masse on Cheney et al.)

Scooter’s the Albino.

Tom DeFrank and Tony Blankley were on Hardball debating whether this unhooking of Rove means he’s back in the driver’s seat for the fall elections.

The general consensus, with Norah giggling and sighing like a smitten teen, was “yes, here comes da Sludge.”

Cheney lied thru his snarl yet again…

Thanks, watertiger, for the Princess Bride pic– a most fantabulous movie, indeed!

And Turley, who has represented clients in cases prosecuted by Fitzgerald’s office in Chicago, said, “This is not an investigation that seems in character for Fitzgerald.”

I have watched this guy’s career for the better part of 20 years. PatFitz is a lawyer’s lawyer.

Turley is right. This does not look like a typical PatFitz case. I disagree that Fitz indicts everyone in sight, that’s just Turly speaking defense lawyereese.

But Pat never caves in when he is right, he cannot be intimidated or he would have been by some of the backstory shit that has already gone down, and he does not miss the target.

The flipping theory works and the WH/Cheney/somebody erected a wall between Pat and the target theories all work.

But I just don’t know.

imm#115…I DO embrace it…..BUT……to applaude an atorney for simply getting off a KNOWN criminal has NOTHING to do with the constitution….A defendent is entitled to a thorough defense(OJ comes to mind)…but again..to applaud an attorney for the simple fact of “outsmarting” a prosecutor, whose client has at his disposal tools that a “regular” citizen doesn’t have means shit to me.

Dennis Hastert and Bill Frist were reading from the same playbook today at some Republican fundraiser. Denny talked about how important it was to keep the House Majority so they could continue to build on their record of success, and then Billy talked about how the Senate was working hand-in-hand with the wonderful president to push back the cut-and-runners and find a clear path to victory in Iraq. Much like Cheney’s remarks, acknowledgement of reality was not considered a valuable rhetorical component of the narrative.
Barf bags?
Why thanks, I think I’ll be needing that.

Oh, I met Donna Edwards tonight, who is running against Al Wynn for MD-4. She is really nice and appreciated the FDL support.
peace,
jim

LHP

I now you are correct — and I’ve done that in cases where we have changed the plea after indictment in federal court. But I have never seen it done pre-initial indictment. The Judge would have to be VERY convinced that someone was waiving the right in a knowing and intelligent way before he or she would allow it in the initial charging situation. Have you ever had that happen in your experience?

Now that could be an explanation for Sealed v. Sealed because you would definately have to have a colloquey before the Judge prior to the information being filed. In the change of charge plea situation (after initial indictment), the colloquey is part of the plea conversation. This would be, in my experience, a unique thing because Judges don’t really like informations at change of plea, let alone as the basis for the initial charge….

lhp I know the VP got powers to classify equal to the president’s via a presidential directive

No, this was -way- more than just classification powers. Powers to RULE.

Speaking of FOIA’s does anybody know the precedent for the declaration that Cheney is not subject to them?

speaking of which – did you hear about the physical conditioning studio in Jamaica?

Pilates of the Caribbean

Mary @116

Have you seen a transcript of the Monday hearing?

I s there one up on the web someplace?

Is mommybrain in the building? I have a couple of unfinished conversations with her from when I got called away a couple of threads ago…

LHP#122 thanks for that.

Franco,

“to applaude an attorney for simply getting off a KNOWN criminal has NOTHING to do with the constitution%u2026.A defendant is entitled to a thorough defense(OJ comes to mind)%u2026but again..to applaud an attorney for the simple fact of “outsmarting” a prosecutor, whose client has at his disposal tools that a “regular” citizen doesn’t have means shit to me.”

Rove was never a “defendent”, he wasn’t indicted. Fitz didn’t have what he believed was proof beyond a reasonable doubt to present to a jury. That’s the bar.

Peterr 117

But the Dread Pirate Roberts (incarnation #4, IIRC) is Cary Elwes! Dread Pirate Scooter

*G* Yep, I just like the analogy. Westley saying he went by Dread Pirate Roberts bc no one would be scared of a Dread Pirate Westley – and Irving, ditching the Irving, to go by the “more cooler” Scooter.

digby keelhauls Iowa Republican congressman Steve King, the guy who dissed Helen Thomas

the simple fact of “outsmarting” a prosecutor

Franco,

I have told many clients — hundreds perhaps, that there are only three people that can get them out the door a free person. The prosecutor can do it by dismissing. The judge can do it by granting some motions or dismissing. The jury (that third “person”) can do it by voting “not guilty.”

The defense attorney has no power to release a client. Defense attorneys cannot “outsmart” prosecutors, they can onle point out where prosecutors are full of shit. The judge or the jury believes the prosecutor or not. They almost never decide a case based on whether they “believe” a defense attorney. it is simply whether they believe the defense attorney has a good and verifiable point when they argue that the prosecutor is blowing smoke. So, to give defense attorneys the kind of power you suggest they possess is really a few steps away from reality (outside of that portrayed by real actors on prime time TV.)

Now I agree that rich people have a lot more access to the court’s ear than poor people. I have spent the last twenty plus years only representing indigent defendants and it is a huge problem in the system. But the complaint is not that rich people have such great defense attorneys, but rather that poor people do not.

for the last alternative that cheney could have said, don’t you mean “look over there! a flock of quayle” ?

cozumel#132…thanks for talking down to me. I know Rover wasn’t a defendent. I never said he was…..Please read all the posts before commenting. My first post was about Jeralyn applauding her buddy for getting off Loonbaugh, I think he was a defendent…As for the rest Jeralyn applauding Luskin for helping Rover not get an indictment is actually more egregious to me. AND by the way it is only my opinion.

Imm at 125

Yes,
In white collar case. Yes. When you have a defendant represented by counsel and you are negotiating a plea right off the get go.
Yes.

Hell, now with corporate defendants, they don’t even use an information. They file a complaint with a deferred prosecution agreement.

THAT may be a bridge too far for me.I have mixed feelings about.

Because of the collapse of Arthur Anderson, Comey set up something called the Enron TAsk force. It had USAs from most of the big offices.

Fitz, Dave Kelly from SDNY, McNulty, Roz Mauskaupf from EDNY, I think the guy from Philly (forget his name–Irish though)

Anyway, When Mary Jo White was USA in SDNY she used one of the first deferred prosecution agrements. Her boys brought the concept to the Enron Task Force.

Now I think they are getting way too loosy goosy with the Government giving the defense lawyers WAY WAY WAY too much say in how their client will be complying with the terms of the agreement.

DPAs were used in the AOL/Time Warner case and the Computer Associates case and in the NYS Racing Association case and a bunch of others.

Problem is: no two agreements have the same terms. Whether or not the erstwhile defendat will actually mend it’s ways becomes a crapshoot.

It becomes like one commenter upthread was complaining about, when defense lawyers scam the system.

I rant about this particualr topic for days.

Imm@135

i think maybe some indigent defendats get great representation. Like maybe some of yours…..

imm#135…I am not by far an expert on the law…thank you for your responses to me and explaining the way you do. I guess I am just responding emotionally, and I frankly am still upset and confused what has happened the past two weeks. As for Rover he has much more than just wealth and power, he has access to the power structure of this country I will leave the law analysis to those of you who know what you are talking about…again much thanks.

digby link

meta 6:09 p.m.

“Speaking of FOIA’s does anybody know the precedent for the declaration that Cheney is not subject to them?”

You would probably have to ask Yoo.

LHP 138

That was very helpful. My clients were all drug dealers etc. and generally were the targets of sealed indictments rather than deferred indictment plans.

I am being serious — in light of Apprendi and all, I wonder what even Scalia would say about this. In the OK City Bombing case in Federal court, Nichol’s attorney argued that the death eligibility decision was unconstitutional because no GJ indicted him for death (it was an AG decision). I always thought that was a very interesting argument about what the 5th means re: indictment. Nichol’s life sentence has prevented us all from finding out.

Franco,

No worries. This is just something I am a little, let us say, “rehearsed” about because students find it so difficult to understand the actual power imbalance in criminal courts.

Certainly there are injustices. But most of them go the opposite way — where people innocent or not-so-guilty are found guilty and sentenced to huge amounts of time. As a friend of mine once said, if you really believe the system is somehwat arbitrary, then it has to be arbitrary in your favor at least occasionally.

Cue the Diebold stolen election folks….

It’s all just words to Dick “Weed” Cheney. He knows he can fool some of the people all of the time (fewer than one in five, apparently), and that’s good enough for him.

Cheney gets away with the abuse of the term “last throes” b/c the complicit right wing media will not call him on it. The kool aid drinkers will not even recognize/validate the fact that he said “last throes” six or eight effing months ago. Like everything else, that is part and parcel of the Bush Junta, it is absolutely brazen AND ridiculous.

immanentize @ 6:32 pm (#144) – I don’t think I’ve met a lawyer yet who wouldn’t say the OJ Simpson case was almost the exact opposite of a typical court proceeding. Usually, the state has the advantage in money and resources. That’s one of the reasons they have all those rules about whether evidence is admissible, etc.

Anyway, for the trials I’ve seen as a juror, the state had most, if not all, of the advantages.

egreigious @ 29 and LHP @ 38

What you might be referring to are executive orders which created …

Mount Weather

Franco,

Your words ; )

“A defendant is entitled to a thorough defense”

Do these lunatics in Washington expect the Iraqi air-force to defend their nation with spitballs?

-Zell Miller

“Despite promises to help the ineffective Iraqi Air Force upgrade itself, the U.S. military has yet to provide any significant information or technology, The Los Angeles Times reported.”

http://story.irishsun.com/p.x/…..571b4f088/

as Ken Starr would say: it’s truly amazing what you can do with the law with $47,000,000 !

Hackworth,

Deadeye Dick uttered that self-congratulatory medicated gibberish from his sneering pie-hole more than a year ago.

-GSD

Perhaps OT but not really, as far as Cheney is concerned…

Larry King just did a segment on the two American soldiers who may have been (captured? kidnapped?) in Iraq.

In my opinion, if it turns out that the soldiers have been tortured, someone should turn over Cheney, Rumsfeld, Addington and Yoo to their captors and request they receive the same treatment.

They have set the precedent for torture in this war, insurgency, occupation, whatever you want to call it. By acting as if they are not bound by the Geneva Conventions, they have made it much more likely that our enemies, whatever you want to call them, would honor such limitations in their treatment of prisoners.

They have taken the position that the administration is not even bound by the anti-torture amendment that Congress passed–and that Bush signed! (only to subvert with a “signing statement” proclaiming his omnipotence).

As for Bush, I think a courtroom should be reserved for him in The Hague. Instead, what will really happen is that the White House will milk this potential tragedy for all that it is worth in order to once again inflame public opinion against the Iraqis. And the MSM will be more than happy to play its expected role in that process.

I saw Al Gore on Keith Olberman tonight and he initially did a great job. Keith would feed him a line from some scientific nutcase and Al would knock it out of the park. Keith gave him the time to make his case without interupting and then followed up with great follow on questions.

Afterwards Keith told him that he couldn’t quite let him get away without talking politics. So Keith asked what he’s thoughts were on how the government took us to war in Iraq and if he thought that the government cherry picked intelligence like some have accused them of doing. Man, I was sitting back in my easy chair thinking of what a fantastic set up that was and waited for Al to hit a home run.

But no. He gave a standard political answer by suggesting that he hoped that not what had happened but what a great job the troops were doing in a bad situtation. Again…how great are our troops? Damn I thought! My girlfriend in the kitchen asked why I was so mad and I said that Al gave a political answer to the question. What’s wrong with that she asked? Because, I said, he must be thinking about running else we would have cleaned Bush’s clock.

Al has a lot of goodwill and great press due to his passionate articulation of the environmental catastrophe he sees coming but if he does become a candidate again and begins to answer questions like that, it’ll all evaporate in a second. What a drag.

Was there ever a time when Dick Cheney didn’t look like a fucking creep ?

You all have my explict permission to throw tralier trash pies, jumbalaya and po’ boys right in James Carvilles face should you ever see him in person.

Guess who his cadaverous wife is holding a fundraiser for in the Casa De Carville?

That man should be kept miles from any Democratic campaigns.

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2….._0619.html

-GSD

Oh man, I missed the Olberman smack of Cal Thomas. How will I ever survive? Was it a good one? (I mean, honestly, it was one of the dumbest thing to ever come out of the man’s mouth. What in the hell was he thinking saying it out loud?)

Carville just freakin’ embodies whipped.

“I have five deferments and a paycheck from Halliburton. I am a moral coward. I have always been a moral coward. Are there any other questions?”

lisadawn82 @ 6:44 pm (#154) – This is why I haven’t been too enthusiastic about an Al Gore candidacy. Maybe one of his campaign consultants should write on a legal pad “Let Gore be Gore”, and present it as the new strategy before it’s too late.

Unless what you saw is the real Gore…

Cujo,

I know what you mean about OJ — but:

The State in the OJ case spent over 3 times what the defense spent. The prosectors hired forensic experts and trial consultants and jury advisors. They had an unlimited budget.

So even in that case, the State out-resourced the defendant 3 to 1! As for the verdict — although there was good evidence that OJ was guilty. But there was fabulous evidence that the police cheated. So, the jury ultimately let OJ go because they were convinced the prosecution was based on a corrupt investigation.

Was there ever a time when Dick Cheney didn’t look like a fucking creep ?

Let me think about it for a second no.

GSD 6:46 p.m.

You should have warned that clicking on your Mary Matalin link above will expose the reader to the horrible visage of SatAnn Coulter. Ugh!

I don’t think that he knows what that word means. Throws? As in when I see Cheney I think I’m going to throw up.

“I have Haliburton stock options. That means that I can buy X (many, many shares) at a fixed price of (around) $7/share. Haliburton stock was $27/share three years ago. Now its around $70/share. And, by the way, the insurgency is in its last throes.” – The Sneering Dickhead

Slothrop 6:50 p.m.

The kind of money Cheney gets from Halliburton isn’t a paycheck. It’s an endowment.

cujo359 @ 160 – I’m hoping that it was just habit. But really concerned my gf and I was that Al was really taking it to this Administration last year in those speeches he gave sponsered by MoveOn.org. If he was raking them over the coals last year and demuring to whack them today what does that say about his intentions and his ability. Now I’ve got to say that I love Al Gore and would support him in a minute but I’d also kick him in the butt if he starts talking like that again.

Christy @ 157 – Yeah, it was a pretty good smack down. It was all smiles in this house after that segment.

hackworth @ 6:56 pm (#165) Are you serious? Does Cheney have options he hasn’t exercised yet, or exercised during his term as VP?

Anderson Cooper 360 leads with a mention of Cheney’s “last throes” statement and asks a year later if he still believes it.

punaise @ 134

digby keelhauls Iowa Republican congressman Steve King…

And such economy of words. All hail Digby!

Franco…

Perhaps you are operating from a principled idea that JUSTICE is what should prevail. An honorable notion to be sure. I share that. But the thing is, in this country, and in our legal adversarial system, justice really doesn’t have much to do with ‘actual’ justice. Our system is one of games and advantages. Many times, or perhaps even most times, very, very unfair advantages. And I don’t think this is the best legal system in the world. Not by a long shot. However, it does appear, that in this country one procures (usually) the best ‘justice’ money can purchase. Quite unfortunately.

850 U.S. troops and thousands of Iraqis killed since “last throes” according to CNN.

Cheney talking (snarling) right now. Creepy.

Spokesman for Harry Reid smacks down Cheney.

“We can’t create our own reality.” Al Gore on Iraq and global warming.

I’m getting that funny EPU feeling…is my “refresh” button misfiring again?

Maybe the 2001 I’m thinking of was Cheney’s secrecy wrt the energy Policy meetings.

In 2004 there was talk about cancelling elections–Wm Rivers Pitt http://www.yuricareport.com/Vo…..tions.html
and an article at Infowars http://www.infowars.com/print/…..ctions.htm

I’ll keep looking for shadow govt.

the ‘radical’ position amongst Democratic Senators on Iraq is out in one year (Kerry & Feingold). DAMN!!!

john in sacramento at 148 What you might be referring to are executive orders which created…Mount Weather

Continuity of Government, COG, yes that term does stick in my head. But there was also some kind of legislation superceding Congress. That’s what alarmed me some years ago, and what is surfacing now.

Well, whatever’s going on behind the scenes in Fitz’s office, a big thankyou to Mary, looseheadprop, immanentize, Cujo359, and all the rest of you for the educated speculation.

In defense of Al Gore, he said very clearly that he’s campaigning for a cause. Getting into the Iraq stuff in a major way would’ve stepped all over the message he was trying to deliver.

I understand that he’s the closest thing the Democratic party has to leadership this side of John Murtha, but he’s not a party spokesman.

The two kidnapped soldiers…I ache for them but must wonder how convenient it is for the propaganda machine, See? Al-Qaeda really IS in Iraq so we’re right! And we must stay and fight them and [incidentally suppress your civil rights and liberties so sorry] fight them and fight them forEVER!!

“The Long War.” = their -own- phrase

Technically, Cheney is correct. The insurgency is in its last throes. It has now moved on to being a civil war.

Also it is pretty much Cheney’s modus operandi to lie, get his lie debunked, and then repeat it in a cycle that goes on ad infinitum. Cheney repeated that Saddam had ties to al Qaeda about a dozen times. If it came up I would expect him to say it again.

Cheney is a deeply disturbed manipulative individual who filters the world through his delusions and paranoia. He is the puppeteer who pulls the strings offstage, the spider in the web in the dark. The psychopathology that permeates this Administration is typical of so many of the 20th century cliques that inflicted so much haovc on the world. Conspiratorial by nature they see conspiracies everywhere. Failure is impossible. If it occurs, it was someone else’s fault. It was the Democrats or Clinton. It was a la Ann Coulter sabotage or treason. Intolerance to others is balanced by a permissiveness with regard to their own actions. Tom Delay, Ken Lay, Abramoff, Karl Rove, they aren’t criminals at least in their own minds. They are the cleverest guys in the room. The inability to even recognize other points of view is seen as the mark of the true believer. It is also a lack of empathy which taken together with their hypersensitivity to criticism is a defining attribute of sociopathy. Cheney lies not because he has to but because that is who he is.

OT

CT-Sen: If Lieberman goes indy
by kos
Mon Jun 19, 2006 at 06:03:14 PM PDT

Rasmussen. 6/12. MoE 4.5% (4/27 results)

General Election

Lieberman (I) 44 (47)
Lamont (D) 29 (20)
Schlesinger (R) 15 (17)

Big swing in just the last two weeks. This option has to be looking incrasingly unappetizing to the Lieberman camp, which is perhaps why Joementum finally agreed to stick with the Democratic primary (even while holding up the possibility of an indy bid if he loses).

Marc Ash talks (a little bit) to Justin Rood at TPMuckraker:

http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/000941.php

*ilson, yeah radical! They can’t get anyone to agree with them. This is really, really scary.

Have you read the book Princess Bride? The movie is very faithful, except for the parens.

(
As the story opens, the author is feeling guilty because he’s not home for Christmas, he’s on the opposite coast working on a movie deal. He’s frantically trying to find the book his grandfather read to him once when he (the boy) was very sick. Obscure tome, hard to find. He begins to remember the story of the Princess Bride…
)
AS the story ends, he finally found the book and has picked it up from the bookseller. It’s wrapped in brown paper. He can’t wait to get home to read it to his son, to share the experience as his grandfather had with him. He rips open the package and begins to flip through the book. His jaw drops, he can’t believe it – it’s a book on Roman engineering (or something). He is stunned to realize his grandfather had made the whole thing up.

Just like our exit plan.

My name is George the Destroyer. You almost killed my father; prepare to die.

Neurophius, je suis ici.

Hugh I heard Mary Cheney on Terri Gross last week. She had the same monotonous voice as her dad, sounds seriously depressed. Also has the same worldview, from what I could tell. Kerry was a bastard for bringing it up, she sees no hypocricy whatsoever in her position. A big stone wall, pun intended.

Watertiger, dear, you are the slyest pussycat around. thanks.

Re The Long War:

Noron asked someone (anyone) if the kidnapping of the two soldiers was retaliation for the killing of Zarqawi.

As long as they can keep this back and forth volley going, we are in for perpetual war.

Israel has been at it for 60 years.

It’s the crusaders vs. the infidels. See it on pay per view.

My name is Sue. How do you do? Now you’re gonna die!

Mommybrain,

I heard the same interview and I almost felt sorry for the tiny, compartmentalized world that Mary Cheney inhabits.

Almost, then I realized that she is a traitor to the human condition that she lives with and is an apologist to the worst leaders this nation has ever seen and she’s a garden variety rat-fink to boot. She will never suffer the pain of the people she is complicitly helping to demonize, she has a get out of jail free pass.

Then I didn’t feel so sorry anymore.

-GSD

op99 says:
June 19th, 2006 at 5:55 pm
Re: TruthOut’s latest self apologia: Is it possible that Rove engineered the same kind of elaborate doublecross…
———————————————————-
Entirely possible. And largely irrelevant. Leopold may have been snookered. Fitz will not be. Unless and until Luskin decides to show us his letter, we’re still in a wait-and-see mode, as far as I’m concerned.

Carville is creepy. A technical term.

lhp – I did not see a transcript from the Monday hearing and I do not think one went up. But the reports (albeit disinterested and short) would, I am positive, have mentioned if Rove’s name had even begun to come up. The most they discussed was that the Prosecutor was reassuring the Judge that the WH knew who the Prosecutor would be calling and did not have objections and there wouldn’t be any last minute issues, etc. And the conf was very short per the reports. I really think if Libby’s team had brought up the, “Hey Judge, you said that you thought the Rove stuff would be getting addressed soon and we really want to know when we will know if we can get his GJ testimony” someone would have mentioned it, esp. with the Rove announcement coming the next day or so.

So I think that it is odd Libby et al did not ask for an update. And that the timing of Luskin’s release of info was after that status conf with nothing more in the public hearing nature on schedule for a bit. More “die down” time. If they just don’t bring it up at all – that will be VERY interesting. If they were really angling for the info, I would have expected something filed last week asking for the court to reconsider their requests based on the info that Rove isn’t going to be charged and rule. I haven’t seen that either — yet.

So I go, Hmmmmmmmm.

Imman – Gonzales and Ashcroft are two that I pondered about in connection with a sealed v. sealed. REMEMBER – I just toss stuff out on this, I don’t really have any leanings (except I very strongly believe there’s no way a GJ indicted and is not saying anything in the face of Prosecutor letting it all drop – if something is sealed, it that is something they are in on as a strategy- that’s one thing, if they know it is sealed to shut them down- no way. Who would stay quiet over that? )

But one theory goes something like: The 250 missing emails which no one asks much about. Supposedly they had not been officially produced to the Prosecutor pre- Feb or so, from his letter (although he obviously knew abou them). THen they are produced (sometime Feb or March?) bc they are referred to in one of the transcripts and Libby’s crew leave teethmarks in the tongues shutting down any one the record drawn out discussion of them — uh, we have them, don’t think they are a big deal for us, next item . . .

While other prosecutors could have been in for the GJ, the only known witness to appear and testify before them, and the only known time with Fitzgerald appearing before them, from that time on was the Rove testimony, IIRC.

And everyone was puzzled about how long he was in there. Also, I haven’t had to deal with GJs, but they would have all read in Feb/march whenever about the emails. So if Fitzgerald had not already put something in for them before the official production of the emails, or even if he had, here they have a shot at asking the Prosecutor — hey, what about those emails we read about. Aren’t they going to do that? And if they never get clued in on them, and yet still hear Rove is walking – again, it just doesn’t seem to me a GJ sits quiet forever on something like that.

So I wondered a bit about whether they used Rove testifying on “his” situation and recollections as a deal where he instead came in and gave testimony vis a vis the emails. What happened with them. THat could put any combo of Ashcroft, Gonzales and Card, if not others, in the loop. [Frolic and detour - there is also the email in the Abramoff case indicating that Ashcroft’s was in Abramoff’s pocket on getting the classified NMI report “quashed” (and indeed, Congress has JUST received it) and bragging about getting classified info from Ashcroft’s COS, and Zeidenberg who has prosecuted Safavian is also on Fitzgerald’s team and would be crossing the borders some on those two cases]

Anyway – if Rove gave them info that helped to seal the deal on conspiracy, esp if it involved any of Ashcroft, Gonzales or Card, I can see it being pretty interestin (actually – Gonzales may have known a couple of days in advance of the “12 hour” notice that it was coming – long explanations on this serveral places).

So – if Rove’s turnstile testimony was really a chance to put on something new or add weight to something like the emails rather than Viveka, then it could be worth getting trashed in the press for awhile to seal a deal that lets you indict on conspiracy and/or that opens the door to prosecution of someone like WH COS or fomer AG, or former WHC and current AG.

I also think that it is odd that the Waas article on how involved Ashcroft was and how much he may have stepped over the bounds, right from the beginning, comes out almost so close in time to the Rove news. Those parts of the story have been around a long time – why did they come out now? That makes me think someone was wanting to jiggle the Ashcroft button – ?? But maybe not. Just spec.

What if Ashcroft did go too far though and maybe even had some direct knowledge of cover up or passed confid. info along to Rove and others while the investigation was ongoing. Fitzgerald is going to work and the Abramoff crew find his emails. Sounds to me like a good opportunity to put a squeeze on Ashcroft. Who knows if he has been questioned or is cooperating? Wouldn’t someone have questioned him when the investigation was taken over?

I dunno, but if you go after big guns, you need big guns. If you had a deal with Ashcroft and got Rove to corroborate on the record — that would be pretty peachy wouldn’t it?

Could sealed v. sealed be a case to test the waters for indicting a current AG? I don’t really think so, but it’s interesting spec. COuld letting Rove walk in Plame mean there is a something on the Abramoff – Black front heading his way? Was a deal cut with Rove in the Abramoff suit that involved cooperation and no prosecution in Plame? You could go on and on.

On the flip side, I could also see something like what if McNulty decides to take back over the delegation to Margolis? What if Margolis objects? Battle over classified Exec order? Sealed v. Sealed? Personally, I can picture someone like Addington enjoying taking a secrecy approach of some kind with Fitzgerald – bc the Prosecutor’s not likely to leap to publically challenge something like that, IMO. He would go by the book on challenging it – what else could you do – and that might give you a sealed v. sealed. The order/confontation/pardon etc. might not relate to Rove, it might related to whomever Rove gave info about.

The emails themselves might be the subject of the sealed v. sealed – as to how they can be used in a non-Libby setting/case. Sealed v. Sealed could be Gonzales or Miers as WHC fighting US/Spec Prosec with respect to Executive privilege issues relating to the emails. Esp if most of them do not relate to Libby or relate to conspiracy or matters for which he has not been charged, it might be that sealed v. sealed is to prevent the emails from getting to the GJ?

I could spec and spec, but I mostly think we have to wait and see. If nothing more comes from the Prosecutors office for awhile, then you’ll have to think things were shut down in some way, but I won’t easily buy in (even though I am not the kind of fan lhp is) to the Prosecutor tanking anything, bc he has just put out too much damaging stuff already.

No way would the emails, the Cheney notes, the NIE, info have been handed over like they were if he was playing cover WH backside. There were too many ways for him to keep all three of those things underground.

So I’m willing to wait and see.

Plus I’m more rattled by other situations – NSA, Gitmo, etc.

Shorter Marc Ash: “We were spun, and now our sources are helping us assess how dizzy we are.”

Hi, mommybrain!

“Neurophius, je suis ici.”

Sorry, I don’t comprendo French.

I read your comment a couple of threads back quite a while after you posted it. I hope to see further discussion here about a Virtual War Room. More specifically, I see a need for the creation of Democratic talking points on an ongoing basis, coordinated among major Democratic players and the blogosphere. We need to be reinforcing each other’s messages. I don’t know if this is an unrealistic dream or not. I personally do not have time to devote to it now, but will have after I finish my master’s degree in December. What are your thoughts?

I’m late to the game here, but Cheney can throe fuck himself!

lina @ 7:29 pm (#190) – One of the better Star Trek: The Next Generation episodes is the one about the deaf mute diplomat who must figure out how to make two sides stop fighting with each other. Riker starts to explain why the war was going on, and mentions that it’s been going on for several centuries. The diplomat cuts him off, and Riker is miffed. The diplomat explains that the reasons don’t matter, the people who are fighting now forgot what the reasons were long ago.

I don’t know what they had in mind when they wrote that, Israel-Palestine, Ireland, Yugoslavia, but it will be just as true of this conflict if it starts up again. Whatever it was, it’s been going on for a long time, and we just stepped in the middle of it.

Frank Probst 7:33 p.m.

So are we suppposed to believe Truthout now, or are they fresh out of truth? Their current position is interesting, but should it be believed?

Frank Probst 193, I hope you’re right. Rove is used to pulling these stunts in a political context, where, once the (true) damaging story is “discredited,” it can never be introduced again. A sharp US Attorney is a horse of a different color…

google cheney stock options: raw story article says cheney holds 433,333 Haliburton stock options once valued at $233,000.00 valued at $12,000,000.00 (worth much more now). He has received nearly $200,000.00 per year from Haliburton while in office. He said that he did not have any interest in Haliburton. When busted by Frank Lautenberg, he said that he would donate after tax profits to charity.

Probably “The Evil, Sneering, Lying Penguin Charity” would be a good one.

New thread -Digby!

Mary at 194.

Interesting. A lot of people have been speculating about a Rove “deal” with Fitz. I don’t think Fitz cuts deals the way they do on “Law & Order” (i.e. Give me Cheney, and I’ll let you go.). Think back to JudyJudyJudy. She got to testify to the GJ twice, remember? And that little contempt charge wasn’t lifted until after the second round of testimony. The one she walked away from looking like she’d just sucked on a basketful of lemons. My guess is that Rove gave up some damning–and verifiable–evidence. The “missing” e-mails is a good guess. And don’t forget, there were other e-mails that were withheld from Fitz under executive privilege. Another possibility: Sealed v Sealed is some sort of Hail Mary by the White House. Maybe, but I don’t think that can stay secret for too long.

Rather than have a war would it not have been cheaper and more effective to buy every American a hybrid car? Then we could have dropped the demand for oil and cut the funds Arabs are still giving Ossama. Now thanks to the war we have higher oil prices which means Ossama has more money and al quida has a GREAT RECRUITING device in Iraq. When are the American people or the Corporations that control this country going to puinish this incompetence? Maybe they will get the 411 when they have to pay higher taxes to support this war, sometime
I predict after the November elections SUCKERS!

The “deal” thing – Corallo (ex-Ashcroft, like Comstock in the LIbby case is ex-Ashcroft) made some pretty direct statements about there not being any deal. Now, he may not be a believable guy – but what happens if there is later a deal revealed? Obviously, if there is one, Rove knows about it – would he let his people make such easily misproven statements just on the thought that the Prosecutor won’t be able to act for awhile or the plea deal is under seal and so Rove won’t be challenged on the “no deal” aspect unless the Prosecutor burns through the seal?

Is he willing to be that provocative? I would think twice, but maybe he feels his deal is just that good and if it is under seal, he can’t talk about it, so he’ll just claim he couldn’t tell Corallo there was a deal … etc. Maybe being questioned too much about the letter and the deal is why Luskin backed out and let Corallo start making the statements?

Or maybe not. Who knows.

hackworth @ 7:49 pm (#201) – Wish I had a $7 Halliburton stock option for every time some right wing half-wit told me that Cheney wasn’t profiting by Halliburton’s good fortune.

Hmm. 33x increase in value over two years. As they say in the stock biz, that doesn’t suck totally. No, that’s not 33 percent, that’s 33 times…

neurophius says
June 19th, 2006 at 7:41 pm
Frank Probst 7:33 p.m.

So are we suppposed to believe Truthout now, or are they fresh out of truth? Their current position is interesting, but should it be believed?
———————————————————-
Put them on the list with Wayne Madsen. Something to read and think about, but always with a grain (or twelve) of salt on hand.

mOropeza @ 7:53 pm (#204) – I know my part of this war and the tax cuts could buy a car.

neurophius @ 199
I almost wish T/O was lying, or just delaying the inevitable. But Ash has a lot to lose. T/O readers and contributors aren’t the types who hope that T/O will parse and dance and change the subject, just “Give us something to tell people at cocktail parties and Matthews, so we won’t seem like such schmucks” (like some we hear from). If lied to or made utter fools of, they will crucify the whole lot.
I’ve been as guilty as anyone of walking around with a self-satisfied, shit-eating grin over Rove’s fate – I WAS ABSOLUTELY CERTIAN HE WAS GOING TO BE INDICTED ON NATIONAL TEE VEE! So what the fuck do I know. But I believe the story.

Finally back, and caught up on the comments, just in time for the new thread.

LHP, Mary, et al. – how did we get through 199 comments and nobody made the observation that Fitz is still trying to get through the Fire Swamp, surrounded by ROUSes [Rodents of Unusual Size]? We’ve got a ways to go in this movie/book before we get to the end . . .

Seriously, thanks for the interesting speculations above. I’m really curious to see the transcript of that conference. That seems to be the next semi-scheduled thing we can expect . . .

. . . but no one expects the Spanish Inquisition!

[Oh wait - channelling Monty Python there for a minute]

Mary says
June 19th, 2006 at 7:57 pm
The “deal” thing
———————————————————-
He sent McClellan out to say he had nothing at all to do with it. I think he’d have Corallo say just about anything to save his ass at this point.

Final comment for lhp if she sees this (or anyone else who like Princess Bride and is feeling a little blue over the Rove thing)

Here are some other quotes to keep in mind:

Grandpa: Wait, just wait.
The Grandson: Well, when does it get good?
**********

The Grandson: Doesn’t sound too bad. I’ll try to stay awake.
Grandpa: Oh, well, thank you very much, very nice of you. Your vote of confidence is overwhelming.
*g********
For LHP in particular -
Miracle Max: You rush a miracle man, you get rotten miracles.
*G*G*G*G*

op99-
You know that pic we sent to QS from yKos? I’ve been thanked for it. I humbly accepted.
Seriously – email him and let him know.

Karl

Carolina wins it in 7!

Do Bush and Chenny realize just how they are going to be portrayed in the history books America never liked the wars we LOST!

Mary @ 212

Miracle Max is definitely the best final comment on all this for right now! Let me add his “Have a nice time storming the castle, boys!”

[bows and scrapes]

Could be Frank. It’s just that with McClellan, he had a shot of keeping it undercover for good. With this – I don’t think so. But still, he’s the kind who will push on a string. Could be.
********************

Peterr ROUSes [Rodents of Unusual Size]

How about ROVES [Rodents of Very Enormous Size]?

ok – I’m done. Off the grocery and then home.

Newtonusr –

Carolina is in the World Cup?

;)

Mary,

Pick up some brownies, OK?

(and thanks for the great posts — you too LHP)

Me? I’m sleeping…. Catch you in the a.m.

Peterr
Nascar qualifying, dude!

Bush’s expected pardon of Scooter has to be stopped I think every Dem canidate for president should say pardons involving the white house are a clear CONFLICT OF INTEREST and are not what the founding fathers wanted. Lets let Scalia try to argue that the founding fathers really wanted George Washington to have the power to pardon his friends and white house cronies BECAUSE HE WAS CROOK. Heck I would love to hear Jeb argue this in a presidential debate.

Edmonton is evil and everyone in it is evil. So go ‘Canes.

There you go again, Tiger; harassing Halliburton Dick about his prognostications.

For shame!

Are you some kind of linguistic puritan?

That you can’t stand the bushmasters buttfucking the english language cross-eyed, in their efforts to avoid being evicted from Fantasy-Island-with-flying-body-parts?

If our troops can “stay the course” in Iraq, why shouldn’t all the creators of the bastion of democracy and stability in the mideast, be allowed to continue their three-plus-year program to turn the King’s english into a bullshit vehicle that makes a John Deere fertilizer combine look like a toy, and which would make Joseph Goebbels blush with shame?

nuerophius 199 – I believe the story too. And am standing by the truthout team – Jason Leopold deserves no less. Of course I’m biased having grown up a newspaper brat thanks to my intrepid reporter father who had a couple of similar scrapes with enraged crooked pols and their minions. He was about Jason’s age when he took terrific heat for a controversial story he broke on the Joplin (MO)Globe on political corruption during the Depression, scooping – and enraging -the Kansas City Star. Seems they didn’t cotton to the “hick kid” embarrassing the hell out them. A year later they tried unsuccessfully to lure him away to the KCS.

mOropeza 221 – Agree with everything you write except the part about Jeb. Is this the new conventional wisdom that Jeb may actually be in a presidential debate? Let me know if a betting pool is afoot – I could use some easy money. The Bush Family dynasty is on the wrong side of history and as my poker playing son is wont to say: TOAST.

don’t you silly people understand. the insurgency won’t end untill we BAN GAY MARRIAGE!!!

Anne Holiday
Jeb is not running for president unless Bush wins the war in Iraq and turns the ecconomy around. I mentioned Jeb because he might run and I think he more than any other canidate would be hurt by Bush pardoing Scooter. However if Scooter is not pardoned then I think that Jeb is going to run for president. Thanks for reading my comment!

One last spec. If someone was challenging the authority of the Spec. Prosecutor, that might be styled as a V. Fitzgerald etc. instead of a V. US.

So another possiblity – what if the delegation of authority to the Spec. Prosecutor was changed, via McNulty? If the Comey authorization to investigate obstruction, etc. was withdrawn? If he objected, there could be an action for compliance filed. They could argue that the reasons for the withdrawal of the auhorizations to pursue obstruction etc. and limiting the delegation might be due to the possible nat. sec. implications of letting the Prosec. pursue conspiracy investigations involving people involved at the highest levels of security matters and their correspondence – or they could claim lesser, but still privileged, executive privilege as to the methods of determination to reduce the scope of the delegation.

Either one would likely yield a Sealed v. Sealed case – in essence a US via McNulty v. Fitzgerald case. On the national sec front, they could get an affidavit from Gonzales, as head of the dept – DOJ, stating that it would be harmful to nat sec to have to turn over docs relating to the innerworkings of people like the WHIG. They could even lift and use some of Comey’s argument in Arar to make the case for them that the assertion of nat sec. interests by the head of the DOJ should not be subject to further review and should stand on its own. Tack on Exec Priv. arguments for not wanting to get into why the decision to reduce the Spec. Prose. authority was made in a public format –andyou have two privilege bases for keeping the case under wraps.

If a judge issued a prompt ruling that the Spec Pros. has to abide by the order and his authority is reduced – then ?