(Rove) From May 8th: Remember Shuster on KO: "In the next 2 weeks."

[jazzjunkysue]

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/MSNBC_reporter_I_am_convinced_that_0508.html

MSNBC reporter: 'I am convinced that Karl Rove will, in fact, be indicted'

RAW STORY
Published: Monday May 8, 2006

Rush transcript from Countdown with Keith Olbermann/MSNBC.

MSNBC's Keith Olbermann: There are stories -- possibly apocryphal -- from the medieval courts of chancery in England, of lawsuits that took so long to resolve that they were passed down from generation to generation like property or some really good axes. Our fourth story on the Countdown: if Karl Rove hasn't thought of that analogy yet, somebody else probably has mentioned it to him. Or they still have time to get around to it. Though maybe not a lot of time. An end, of one kind or another, may be in sight.


David Shuster: Well, Karl Rove's legal team has told me that they expect that a decision will come sometime in the next two weeks. And I am convinced that Karl Rove will, in fact, be indicted. And there are a couple of reasons why.

First of all, you don't put somebody in front of a grand jury at the end of an investigation or for the fifth time, as Karl Rove testified a couple, a week and a half ago, unless you feel that's your only chance of avoiding indictment. So in other words, the burden starts with Karl Rove to stop the charges.

Secondly, it's now been 13 days since Rove testified. After testifying for three and a half hours, prosecutors refused to give him any indication that he was clear. He has not gotten any indication since then. And the lawyers that I've spoken with outside of this case say that if Rove had gotten himself out of the jam, he would have heard something by now.

And then the third issue is something we've talked about before. And that is, in the Scooter Libby indictment, Karl Rove was identified as 'Official A.' It's the term that prosecutors use when they try to get around restrictions on naming somebody in an indictment. We've looked through the records of Patrick Fitzgerald from when he was prosecuting cases in New York and from when he's been US attorney in Chicago. And in every single investigation, whenever Fitzgerald has identified somebody as Official A, that person eventually gets indicted themselves, in every single investigation.

Will Karl Rove defy history in this particular case? I suppose anything is possible when you are dealing with a White House official. But the lawyers that I've been speaking with who know this stuff say, don't bet on Karl Rove getting out of this.


From Me:
Let's remember that this case has already dragged on 2 years, so, if it's a week or 2 later than Leopold was told, that's to be expected.

But Shuster does agree with Leopold.

[texasleo]

1. um, nobody has ruled out that he may be indicted

[corbett]

2. But The Doubting Thomas Have Been Numerous This Week (n/t)

[Semblance]

3. Oh come on now

"But Shuster does agree with Leopold."

That is not correct. Shuster does not say that Fitz and Rove met last Friday and that Rove was handed an indictment.

Jason Leopold may be right and he may be wrong, but let's not misstate what he has claimed.

If Rove gets indicted tonight, it doesn't mean Leopold was correct.

[jazzjunkysue]

4. Leopold's info can change, but it's not his fault, and it doesn't mean he

intentionally misled anyone.

I think the concept of negotiations makes the most sense, and that's been going on days after Leopold's information was provided.

But Shuster and Leopold both think he's toast, and soon.

[lies and propaganda]

5. I dont care who or how the Messenger is

I just want this shit to happen.

The champagne has been screaming my name.

[Delphinus]

8. Ditto!

I bought my champagne in anticipation of my house selling (two years ago). It didn't, so it's been waiting for a good reason to celebrate. I'm ready!!

[Halliburton]

6. Shuster does not agree with Leopold

There's a big difference between thinking someone is going to be indicted and actually reporting that someone was in fact indicted. Shuster believes based on the patterns of Fitzgerald's cases that Rove will be indicted. Leopold is reporting that Rove was actually indicted.

[jazzjunkysue]

7. Fine. But they both think he's toast, in the end. The latest threads have

suggested that Rove was offered a plea, turned it down, and was handed "the indictment" meaning the paper, in an effort to get him to plead to something in exchange for a lesser charge.

So, while an indictment is an entire procedure involving courts and arrests, Leopold may have been right when he said Rove was handed the indictment. The thing is, it doesn't stick until the rest of the procedures are followed, including giving it to a judge, voting, etc.

So, I have no trouble accepting that the indictment, or several indictments were written and seen by Rove pending the actual filing of them.

But still, the GOP is silent, refusing to defend Rove or flame Fitzgerald. And they've already proved they're quite happy to do that.

The silence is enough for me.

[Halliburton]

9. I think Rove's toast too

but I wouldn't use Leopold's article as proof of anything.

[jazzjunkysue]

11. Fair enough.

[No Exit]

10. It's going to be so WONDERFUL!!!!

:) :) :) :) :) :9 :toast:

And when the great Fitzerman pulls in his net, having at last caught the fat little fish, what will be his surprise when he sees that the net also contains a GREAT BIG CHENEY!!!!

[jazzjunkysue]

12. Amen. I think that's the cause of the delay: The 3 kings are fighting

amongst themselves. It's clear Cheney has left the president's side. They're carrying each other's water but not drinking cognac together anymore.

So, with Libby's case blasting open, it's revealing their wrong-doings, and they're all trying to use each other for cover.

It's not hard to understand the delay when you think about the fact that this treasonous act could, might, should bring down the president.

Of course there will be delay tactics. And that also explains the absolute vaccuum that is the GOP talking heads since this broke: They're all toxic. Every day proves that.

At this point we might be able to get the country running again if we could sweep the three of them out of the white house and start over.

Any takers?

[Moderator]

13. locking...

Please continue here:


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1224473