Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Marc Ash: "Update on the Rove Indictment Story"

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 02:55 PM
Original message
Marc Ash: "Update on the Rove Indictment Story"
Edited on Wed May-17-06 02:56 PM by WilliamPitt
Update on the Rove Indictment Story
By Marc Ash

Wed May 17th, 2006

For the past few days, we have endured non-stop attacks on our credibility, and we have fought hard to defend our reputation. In addition, we have worked around the clock to provide additional information to our readership. People want to know more about this, and our job is to keep them informed. We take that responsibility seriously.

Here's what we now know: I spoke personally yesterday with both Rove's spokesman Mark Corallo and Rove's attorney Robert Luskin. Both men categorically denied all key points of our recent reporting on this issue. Both said, "Rove is not a target," "Rove did not inform the White House late last week that he would be indicted," and "Rove has not been indicted." Further, both Corallo and Luskin denied Leopold's account of events at the offices of Patton Boggs, the law firm that represents Karl Rove. They specifically stated again that no such meeting ever occurred, that Fitzgerald was not there, that Rove was not there, and that a major meeting did not take place. Both men were unequivocal on that point.

We can now report, however, that we have additional, independent sources that refute those denials by Corallo and Luskin. While we had only our own sources to work with in the beginning, additional sources have now come forward and offered corroboration to us.

We have been contacted by at least three reporters from mainstream media - network level organizations - who shared with us off-the-record confirmation and moral support. When we asked why they were not going public with this information, in each case they expressed frustration with superiors who would not allow it.

More: http://forum.truthout.org/blog/story/2006/5/17/125248/0...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ShortnFiery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 02:56 PM
Response to Original message
1. Good! Thank-you for further information. :-) n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Julius Civitatus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:16 PM
Response to Reply #1
70. This is Rove's last rat-f#cking, messing w lefty bloggers before he goes
Edited on Wed May-17-06 03:18 PM by Julius Civitatus
I think it could be Rove's personal farewell.
Before he goes, he will discredit lefty bloggers and ruin a few careers in the process.

Hey, is not like Rove hasn't done that before, several times...

:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
idgiehkt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:13 PM
Response to Reply #70
231. once the word is out about Rove, can Fitz confirm when it happened?
I mean, would that be possible. Or if there are documents that support it, will they be made public?

If the Leopold's assertions are supported somehow, even this far after the fact, how will it ruin his career?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hepburn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:37 PM
Response to Reply #231
259. The date the indictment was issued...
...would be on the indictment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Doctor. Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:57 PM
Response to Reply #70
379. The one flaw is that a few others would be 'outing' themselves
in order to accomplish this.

I have trouble believing anyone with half a brain would compromise their position and reliability for him at this point.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Exit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:36 PM
Response to Reply #70
389. Yeah, you right. Meanwhile, I'm left sitting here at my keyboard,
Edited on Wed May-17-06 09:38 PM by No Exit
all cold and lonely, with my Billie Holiday CD... playing "That Old Devil Called Rove" and "Them There Lies".

Whether Leopold is right or wrong is not the issue at this point. The question is Will the Fat Bastard Be Indicted?

I have absolutely no inside sources--far, far, far from it. All I have is something of a familiarity with federal prosecutions, having sometimes defended people from them. And given that slight background, my belief is, yes, he will be indicted.

IOW, if he is NOT indicted, that DEFINITELY means the fix is in--and if the fix is in, that means that someday, somehow, someone will get the full story out of Patrick Fitzgerald. (Because if the fix is in, NO WAY is Fitzgerald part of the fix!) Even if Fitz refused to ever tell what really happened, Joe Wilson would also know what happened, and YOU BET he would tell! God knows both Wilson and Fitzgerald have already amply proved their courage.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
myrna minx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 02:57 PM
Response to Original message
2. Thank you for the update. K&R.
Edited on Wed May-17-06 02:59 PM by myrna minx
Shoot. I only have non dairy creamer for my ghastly office coffee. I Guess I'd better chill the champagne.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MelissaB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 02:57 PM
Response to Original message
3. Thank you!
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stop the bleeding Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 02:58 PM
Response to Original message
4. thanks Will
this should be a fun ride, not like it hasn't already been fun enough.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 02:58 PM
Response to Original message
5. Just trust you
in other words.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maddy McCall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:06 PM
Response to Reply #5
34. More of the same.
Keeping the fires fanned at DU.

:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stepnw1f Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:10 PM
Response to Reply #34
49. Merry Fitzmas! (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maddy McCall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:11 PM
Response to Reply #49
52. Happy Fitzmorial Day!
:D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:12 PM
Response to Reply #34
55. Yep
Because that's what we're all about at truthout, Maddy. Our 20+ member staff, multiple editions per day, original content and original reporting, is all for one purpose: to keep the flames fanned in DU GD.

Oh, and also, we like to do it so as to afford you the opportunity to flex your sarcasm.

You've figured us out. It's all about DU.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maddy McCall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:15 PM
Response to Reply #55
64. Why didn't you answer questions when they were first asked?
Instead, you called people with questions "fuckwits" and even insulted the owner of this site--who has been more than gracious to let you keep posting here after your obviously drunken tirade.

All you had to do was answer questions. But your hubris got in the way.

You are more than your DU membership--I am, too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maddy McCall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:17 PM
Original message
And I'll say this, if you had even considered my question, it would have
saved you a lot of embarrassment, because my specific question, immediately after you posted the "ROVE HAS BEEN INDICTED" thread at DU was about the 24 hours.

If you had considered my question, you could have dealt with that BEFORE this thing went big. But you were too proud to take a question from anyone.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:15 PM
Response to Reply #55
65. Will, have you seen the documents you referred to below?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jacobin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:16 PM
Response to Reply #55
68. Wow. Okay, now I'm convinced.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flyarm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 06:27 PM
Response to Reply #55
326. THANK YOU WILL FOR UPDATE!! AND QUESTION....
what possibly could be the reason for keeping this so secret..now i don't want you to go out on a limb ..and this is in no way meant to be a flame bait or critical..as i do believe this is whats happening..its just got me befuddled.. ..and i am just curious ..why would fitz not do a press conference..and why would he let that fucker play this out this way??

if you do not want ot answer here you can Pm me..but i am curious..
now i have sat on 5 juries and that is a whole other ballgame..4 as jurer and 1 alternate..and my sister sat on a grand jury..but she never remembers them holding back an indictment from the public...

and believe me i am not flaming..i just am curious..

in fact you don't need to answer if you don't want to..maybe some lawyers here could answer me..

thanks for keeping us informed Will!! and Thanks to Truthout for all the people who work hard everyday to be the real media..and for caring so much about our precious nation!!

fly
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jigarotta Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:18 PM
Original message
twoallbeefpatties Special Source
lettucecheesepicklesonionsonasesameseedbun.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:10 PM
Response to Reply #5
48. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:13 PM
Response to Reply #48
60. Why are the keepers of this story being so stingy?
Sorry, but I cannot make myself not be skeptical. Too many pieces are missing from this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maddy McCall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:15 PM
Response to Reply #60
66. If you want to see who's the dick, read the Dkos thread.
It's pretty evident there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CatWoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:18 PM
Response to Reply #66
74. what DKos thread?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jigarotta Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:20 PM
Response to Reply #74
81. the one where someone called someone big here a cretin.
and all who don't Believe, are cretins as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maddy McCall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:24 PM
Response to Reply #81
97. And that's not the post...
in which he says that DU ought to pay him for outting freepers, and calls the people who questioned Leopold's article "fuckwits," among other assorted names.

This is also the same person who said that he'd start a thread when he was proved right so that anyone who had QUESTIONS would have to apologize to him.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tavalon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 02:00 AM
Response to Reply #97
446. Oh come on Maddy
You know Will gets pissy sometimes. It's something he clearly tries to be better about, but being human, fails on occasion. But it's really weird that you seem to be connecting his getting pissy with whether this story is credible.

There are plenty of bad internet sites out there that I wouldn't quote if they reported that the sky was blue. Truthout isn't one of them. They've always had high standards, higher than many in the MSM. Since I think they have the story pretty much right, I'm much more interested in having the discussion about why the MSM is this clamped down, why and how.

Yeah, you had a valid question and it's too bad that it didn't get answered in a timely fashion but come on, try to let it go. Be big and step away from the computer - hell, that would make you bigger than a lot of us, Will included. You and OldLeftyLawyer and a couple of others have been working overtime on this circular firing squad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Media_Lies_Daily Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:33 PM
Response to Reply #81
388. Are you talking about Old Lefty Lawyer? Sounds exactly like her.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maddy McCall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:22 PM
Response to Reply #74
87. This link.
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/5/15/33446/1501

The guy who copied and saved the post is supposedly a big bastard, but he was trolling DU and saved it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:01 PM
Response to Reply #87
197. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
arwalden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:16 PM
Response to Reply #197
236. "Don't Post Drunk"
:thumbsup: :patriot:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Misunderestimator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 05:09 PM
Response to Reply #236
285. That's some good advice there.
:patriot:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Media_Lies_Daily Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:51 PM
Response to Reply #236
400. Here's another one....don't make assertions you can't prove.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maddy McCall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 10:46 PM
Response to Reply #400
417. Assertions you can't prove?
Like Leopold asserting that Rove was indicted on May 12?

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Roon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 01:26 AM
Response to Reply #236
444. I hear that!!!
When I am shit faced I just read....no posting....you just end up embarrassing yourself in the end.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hiley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:03 PM
Response to Reply #87
202. Supposedly
my ass
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Seabiscuit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:31 PM
Response to Reply #87
254. I just read the link (and the link within the link) and I am appalled at
Pitt's online behavior. Who the fuck does he think he is? A megalomaniac's megalomaniac? Anyone who disagrees with him or expresses any doubt about Leopold's hastily and sloppily written story with all its internal absurdities is a "little fish" and "a cretin"?

The only cretin around here by now is Will Pitt. Pitt has lost all credibility for me after reading his reply to Skinner. Skinner is a big man indeed to allow Pitt to abuse us all further by allowing him to keep his account on DU.

Interesting that 41% in the poll in that link don't even believe Pitt's assertion that Joe Wilson helped locate other sources corroborating Leopold's story.

You want to know if Leopold's story is true? Give both Leopole and Pitt the benefit of the doubt and suppose that "24 hours" really means something they invented the day after publication called "24 business hours", supposedly meaning three days. Well guess what, folks, even giving them the benefit of that doubt, the three days are up, and there's NO INDICTMENT. End game.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
katinmn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:38 PM
Response to Reply #254
260. Not an isolated incident. Here's his response to Symbolman
who had made a challenge, a civil one, involving a bet that would have meant a donation to DU. I agree. Lost all respect.

WilliamPitt (1000+ posts) Sat May-13-06 09:52 AM
Response to Original message
56. How about this instead
How about you take this thread, and all the others like it, and your insane professional jealousy, and your video you can't sell, and anything else you can think of, and jam them up your ass as far and as fast as they will go.

Sound good? I'd pay $1,000 to find someone to help you do it, if only it would shut you the fuck up.

You decry sensationalism, but what is this? This is you taking contrary positions against a journalist who out-scoops you every time he gets out of bed in the morning. Your bravery is unmatched.

No, I'm not making any bets with you. I am putting you on Ignore, and hitting alert on this thread, for why the mods would allow a call-out like this to go on for so long is a mystery. In the meantime, I will continue to put my faith in Jason Leopold and his sources, which we at truthout check with deep intensity.

When the deal goes down and I post the obligatory "Apologize to Jason Leopold Here" thread, I will look for 'Ignored' somewhere on the list of posters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maddy McCall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 05:17 PM
Response to Reply #260
290. Or this:
Edited on Wed May-17-06 05:18 PM by Maddy McCall
"The site admins ought to pay me cold hard cash... for outing trolls and other fuckshits of low mental weight. I seem to manage to do so by accident. Just by posting. I don't mean to.

See, they can lay low for everyone else. But I'm the magic man. I've got two dozen of you cowardly shitdogs out in the open now. Just by showing up. Just by doing my job. I should get combat pay.

Yeah, you. They oughta pay me for this. I out more Freepers by accident than anyone else does on purpose. Heh."




Wills rant at about 3AM Central, Monday, May 15, 2006
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
katinmn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 05:30 PM
Response to Reply #290
298. oh, how charming
:dilemma:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Seabiscuit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 05:40 PM
Response to Reply #290
304. Will was definitely posting drunk at 3 a.m. Monday, May 15 because on
Edited on Wed May-17-06 05:40 PM by Seabiscuit
Sunday, May 14, he declared he was going out to get drunk after entertaining us all with his "24 hours" means "24 business hours" hooey.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Media_Lies_Daily Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:30 PM
Response to Reply #304
386. Hey....if you feel you can do a better job of reporting on this story....
...let's see it. Step right up, set up your website, and let's see what you can do.

"Hooey"?? Yeah, real nice. That tells us MUCH more about you than it does TO, Jason, or Will.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Seabiscuit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 10:32 PM
Response to Reply #386
414. OMG! Another Pitt Groupie chimes in!
Edited on Wed May-17-06 10:39 PM by Seabiscuit
With all the illogic.

I don't have to "do a better job of reporting on this story" to be entitled to question it. Same goes for the "set up your website" bullshit.

No, "hooey" describes Will Pitt's behavior on DU during the past five days to a "T". It doesn't say anything about me unless you're Will Pitt and regard anyone who questions anything about anything he posts as, in his words, a "cretin".

Get a life and quit indulging in your mindless idol-worship.

Will Pitt has expressly put his reputation on the line in patently endorsing Leopold's last article about Rove already being "indicted". There are so many obvious flaws in this story, pointed out in so many posts (not just mine) that did it ever occur to you that maybe you just might be motivated to ever ask at least a single question about it?

BTW, have you ever even wondered what the fuck I was talking about in my post - the 24 hours BS, or the fact that he posted on 5/14 that he as going out to get drunk? So therefore if he posted that egregious crap at 3:30 a.m. the next morning, he's obviously, according to his own post on DU, posting drunk?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skip Intro Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:49 PM
Response to Reply #290
360. I have to ask - have you ever apologized for something you posted?
Edited on Wed May-17-06 07:55 PM by Skip Intro
I don't mean apologies for factual errors, shit happens (right?).

I mean for someting maybe, oh, Idon't know, mean-spirited or not-yourself posts or something?

You've been around DU for a while. Have you ever apologized for something you originally posted. Some rant maybe?

Ever?

Just curious...

edited to be a bit less confrontational (wouldn't want to disurb the good vibes going on here....)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Seabiscuit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 11:14 PM
Response to Reply #360
424. I have - and it was for some very silly "not myself" posts in the Lounge.
Edited on Wed May-17-06 11:20 PM by Seabiscuit
But that doesn't begin to compare with (1) Will Pitt's unflagging and absolute endorsement of a story that is not only internally inconsistent and patently absurd in parts on its face, but also even more subject to suspicion and ridicule with every post Will Pitt has put up since then endorsing it; (2) Will Pitt's extremely juvenile and abusive drunken tirades against Symbolman, Skinner, and others who have dared to even raise any question on DU about the story's veracity.

Truth be told: Will Pitt's "24 business hours" are up. It didn't happen. No indictment. End Game. End of story.

Pitt's full of shit.

End Game. End of story.

Will Pitt's still gaming us/wallowing in his little syndrome about "let's see: if I post some really explosive news on DU, true or not, I'll get hundreds of strokes from my 'blind faith' fanclub? Oh, yeah, let's give it another try and see how long it lasts. When it all collapses I can post another 'I'm quitting DU' post and vilify everyone who called me out for my bullshit. Then I'll start all over again with another BS story because I need the strokes".

I have yet to note any abject apologies from him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Seabiscuit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 05:36 PM
Response to Reply #260
302. Yes, I recall reading that a few days ago. Equally disgusting.
When will Will post the now obligatory "I apologize to DU" thread that he owes us all for filling DU with such juvenile, drunken swill?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Laurab Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:11 PM
Response to Reply #260
367. Could you post Symbolman's "civil challenge" as well?
I've seen far too many of his posts bashing Will to believe it was civil, and I now have him on ignore, but still, you should really post his post, too. I'd love to see a compilation of his posts....well, actually, no I wouldn't. I saw enough hate and anger in the ones I saw. "Civil" is not a word I'd attribute to any of his posts regarding Will.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DisgustedTX Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:22 PM
Response to Reply #260
372. Quite Coulterian
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Media_Lies_Daily Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:48 PM
Response to Reply #260
399. I can't believe anyone would defend Symbolman in his....
....long-running personal attack against Will, Jason, TO, and the people at Raw Story.

IMHO, Will let him off way too easy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catherine Vincent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 11:51 PM
Response to Reply #260
432. I'm sorry but I just have to laugh at Will's post.
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KoKo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 05:34 PM
Response to Reply #254
300. It's sad and hard to believe that Will Pitt would do this ...but it's his
Edited on Wed May-17-06 05:36 PM by KoKo01
own words. There were several posts. He thinks some of us are "Cretins" and worse.

I know that drinking can change personalities. And, we are all stressed these days. But, to trash one's own group of supporters....

We have to look at the Good and the Bad with people. And, the tension over Leopold is getting DU'ers at each other's throats. But what would get most of us banned here on DU is being said against fellow DU'ers and even though I'v posted some crap after three glasses of wine and thought better of it when the mods deleted me...I don't ever recall trashing my fellow DU'ers with epithets or calling them "cretins/trolls and worse." Including that I would have ever trashed the Admins of DU... :-( Really bad, bad stuff.

We have to hope that Will and Jason are under incredible pressure that Will would be so drunk and abusive as to go after the folks who gave him "the wind beneath his wings." I know he did everything with his books and all on his own...but it's not like we DU'ers didn't support him every inch of the way.

It is what it is....but trashing and making fun of DU'ers isn't cool...I don't think.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 06:18 PM
Response to Reply #300
323. I think I understand
There are those here who will kiss his ass no matter what he says.

There are those who will argue with him no matter what.

I've argued with him in the past, but I've never, ever kissed his ass and I never, ever will. Not my MO by any stretch.

There are a lot of cretins here! WTF? The man was honest about that, drunk or not.

There are many here who owe HIM an apology. I've done battle on more than one thread in the past few days trying to verbally split an iron-clad skull so some logic could sink in, and I got called some names and generally got beat up. Who cares? Sticks and stones and all that.

Trashing and making fun of Will and TO isn't cool either. Maybe he just had enough. I know I have.

I only hope all the lily-livered, pantywaist, piss-ants haven't run the man off again!

I should have started keeping a list of names of those who will owe Will and TO an apology when all this is over! Public humiliation goes both ways.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KoKo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 06:57 PM
Response to Reply #323
335. What you say is valid...
and many of us have faith enough that if he's laid his life on this story from Leopold it will pann out.

Still...to go into drunken stuff and trash Skinner and fellow DU'ers is an issue that needs to be address "down the road." ...after he and Jason have been proved CORRECT on what "Truth Out" laid their Reputation down on.

Calling out fellow DU'ers was kind of "crude" but I guess we can forgive him for that...one MO TIME...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KoKo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:10 PM
Response to Reply #323
342. I've seen some "trashing"
but I've not seen anyone making "fun" of Will.

I have had "dust ups and at times "knock down drag outs" with Will...but I always believed in him...

I've never "made 'fun' of Will" and have seen more "Concern" about him here on DU than "Lounge Style Antics" going after either Will or Jason..

Maybe somewhere in a "Forum" here on DU there is fun and trashing of Will but it seems that in the "dark of night" on DU, Will called DU'ers who quetioned him OUT and said we were "Cretins," "Traitors" and worse.

I'm still holding out my opinion on "Truth Out" Scoop about Rove...but to have reporters trashing fellow DU'ers with Epithets when if any others of us would get "TOMBSTONED" for doing that does mean that while we "appreciate the CREDENTIALS" of the "OP" ...does it mean that the rest of us are "chopped liver?"

Just kind of wondering..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Media_Lies_Daily Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:39 PM
Response to Reply #342
391. You've got to be kidding me. Will, Jason, and TO have been the....
...object of some of the most vile comments anyone could make on DU and still keep their posting privileges.

It surprises me that anyone could have missed all of that crap.

And here it is....still going on. How sad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KoKo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 10:08 PM
Response to Reply #391
407. I guess some see what they want to see...the rest of us are holding
opinions...

The trashing seems to be coming from folks who want some of us to take sides...and some of us want to wait and see how it all works out.

We're just watching it all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
springhill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 01:23 AM
Response to Reply #254
443. Go Will Go!
I am behind you all the way. They are calling you a liar and you have every right to be indignant at that. The posts, especially concerning your credibility are uncalled for. Period.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
katinmn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:54 PM
Response to Reply #66
180. Normally isn't it the messenger that gets attacked?
In this case, the messenger is also the attacker.

I am amazed at the number who continue to fawn over one person who has viciously attacked anyone who dared question the story, and it wasn't even his damn story. Arrogance rulz! Fall in line -- or else!

In the meantime, we still have nuthin and still can't ask a question and get a yes or no answer.

BurtWorm (1000+ posts) Wed May-17-06 03:06 PM
Response to Original message
33. You've seen them?
You've seen a reasonable facsimile of the documents?
crasez l'Infme!

BurtWorm (1000+ posts) Wed May-17-06 03:15 PM
Response to Reply #55
65. Will, have you seen the documents you referred to below?
crasez l'Infme!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maddy McCall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:58 PM
Response to Reply #180
190. And it's a simple question, isn't it?
No less simple than the two I asked that had me labeled a GOP operative. :shrug:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
smb Donating Member (761 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:20 PM
Response to Reply #60
82. O Ye Of Little Faith
I'm sure that all will be revealed in just a few more "business hours".... :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Seabiscuit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 05:48 PM
Response to Reply #82
310. Get yur "business hours" here - 25 cents per business hour - cheap!
Not enough "business hours" for you? Here, have some of mine! :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 05:55 PM
Response to Reply #310
316. Are those business cents you're talking about?
Or just plain ones.

:dunce:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Seabiscuit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:06 PM
Response to Reply #316
341. Did I say "cents"? Half the world is thinking I literally meant "cents"!
Edited on Wed May-17-06 07:10 PM by Seabiscuit
If I could rewrite my story, I'd *definitely* change that to "business cents". After all, "business hours" must cost "business cents", not just plain old everyday cents. So... just 25 business cents per business hour - THAT makes a lot of business sense, doesn't it? Especially when you're talking sense to monkey business.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jacobin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:14 PM
Response to Reply #48
62. May I say that I don't think he's being a dick?
The blogs don't have editors. The key to factual and accurate reporting is self vetting.

If we all worship the writer of a story and don't vet it, we are on the road to serious problems with reliability and accuracy.

The MSM has that problem because its bought off. I for one would like to be able to depend on blog reporters and it appears that we have a serious problem with the reporting on this issue.

Why can't we ask for a reality check from blog reporters?

:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Seabiscuit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:26 PM
Response to Reply #62
349. How's this for "a reality check from blog reporters?"
"This is you taking contrary positions against a journalist who out-scoops you every time he gets out of bed in the morning." - Will Pitt to Symbolman.

And what kind of "scoop" would that be? Ice cream? Nah. The kind one picks up with a "pooper scooper"? Nah, that's just poop. Hmmm.... still wonderin' about that last question...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
benburch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:55 PM
Response to Reply #5
182. And when they are proved right...
...are you planning to apologize?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maddy McCall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:01 PM
Response to Reply #182
196. For what?
Asking questions about the article? No.

I peer-review articles for scholarly journals. It's never been seen as a slight to ASK A QUESTION by any of the academics whose work I review.

An outburst like Will's would be professional suicide in any other profession.

Asking questions isn't hostility. Therefore, I have nothing to apologize for.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
benburch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:07 PM
Response to Reply #196
213. If you mean me to come away from this thinking this has not been hostile -
- sorry. I am fully capable of judging for myself the tone of postings, and there has been a lot of hostility here directed towards Will and Jason and the whole TO team.

However, I did not direct the question to you, so I wonder why you are being so defensive?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skip Intro Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:25 PM
Response to Reply #213
348. Hello! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Seabiscuit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:35 PM
Response to Reply #196
353. Should we apologize if Rove is indicted next week? Next June? Next
Edited on Wed May-17-06 07:58 PM by Seabiscuit
July?

Hell no - our questions and criticisms are valid and Pitt hasn't responded directly to any of them, beyond lumping us all in his "cretin" type of remarks simply for simply expressing our doubts, despite one of his own posts which said: "Doubt is good".

And besides, Pitt's own "24 business hours" (3 days?) have already expired without any evidence of any indictment of Rove last Friday. For that alone Pitt owes DU an apology already.

I still think Rove *will* be indicted based on the evidence in the case revealed to date. But I don't buy the Leopold/Pitt story any more. It has evolved into what appears to be more rumor mongering than investigative reporting. Pitt's obviously obsessed with "outscooping" Symbolman and others to his own detriment (angry and emotional irrationality at the expense of any investigative journalistic skills he may possess).

I was personally very depressed last Thursday when the USA Today news came out about the hundreds of millions of Americans having their phone records tracked by the NSA.

Then Pitt's post last Friday of Leopold's first story about a Rove indictment being "imminent" as of Thursday had me elated, and my posts reflected that.

Then Saturday Leopold's second story about Rove having been "indicted" on Friday caused me to recklessly announce the good news to relatives visiting for Mother's Day weekend.

By Sunday, after reading Pitt's post about changing "hours" to "business hours" I became suspicious and went back to read Leopold's story more carefully and came away with a mountain of doubt - it is full of absurdities and inconsistencies and sloppiness. But for awhile I still put up forgiving posts, some of which drew a lot of flak from the doubters. Since then, Pitt's own postings have just dug himself and Leopold bigger and bigger holes - to the point that the story by now, five days later, lacks any credibility at all. I'm beginning to think these two are not only naive but self-destructive and reckless.

And that makes ME angry, as I don't appreciate my emotional convictions about Rove or other bastards in this criminal cabal in Washington, D.C. being fucked with. Thanks for the emotional roller coaster, but NO THANKS!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 12:56 AM
Response to Reply #353
440. The beautiful thing about buying the story wholesale
is that if Rove is never indicted, you don't ever have to admit you were wrong. You can keep maintaining that the indictment was sealed on May 12, 2006, and it's just a matter of time--business hours, days, years--before it's unsealed. Eventually everyone will forget about Leopold and Rove. You'll never have to apologize for being proven wrong.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
motocicleta Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:33 PM
Response to Reply #196
387. peer-reviewing academic articles is great, but
it doesn't have anything to do with journalism, last I checked. Journalists are working, busy humans. The process is entirely different from academia. Professional suicide? Professional suicide in journalism is getting the story wrong, or plagiarizing. Being aggro? This ain't academia, friend. It's not the political bs that is academia; it's about being right. There mostly is no 'right' in academia, it's almost all about politics. In which case, being nice and diplomatic matters, but not with journalism.

If you all want to skewer TO and Pitt when it is clear they are entirely wrong, not just wrong about timing or parts of the story, then live it up. But this whole, "Om my gosh, Pitt really acted in such an uncivil fashion" thing just sounds like a bunch of prissy little ninnies.

For the record, I am not saying Pitt is right. But you get what you pay for with Pitt. Mostly I have gotten accurate information. I also get a guy who posts on internet discussion boards like a bull in a china shop. All ya'all who think he is so out of line on this sound like a pile of church ladies.

And I love DU, but there are a huge load of cretins over here, myself included. What the hell is the problem with that?

In other words, chill the fuck out. We'll all have our answers soon enough.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:58 PM
Response to Reply #387
402. Here are some more stories to chill the fuck out to
Bush has been indicted in Texas for scrubbing his drug and DUI busts off the record when he was Governor.

Cheney has been indicted for illegal activities Halliburton engaged in in Iran when Cheney was CEO.

Rumsfeld has been charged with war crimes at the Hague.

Sources close to each investigation say.

:smoke:

Par-tay!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
motocicleta Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 10:14 PM
Response to Reply #402
409. whaaaa?
We all know this admin is corrupt, and the MSM sucks. Is it some kind of surprise that other journalists with fewer resources are also getting the story wrong? I'm just saying that Ben might reasonably suggest that if Rove gets indicted soon, some of you who are so vociferous about Pitt might be in the wrong. Discretion being the better part of valor, and all that.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 10:37 PM
Response to Reply #409
416. If Rove wasn't indicted last Friday, Leopold's story is wrong.
If Rove is indicted tomorrow, I'll be applauding Rove's indictment, surely, but I will not be applauding Leopold's journalistic acumen, because it will be shown that he doesn't have enough to warrant applause.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
northamericancitizen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 10:18 PM
Response to Reply #387
411. great post eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:10 PM
Response to Reply #182
221. I have to ask Maddy's question again: For what?
For asking a question? Is it bad to ask questions?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
benburch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:12 PM
Response to Reply #221
230. For the clear and hostile implication that he is NOT to be trusted.
Repeated ad nauseum.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:16 PM
Response to Reply #230
235. On this story, I'd like a little more information.
Edited on Wed May-17-06 04:18 PM by BurtWorm
For reasons that would be obvious to anyone who doesn't put blind trust in the sources of this story.

PS: I don't think I need to apologize for needing more information.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
katinmn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:25 PM
Response to Reply #235
244. Other blogs and forums are self-policing on this story
A lot (not all) of DU is going out on the limb with TO.

I still believe it is healthy to ask questions and be skeptical whenever you are told to accept things because someone says so.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
theboss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:30 PM
Response to Reply #244
252. How many times has DU been Charlies Brown to someone else's Lucy?
Rove has been indicted on 28 separate occasions according to this place.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:57 PM
Response to Reply #244
270. I don't have problems with people believing Rove was indicted, you know?
I have problems with people setting belief in that as a standard of one's loyalty to the cause. I owe more to the truth than I do to Truthout.

(And by the way, anyone who is offended by that statement: it doesn't mean I am 100% anti-Truthout. It's you who sees things in black and white, not me. Even though I do think there is a clear line separating what is a true fact from what is a false one.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maddy McCall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 05:20 PM
Response to Reply #270
292. Excellent post.
Perfectly expresses my sentiments.

:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KoKo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:28 PM
Response to Reply #270
350. Yeah...didn't we think that "Black and White" my "Team against Yours"
was Freeper crap? Yet, here we are caught in the same trap.

I thought we'd moved beyond that? :shrug: I guess I was wrong...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
benburch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:55 PM
Response to Reply #235
363. I gave you the opportunity to do the classy thing.
Which would have been to say "Of course I'll apologize if I am wrong."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:25 PM
Response to Reply #363
373. What would I be wrong about?
I don't understand. If it turns out Rove was indicted on Friday and every detail that matters of Leopold's story is correct, I'll be as ecstatic as everybody else with a brain. It won't change the fact that questions about some anomalous details in the story weren't answered, and that the keepers of this story have been behaving exactly like the keepers of mainstream stories, flaunting unnamed sources and expecting readers to just trust them that the sources are trustworthy.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
motocicleta Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:17 PM
Response to Reply #373
382. If Rove gets indicted soon, it will look like a bunch of people
at DU with too much time on their hands asked too many questions of some alternative journalistic sources who don't have the time to deal with them, and a notoriously short-tempered guy lit into the DUers. If Rove gets indicted soon, no matter the 24 hours thing, a bunch of people at DU will look like the types Pitt accuses us of being. And the incessant accusations of drunkenness? Pretty pathetic, cheap, low, cowardly, and wrong.
That's what DUers might be wrong about.
If Rove doesn't get indicted, then Pitt and Leopold are wrong. They should come correct.
Getting a few details wrong, though, isn't enough to account for the bulletin board tomfoolery we are seeing right now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:40 PM
Response to Reply #382
392. If someone says to me "Rove was indicted," Rove better be indicted
or that someone is either wrong or lying to me. You may have a lower standard for truth than I do. Fine. But if Rove is not indicted, it's not just a "few" details we're talking about.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
motocicleta Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:47 PM
Response to Reply #392
398. Actually I suspect I have a higher standard for truth than just about
Edited on Wed May-17-06 09:47 PM by motocicleta
anyone on earth. I don't look at journalism as anything close to approximating truth. It is best when it breaks stories that people aren't hearing and that are presented vaguely accurately, but anyone who looks at journalism for "Truth" has a much lower bar than I. When I saw the story from Pitt and TO, I thought, cool, that will be fun, and went on with my life. It doesn't mean crap until we see somebody in cuffs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 10:05 PM
Response to Reply #398
405. That's a low standard for truth.
You can tolerate falsehoods as long as they reward your sense of fun. I can't tolerate falsehoods, least of all from some agency calling itself "truthout." But I admit, that could just be a quirk of mine. ;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
motocicleta Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 10:09 PM
Response to Reply #405
408. No, it's a high standard. I expect falsehoods, or at least nothing
that corresponds to capital T Truth, from journalists. I would suggest it is a quirk of yours that you expect to get capital T Truth from the news. These men and women are getting paid for their take on Truth. Something tells me that system doesn't work perfectly very often.
But maybe that's just a quirk of mine.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 10:16 PM
Response to Reply #408
410. If I expected capital T Truth, I wouldn't be complaining about this story
I'd just be swallowing it like so many others here are.

Maybe you should tell Will you expect him to lie. See how cool and fun he thinks that news is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
motocicleta Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 10:20 PM
Response to Reply #410
412. Touche
although I don't expect him to lie, but I don't really expect him to get me the real truth. It's a process, and I don't understand why we can expect him to always be right and always answer all of our questions in a polite, timely fashion. I mean, compare this process to our interactions with journalists pre-internet. Things are better, but come on. How perfectly do you guys expect this to go?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 10:49 PM
Response to Reply #412
418. How long should I wait for an answer to the question I posed here.
Which was, did Will see a facsimile of the documents he said would prove Leopold's story right? Pretty simple question. Maybe a little insulting seeming, considering editors are supposed to see things like documents that verify a story they're about to publish is true. Then again, how much of Judy Miller's notes from her conversations with Scooter Libby did Bill Keller see?

I don't know, I just have this nagging feeling that even low-budget, out-of-the-mainstream journalism--actually ESPECIALLY outside the mainstream journalism--should have higher standards of proof than run-of-the-mill bullshitting on a political forum.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
motocicleta Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 10:58 PM
Response to Reply #418
421. Live it up then, bud
but to me it seems like editors and writers have more important things to do than answer our questions. Plus it seems that expecting Pitt to not be a bull in a china shop is a bit like expecting the sun to rise in the west.

But I repeat myself. That generally means it's time to stop posting on a thread.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 11:19 PM
Response to Reply #421
426. As an editor and writer myself, I have to say I disagree with you.
Writers and editors of journalism in particular are in the business of answering the public's questions. That's what it's all about. You try to answer them accurately, too.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
motocicleta Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 11:26 PM
Response to Reply #426
427. I certainly don't want to get in the way of a writer
and editor trying to do the right thing, but you can see how deeply cynical I have gotten about journalists. I'm not proud of it, it's just the way it is. If you have some input on this system, then please hold yourself to a higher standard than I apply. I agree with your formulation, I just have very little faith left, hence my defence of TO and Pitt. Which I think we can both agree they would not appreciate very much. Good luck, burtworm.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jazz2006 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 02:22 AM
Response to Reply #427
448. So, you're defending poor journalism on the basis that you have no faith
in their ability to get it right?

And your low expectation of journalistic integrity leads you to your "defence of TO and Pitt"?

Sorry, but that just seems utterly bizarre and illogical on its face.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lfairban Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:44 PM
Response to Reply #382
397. If Rove's indictment gets announced anytime this month . . .
. . . we at DU will be Awesome. People will quit watching the MSM and start getting their news here.

OK, not all people, but quite a few. Blogs will gain a sudden rise in popularity. The MSM will be kicked in the nads harder than they were by Judy Miller.

Remember that you are in a big tent, and problems can and will occur.

Now stop fighting with each other and save it for the Jerrys.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 01:01 AM
Response to Reply #382
441. By the way, if Rove *doesn't* get indicted, how do you think DU will look?
;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:47 PM
Response to Reply #230
263. Well, when I pointed out, in a reasonably supportive way, and without
casting any aspersions whatsoever on the Truthout website OR the author of the piece, indeed, not even mentioning them, that in actual fact Tweety was actually the first one to raise the indictment issue (on Friday morning, on Imus--he said he was standing by, something was about to break, could be Friday, could be next week) a bunch of rabid assholes tried to hand me my head because their guy had to be FIRST. And Tweety is a SHILL, ya see. And Tweety wasn't SPECIFIC enough for their tastes. I've seen more maturity in a grade school lunchroom during a food fight.

You'd think that if anyone from the MSM, and particularly someone who worships at the BushCo altar, was even humming along to the same tune, they'd find it heartening, indeed, validating. Instead, all I caught was rudeness and shit. That's not the way to encourage debate or honest discussion, and it sure as hell isn't the way to rally people to one's defense.

I had an open mind and a willingness to wait and see about the whole matter when I made that initial post, but seeing the repeated "YOU MUST BELIEVE...without ANY PROOF" and the curious "24 business HOURS" phrase, I am starting to be skeptical, where I was less so before. And brutal, vicious attacks on people who politely ask questions and seek clarification have much to do with my shifting opinion.

It's rather curious, though, that there seems to be a great deal of fighting over an item that everyone here actually HOPES will happen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
theboss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:57 PM
Response to Reply #263
271. If the indictment is handed down next week, Tweety wins the scoop
Wouldn't that be a hoot?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 05:22 PM
Response to Reply #271
294. Handed UP, boss, handed UP!!!
But yes, he does win the scoop if that is the case. And make no mistake, he'll not hesitate to mention it!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 05:05 PM
Response to Reply #263
279. There seems to be a disagreement about tenses, past and future.
Edited on Wed May-17-06 05:08 PM by BurtWorm
A large contingent thinks a) it already happened and b) if you don't believe it already happened you're a Republican fascist Bush-loving Santorum wannabe. Another contingent believes it a) may or may not happen--or maybe even has already happened, but we don't know it yet because only one media source is saying it already happened and b) if you think it already did happen you may have lost touch with reality.

Therein lies the controversy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
theboss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 05:07 PM
Response to Reply #279
283. But Will states emphatically that it happened
The date is Friday.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 05:28 PM
Response to Reply #283
297. He does. And the sources for that to be true, with any expectation of
accuracy, have to be one of the following:

The Judge.

A GJ member.

Someone in Rove's legal team's offices.

Someone at the courthouse.

Someone in Fitzgerald's office.

Someone directly connected to any one of the above.


If the sources are anyone other than those, then it's just rumor-mongering. Or wishful thinking.

As I have said upthread and elsewhere, the fact that Tweety broke the tale that something big was about to go down WRT Rove, a full day (or would that be 24 business hours?) earlier than the article, actually lends credence to the piece.

The bottom line: if we aren't in the club of those "in the know" listed above, we know nothing yet. We can hope, but we can't know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
benburch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:35 PM
Response to Reply #263
352. Respectfully, I wasn't one of those people.
And moreover, this isn't about the people who rally to "defend" "their guy". It is simply about how horribly rude people have been towards TO and Jason and Will here. They are not to blame for the actions of their fans any more than English football teams are responsible for the hooligans who follow them around.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 10:59 PM
Response to Reply #352
422. I know you weren't. And your civility isn't unnoticed.
My point though, remains. I didn't say one pejorative word about the website in question, OR the author of the piece, or the editor of the website, at all. I didn't even MENTION them. I simply pointed out that 'Tweety said it' the day BEFORE the publication of the article, and the next thing you know, the stake and bonfire were being prepared. And many of the same rallymonsters that attacked me for mentioning this small fact are out in force, playing football fan, yet again.

I guess the old saying that two wrongs don't make a right applies! The rudeness is clearly cutting both ways.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeftNYC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:22 PM
Response to Reply #182
241. of course they wont apologize. They will go on splitting hairs
over 24 hours=3 weeks. Go TO!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
benburch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:43 PM
Response to Reply #241
356. I fear you are correct.
Most people who are doing this attacking won't have the civility to apologize.

I think you may have noticed that when I am convinced I have wronged somebody, I apologize, and I wonder when this became a lost art?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KoKo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 05:40 PM
Response to Reply #182
306. Ben, did you read Maddy's posts about what Will said about DU'ers?
Look ...I know he was drunk and tired...but can you really support him calling folks who asked questions on Sunday ..Cretins and Trolls and him trashing Skinner?

How can you ignore this as if it never happened? :shrug: Only asking you to read Maddy's links to what was really said...

:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
benburch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:38 PM
Response to Reply #306
354. Because I was unaware of it.
I am usually too busy to get a clear notion of everything that happens here.

If Will did that, he ought to apologize to some people here, because though there are cretins and trolls (and paid GOP moles) here who deserve no apology, there are a lot of good folks too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cocoa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:48 PM
Response to Reply #182
359. a game of chicken?
what good do games like that do for anyone?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
benburch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:54 PM
Response to Reply #359
362. Not a game.
I'm looking for civility here.

A lot of accusations are flying, and I think that whomever is in the wrong here needs to own it and apologize. And MEAN IT.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cocoa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:14 PM
Response to Reply #362
368. it's a bluffing game
the story was a gamble.

The people who are questioning it aren't taking a risk. If the story turns out to be true, then the people questioning it aren't "wrong" and we don't have to apologize for it.

But that's what you're comment is trying to say. It's bogus.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
benburch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:42 PM
Response to Reply #368
377. The story was only a gamble if it was a surmise.
If it is not a surmise; If it was based on sound sourcing and certain knowledge, there is no question of a gamble.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Media_Lies_Daily Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:43 PM
Response to Reply #368
395. Incredible. There's more spin in your post than a Maytag dryer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spazito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 02:58 PM
Response to Original message
6. Thanks for the update, much appreciated n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Patsy Stone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 02:58 PM
Response to Original message
7. Hi, Will!
If I were you, I'd stay low...
My .02 :) K&R.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MelissaB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:00 PM
Response to Reply #7
13. Ditto that!
Some people are going to agitate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:00 PM
Original message
Good
Having them all in one place will make things easier for me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Patsy Stone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:20 PM
Response to Original message
79. If you'd like
we can compare lists of the usual suspects. :) Courage!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Laurab Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:21 PM
Response to Original message
370. Not only in one place
it's a tag team - they answer each other, post to each other....what the hell did you do to these people? It's almost kinda like they're coordinated attacks.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Patsy Stone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 06:11 PM
Response to Reply #13
322. And it's nice to see
that you haven't been proven wrong.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Im with Rosey Donating Member (619 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 06:32 PM
Response to Reply #7
328. My thoughts exactly!
I have stayed out of the fray, I don't think it does any good to bicker. Keep fighting the good fight, Will. :headbang:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Coexist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 02:59 PM
Response to Original message
8. thanks for the update! - More on the 24-hour thing:
Edited on Wed May-17-06 03:00 PM by FLDem5
<snip>
"THE 24 HOUR THING

We reported that Patrick Fitzgerald had, "instructed one of the attorneys to tell Rove that he has 24 business hours to get his affairs in order...." That does not mean that at the end of that 24-hour period, Fitzgerald is obliged to hold a press conference and make an announcement. It just means that he has given Rove a 24-hour formal notification. Fitzgerald is not obliged to make an announcement at any point; he does so at his own discretion, and not if it compromises his case. So we're all stuck waiting here. Grab some coffee."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:07 PM
Response to Reply #8
37. First use of the term I have seen -- 24 business hours
Does that mean, assuming an eight hour American workday, that he has three work days?

If the word went forth Friday evening, then the clock runs out at the end of the day, today, then?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
smb Donating Member (761 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:24 PM
Response to Reply #37
98. You Have To Know What To Count
First use of the term I have seen -- 24 business hours
Does that mean, assuming an eight hour American workday, that he has three work days?


Well, "business hours" don't include lunch hour, coffee breaks, shooting the breeze around the water cooler, photocopying your butt, daydreaming, et cetera. "24 business hours" could extend almost indefinitely. The put-up-or-shut-up moment of truth is somewhere in the indefinite future, like the Second Coming of Christ or the establishment of a friendly and self-sufficient government in Iraq.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alcibiades_mystery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:41 PM
Response to Reply #98
137. Reminds me of the Frederick Brooks book:
The Mythical Man-Month...

:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 05:35 PM
Response to Reply #98
301. And time off for golf is time off the business clock??
:evilgrin:

Who has tee times???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jumpoffdaplanet Donating Member (676 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:46 PM
Response to Reply #37
154. Most tech support places use it
google the term. You'll see it plenty.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onenote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:53 PM
Response to Reply #154
178. when he's not prosecuting, fitz offers tips on spam deletion
that's why he's into the tech lingo rather than fuddy-duddy old legal lingo, like "close of business".

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grytpype Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:11 PM
Response to Reply #154
225. Know any lawyers who use the term? I don't & I've been a lawyer 12 years
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:51 PM
Response to Reply #154
266. All I could tell from googling it is that one tech support place
has round the clock support. I still don't understand the term. Is it three days? Is it one?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onenote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:56 PM
Response to Reply #37
187. actually, as a legal term, it means one day
Here's a link to a case involving a state law that required information to be provided within 24 business hours of a request. In this case, the request was made at the end of the day on a Thursday. The government office in question was closed for business on Friday, Saturday, Sunday, reopening on Monday. The order in this case concludes that a response was due at the end of the day on Monday, which is not what you would expect if 24 business hours meant three busineess days. Under the reasoning of this case, 24 business hours from the Friday's alleged meeting between Fitz and Rove's counsel would have expired at the end of the day on Monday.

http://www.in.gov/pac/advisory/2001/2001fc21.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Coexist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:16 PM
Response to Reply #37
234. did you donate recently? If so, you should have seen this:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/donate.html

"Typically, we will give you a star on the next business day after you donate. If you don't get a star within three business days, please send an email to skinner@democraticunderground.com to let us know."

I have seen "business days" and the like around before. Why are you getting so hung up on semantics?

Oh... that must be sarcasm? Sorry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
theboss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:18 PM
Response to Reply #234
238. "Business days" is in the vernacular
This was the first time I've ever seen the phrase "24 business hours."

The fact that nobody knows how long that actually is should be a clue that it is uncommon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:26 PM
Response to Reply #234
245. Yeah, fine. Tell me how often you've seen "24 business hours"
then, because THAT was my question.

Not semantics at all. The terms are not the same.

Why not say ONE business day? Perhaps because a business day is EIGHT HOURS and encompasses a total day during the workweek?

I've been around a few years, and that's my first encounter with the term. I was looking for information, and not being sarcastic.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Coexist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:37 PM
Response to Reply #245
258. quick Google:

http://helpdesk.princeton.edu/kb/display.plx?ID=3338
E-mail is responded to within 24 business hours.

http://www.americansatellite.com/products/shipping_stat...
Product is in stock and will be shipped via UPS within 24 business hours of order confirmation* and should arrive within 3-5 business days.

http://www.newenglandwheels.com/vehiclesforsale-prebuil...
To receive a quote within 24 business hours, tell us your lift, seating and tie down needs.

http://crm.4gov.net/SOMERVILLEMA/supportsrvrqst.asp?sSe...
The property will be removed within 24 business hours from time of notification

http://www.truckstuffusa.com/policies.html
we will do our best to make sure your order ships (via ground carrier) from our vendor within 24 business hours of being placed

http://www.efindoutthetruth.com/MarriageDivorceRecords....
Results emailed within 24 business hours

http://www.bestnest.com/bestnest/outdoor_clocks.asp?sor...
Ships from OH within 24 business hours
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:54 PM
Response to Reply #258
269. OK, fine--now, tell us what it MEANS?
Three days? One, but only counting Monday through Friday, excluding weekends and holidays? What does it MEAN??????
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Coexist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 05:02 PM
Response to Reply #269
276. my point with the semantics comment was -
it doesn't mean what we all thought - the 24-hour thing (business or otherwise) was not meant to time an announcement of any kind.

We are chasing our tails on that - the meat is that it will be announced in good time. Rove's "affair-getting-time" was some type of something that I don't know about. Whether it is one, two or three days doesn't matter, because it does not jive with the timing of an announcement of any kind (from my understanding of the above article.)

Does that make sense?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 05:19 PM
Response to Reply #276
291. Well, if it's going to be "announced in good time" I have to say that
had the initial article said that, rather than specify a timeline that clearly hasn't panned out, no matter how one tries to parse it, there wouldn't be all of this pissing in the punch going on.

A mainstream media commentator put a similar story out on Friday morning, with just that sort of parsing. No one's going after him, because he was cautious with his reporting, and careful about his phrasing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 05:39 PM
Response to Reply #234
303. Why doesn't it say, "If you don't get a star in 24 business hours..."
Many of us would understand that as the same thing, right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Freedom_Aflaim Donating Member (745 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:21 PM
Response to Reply #37
347. Maybe its actually Business BANKERS Hours
In which case Rove's got another 3 days.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wicket Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 02:59 PM
Response to Original message
9. Thanks for the update!!!!
:kick: :kick: :kick:

Keep giving them hell.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 02:59 PM
Response to Original message
10. And THAT is how they work the corp media - superiors who DON'T ALLOW IT
to be heard.

Now do you wonder why no news network showed up at Kerry's speech attacking the swiftliars? Their superiors didn't ALLOW IT. They are there to protect the Bushboy and the fascist agenda.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Media_Lies_Daily Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:20 PM
Original message
When they can get a guy like Rather thrown under the bus....
...people at much lower levels in the MSM are not about to stick out their necks on negative stories involving certain NeoCons.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:23 PM
Response to Original message
91. You think that would have PROVED it to people how much BushInc CONTROLS
the media. The Democrats, real journalists, and the American people are mere TARGETS for them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stop the bleeding Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:00 PM
Response to Original message
11. 5, 4, 3, 2, 1
enter naysayers and start imploding the thread - you know who you are :hurts:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Goblinmonger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:05 PM
Response to Reply #11
30. Amen, brother
This site is not about naysaying. This is a site for progressive liberals that don't want to question ANYTHING. If you think you can come around here and start asking whether someone actually has journalistic ethics, then you got another thing coming, peckerwood. You just get your ass out of here and spread your dissent somewhere else.

Oh, I forgot, satire was dead.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
garybeck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:20 PM
Response to Reply #11
83. skepticism is not a bad thing.
considering the context people have every right to be skeptical here. if we blindly believe everything that we "want" to believe, it is no better than the brainless folks who watch Fox news and believe it.

we live in an environment where reporters are fed bad information on purpose (Dan Rather). Karl Rove is a master trickster, espeically when it comes to the media. The scenario of trying to squash the alternative media with a fake story is plausible, and considering Leopold's history people have every right to want to see some corroborating stories, let alone a press conference from Fitz.

I for one am hoping it's true. I hope Rove's spokesman is discredited for lying. I hope Leopold is rewarded for scooping the biggest story of the year, if not the decade.

but that has yet to be seen. and until then, people who express concern or doubt should not be criticized.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MelissaB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:23 PM
Response to Reply #83
90. The difficult thing for me is not the expressing of doubt, but the
character assinations.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
garybeck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:28 PM
Response to Reply #90
104. you are right.
but that goes in all communications. there's a right way and a wrong way to express yourself, and express your opinions and your disagreements. this is not unique to the issue at hand. I think most people are consistent in the way they communicate. the people who have been offensive in this discussion are probably offensive in other discussions as well.

a long time ago I learned that if you attack someone, you disagree your chances of being heard. If you want to make an impression, or make a point, it's always better to be respectful and stick to the issue, not attack the person. Obviously some people here don't see it that way. But I don't think it's unique to this issue, it applies everywhere. It is just amplified here because we've all been waiting for months, if not years, for something to happen, and people are coming out of the woodwork to express themselves.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stop the bleeding Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:29 PM
Response to Reply #83
107. no one ever said it was - in fact it is healthy, but in the same
Edited on Wed May-17-06 03:32 PM by stop the bleeding
breath no one anointed or appointed people to be the Journo Police and even if they did - there are better ways to be skeptical
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:47 PM
Response to Reply #107
159. "Rumsfeld has been charged at the Hague on war crimes."
Don't be skeptical about that statement. There are other, less desirable factoids to be skeptical about.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stop the bleeding Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:02 PM
Response to Reply #159
199. That is good news
thank you
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:06 PM
Response to Reply #199
211. Spread the word.
;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spazito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:24 PM
Response to Reply #11
96. LOL, yep, right on time and with their flamethrowers turned on full n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemReadingDU Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:00 PM
Response to Original message
12. Thank you for update, K&R!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
deutsey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:00 PM
Response to Original message
14. Things are getting interestinger and interestinger
Maybe Rove and his goons are trying to work behind the scenes to wiggle out of the tightening noose?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nimrod2005 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:00 PM
Response to Original message
15. Well done AGAIN! Thanks for the update....nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sir Jeffrey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:01 PM
Response to Original message
16. Thanks Will, and keep fighting the good fight n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chomp Donating Member (602 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:01 PM
Response to Original message
17. Wow....n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cry baby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:01 PM
Response to Original message
18. I know a lot rides on this story for you guys...
thank you for the update on corroboration. I hope things work out very soon and Rove is lead away in handcuffs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Generic Other Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:01 PM
Response to Original message
19. The truth will out
I have the patience of a saint.

Thanks for the info. I believe the story will be corroborated after Rove's legal team can no longer find ways to block or postpone. I can wait.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:02 PM
Original message
When the documents come out
they will have dates on the top.

Those dates will be Friday May 12, 2006.

Just as we said.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stop the bleeding Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:04 PM
Response to Original message
24. this has been one of the most intense weeks
for me in a while.

05/12/06 - ;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:05 PM
Response to Reply #24
28. Tell me about it
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stop the bleeding Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:09 PM
Response to Reply #28
46. that is the key? huh?
to tell people about it - in due time, naysayers are gathering around as we speak
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:13 PM
Response to Reply #46
59. Let them
:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stop the bleeding Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:16 PM
Response to Reply #59
71. I have been in the trenches for days
I even wanted to direct a few of them here. For me it is as easy as hitting balls out of the park or shooting vermin when they pop their head up like wack-a-mole. I actually find it quite entertaining, I think a few of them have exercised the ignore feature on me.

oh well I guess I'll be loosing sleep over that!?!?!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bleever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 11:46 PM
Response to Reply #28
430. Me too. And I
appreciate that I can't really comprehend how it's been for you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:06 PM
Response to Original message
33. You've seen them?
You've seen a reasonable facsimile of the documents?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maddy McCall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:07 PM
Response to Reply #33
38. Don't ask questions.
Just jump for glee and hit that recommend button.

:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:09 PM
Response to Reply #38
47. Woopee.
:evilfrown:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
femrap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:19 PM
Response to Reply #38
77. I don't get it....is that frog a
puke or what? Why wouldn't you want to see Rove indicted? Or did you have a different date in your pool?

I am willing to be patient and see what in fact comes from Fitzgerald....you don't think the indictment is sealed? What proof do you have? Your sources? I just don't understand why so many are so vehement that Rove has not been indicted. Maybe things are personal and I am totally out of the loop. In that case...I'll just stay out of the loop, waiting for Fitz and his press conference.....and I'm in a pool that says this Friday!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:21 PM
Response to Reply #77
86. We all want to see Rove indicted.
Some of us just don't like being lied to by ANYbody, even if the lie is about when or if Rove is indicted. It's as simple as that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
femrap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:41 PM
Original message
That would be one twisted fool to want to lie about a Rove
indictment...just to get some short term attention that would then turn into complete hostility? That is some kind of masochist!

I can see how Rove might set Jason up...a familiar tactic of his....but I don't think that's the case. At least I sure the hell hope not.

I'm sticking with the Press Conference this Friday....and that the indictment has been sealed.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:51 PM
Response to Original message
169. Mine is not to reason why someone would lie about such a thing.
Mine is to want more than just someone's say so to determine if it's true.

It's clear a lot of people on DU have much lower thresholds than I have for truth-testing. But I will jump up and down over Rove's indictment only when I know for a fact Rove is indicted. And I don't know it yet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
femrap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 12:01 AM
Response to Reply #169
435. I am waiting patiently as well.
I believe he will be indicted. And when he is.....I will dance in the street, drink good champagne, and eat some mighty fine yellow cake!

Just had a thought.....Rove really has f*cked with the Collective American Brain.....we are blaming the media for everything!

Damn. We gotta stop that!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
theboss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:03 PM
Response to Original message
204. Leopold's credentials are not exactly stellar
Just sayin....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
femrap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 12:04 AM
Response to Reply #204
436. I've heard that...
maybe Jason will be redeemed on this one.

I hope so....for our nation's sake. Evil like Rove has no place in our government....on this planet for that matter.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
katinmn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:06 PM
Response to Original message
210. The press conference was to be TODAY. Leopold said
it on a radio program Monday. I was listening. We had a thread on it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Media_Lies_Daily Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 10:04 PM
Response to Reply #210
404. Ooooohhh!! So, if somebody else in the dynamic does something....
...else, you want us to blame Jason for that, too?

Wow. Aren't you a tough customer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
katinmn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 06:53 AM
Response to Reply #404
453. I shared what Leopold said. Nothing more.
Where is there blame in that?

I see a pattern here of groupies attacking anyone who isn't a blind follower.

You are embarrassing yourselves.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
femrap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 11:57 PM
Response to Reply #210
434. So you want to burn Jason in effigy?
Maybe that was the original plan...but things change.

Are you old enough to remember Watergate? Events never go as planned. I am willing to give Jason some slack. Why aren't you?

I still believe Rove will be indicted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
katinmn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 06:50 AM
Response to Reply #434
452. Now there's another logical leap!
By sharing his own words, I want to burn him in effigy. :crazy:

I don't have anything against Leopold. I have never attacked him or insulted him in anyway.





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
druidity33 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 06:47 PM
Response to Reply #86
332. what i don't understand...
is why people have been so persistent about knowing more from the "journos". If i were a journalist and had cultivated sources that i trusted, and had multiple verifications of an event, i'd run with it too! Why didn't Jason just say, "hey, that's what my SOURCES tell me, i trust them, they've not been wrong before or ever tried to mislead me... so i ran with it." Of course Leopold doesn't really have proof... too hard to obtain physical evidence of this magnitude. What bothered most of the stauch defenders of TO here is, i think, that people immediately began to assert that JL had problems of this sort in the past, he plaigerizes, blah, blah, blah, etc... Why not just say to JL, "hey, i don't believe you but i'll keep an eye out and if you're right this time i'll check out your work more often"? I too had noticed the nasty undertones when the TO article just broke... too many people "demanding" information from TO.

In the end the Rove indictment will actually affect NONE OF US. Maybe the DU members who own Liquor stores might see a temporary spike in sales... but otherwise, there's really nothing here to get anyone's jundies in a bundle. As for Will being nasty, well, i'm from NY... i've seen (heard,read) worse... and i gotta admit, though the language was coarse, the anger was accurate.

I just don't think Leopold was lying.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 11:10 PM
Response to Reply #332
423. It's very clear that a large part of DU doesn't care how accurate
Leopold's story was. That's fine. I have a high tolerance for disagreement. I actually think my tolerance for disagreement is much higher than that of "the other side," many of whom seem to take personally the skepticism toward the Leopold story on "this side" and want to quash it for spoiling the illusion of harmony.

I'm just astounded by the number of posts "backing Leopold" and purporting to say "chill out, skeptic dudes," that are actually pleas for us dissidents to "Shaddap!"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maddy McCall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:25 PM
Response to Reply #77
99. Because I ask questions about an article, I obviously don't want...
Edited on Wed May-17-06 03:27 PM by Maddy McCall
to see Rove indicted.

Did you learn LOGIC 101 on the internets?

Gotta attack my sig because you can't attack anything else. Cute.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
femrap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:37 PM
Response to Reply #99
125. well....I guess I'm not half as cute as you.
What I have read of your comments appears to me as if you don't want to see Rove indicted.....or maybe it's that you want to see Jason and William wrong. That's the impression I got from reading your posts.

Logic was Philosophy 102 where I went to school.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maddy McCall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:42 PM
Response to Reply #125
143. Well, then you need to take remedial reading.
You're seeing only what you want to see.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
femrap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:47 PM
Response to Reply #143
157. Then maybe you better sign up for a remedial writing class
so to better explain your thoughts on this subject of Rove's indictment....

Now if you are done insulting my intelligence and education, I will stop insulting yours. Fair?

I simply asked why you appeared to NOT want a Rove indictment....as one of the other posters stated...he/she feels he/she is being lied to. Is this the reason you are so down on this indictment? You feel Jason is purposefully lying?

And if you're gonna come back with another snobby response, then just forget I ever asked.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maddy McCall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:50 PM
Response to Reply #157
168. I want Rove indicted. I believe Leopold jumped the gun and...
engaged in sloppy reporting just to get the scoop. I believe Will's hubris got in the way of questions that could have saved him embarassment.

Interpret that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:03 PM
Response to Reply #168
203. It would be nice to believe it's not just a folie a deux
or trois, or quarant milles.

I'm trying to imagine what I would do if I had hard evidence that Rove had been indicted. I'd like to think I'd pull an Ellsberg and spill the whole thing, sparing no one's secret identity. Because if Rove were indicted, I'd want his ass out of the White House NOW, (never mind 24 business hours from now) and withholding info won't accomplish that.

But excuse me for speculating. I know it's damaging to the cause to speculate about what a rational person would do given this information.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
femrap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 12:08 AM
Response to Reply #168
437. By interpret that.....you mean what exactly?
I have always enjoyed your frog....find that it cheers me up.

Hope to be dancing, drinking and indulging in yellow cake very, very soon.

Eat that! With chocolate icing! Yummy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arwalden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:24 PM
Response to Reply #38
93. Oh My!!
<< Just jump for glee and hit that recommend button. >>


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orsino Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 05:21 PM
Response to Reply #38
293. Good idea. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
papau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:20 PM
Response to Original message
84. Hang in their will - we'll have a vivtory party at our bar in Cambridge
when this is all over - and we'll paint the place red! :-)

Heck, aren't we due to have a Saturday DU get together just on general principles ? - where's MATCOM when you need him!

:toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeftNYC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:24 PM
Response to Reply #84
243. is that like a vivisection...?
:sarcasm:

sorry just trying to lighten the mood
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
papau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:19 PM
Response to Reply #243
369. Cute - I did laugh - you should see how well I type with no meds!
:-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clark2008 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:40 PM
Response to Original message
133. And the warrant dates will be whatever day he was arrested, correct?
I've seen sealed indictments (upon their being opened, of course) and they have the indictment date and then a place for the date of the formal "arrest."

(Note: You can be arrested without being detained. In other words, you're served, but you don't go to jail or get booked or anything until you go for your arrainment.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maddy McCall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:44 PM
Response to Reply #133
149. Indictments are handed down by grand juries. The date of indictment...
is the date that the GJ indicts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clark2008 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 05:02 PM
Response to Reply #149
275. I know that - I covered court for eight years as a reporter.
That wasn't my question, Miss Snark.

My question related to the date of the ARREST - an indictment is nothing more than an arrest warrant handed down by a grand jury, if you want to break it down to its bare bones. The difference is that after you're arrested by, say, a police officer, you then have a preliminary hearing, the judge then decides to send it to a grand jury for review and they can true bill it or no true bill it. By having a grand jury make an indictment before an arrest, you're skipping that whole first process.

The date on the indictment SHOULD have both the date it came down and the date it was served, which doesn't have to be the same date.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalEsto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 05:07 PM
Response to Reply #149
284. Actually, they're handed UP
Edited on Wed May-17-06 05:09 PM by LiberalEsto
I did some courthouse reporting in my 30 years as a journalist. My editors gave me hell if I accidentally wrote "handed down" instead of "handed up."

A grand jury hands up an indictment to the judge/court; a judge/court hands down a verdict or a sentence.

Now that I've done my bit for the World of Nitpicking, let's all relax and let those visions of sugarplums and frogmarching Roves dance in our heads.

:D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 05:13 PM
Response to Reply #149
288. I thought they were actually handed UP (from the GJ to the judge)
but your point is well taken!

I get a kick out of your frog, BTW!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marnieworld Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:40 PM
Response to Original message
134. I never lost faith Will
Jason and TO has always been ahead of the curve on this story, this is not the first scoop as you know of course. Hang in there dude, ride this storm out and you will triumph! :hug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Klimmer Donating Member (426 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:04 PM
Response to Original message
206. Will, I have faith, based on your character.
Can't wait to see it. Keep the faith. TO is doing excellent work.

Waiting is the hardest part. No matter how much I refresh DU or other sources of news it won't make it happen any faster. But I keep trying (lol).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Betsy Ross Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:01 PM
Response to Original message
20. Can I say "Fuck the MSM?"
I am out of town. No WiFi in my hotel. Bought an ethernet cable to get back to DU to read the news. Sure my room has CNN and Fux, but I want my Democratic Underground, the only source I trust. I rely on so many great DUers to keep me informed of LBN as well as entertainment. Thanks all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sammy Pepys Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:02 PM
Response to Original message
21. Thanks for the update
I'll continue to watch.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
patcox2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:02 PM
Response to Original message
22. No, really, I have proof, but its top super duper secret.
But you'll see.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
smb Donating Member (761 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:26 PM
Response to Reply #22
102. Gee, That Sounds Familiar....
No, really, I have proof, but its top super duper secret

Dubya called. He wants his excuse back.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OrangeCountyDemocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:03 PM
Response to Original message
23. So? What's The Hold Up?
If the story is accurate, then why no news yet? If rove was indicted on Friday, and Fitzgerald gave him 24 "Business" Hours, then how come 3 days have now passed with no word from Fitz?

How come rove gets to give his speeches, go to Capitol Hill, and do all the evil stuff he does, if he's already in deep trouble? I would think Fitzgerald would want to keep him from acting completely innocent at this point, if in fact he wasn't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trudyco Donating Member (975 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:05 PM
Response to Reply #23
32. Plea Bargaining? -nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JackORoses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:28 PM
Response to Reply #23
105. hmm
Edited on Wed May-17-06 03:29 PM by JackORoses
Do you really even have to ask this question?

The hold up is the Bush Administration.

They are obviously doing everything in their power to keep this under wraps for as long as they can.

This is not just an indictment of Karl Rove.
This is the beginning of the end for the entire Administration.

The 24 business hours were not for Rove, they were for Bush. Damage Control must be prepared.

The Administration has big strings and they are pulling them.

If anything, the Media silence concerning this only demonstrates how powerful these guys really are.
By casting a little doubt and alot of threat, they have been able to almost completely disable the 4th Estate.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Usrename Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:19 PM
Response to Reply #105
346. Yep, they could nuke Iran and we wouldn't find out.
The silence of the MSM to either denounce the report or confirm it is scarey.

KKKarl is still in control as of this writing. The iron fist of his propaganda machine is still doing it's destruction. When will it stop?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ixion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:04 PM
Response to Original message
25. thanks for the update, Will
hang in there! :yourock:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
malaise Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:04 PM
Response to Original message
26. Kick n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
coffeenap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:04 PM
Response to Original message
27. Thanks Will--we're a tough crowd, aren't we?
One of these days you and your fellows will be recognized fairly for the risks you take and the work you do. Meanwhile, stay safe.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:05 PM
Response to Reply #27
31. "tough crowd"
That's a kind euphemism.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
coffeenap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:22 PM
Response to Reply #31
88. Well, sitting safely on my kitchen chair I have the luxury of
feeling kind. If I was doing what you were, I would not! Stay strong, we are all in your debt--whether we know it now or not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:28 PM
Response to Reply #31
106. It was ordinary weekend hysteria, Will.
One day someone's going to get a Ph.D. studying it and naming it after himself.

I don't think anyone threatened suicide or murder, so you really got off easy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jazzwinders Donating Member (75 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:30 PM
Response to Reply #31
375. thanks Will
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tridim Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:05 PM
Response to Original message
29. Good things come to those who wait
TO, you guys rock!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Wielding Truth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:06 PM
Response to Original message
35. The water's on high.We're just waiting for it to boil over.Will,Great Job!
Edited on Wed May-17-06 03:07 PM by The Wielding Truth
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mike_c Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:07 PM
Response to Original message
36. this entire episode highlights one of my major criticisms...
...of American journalism-- one that was echoed by Robert Fisk recently on Democracy Now-- reliance upon unnamed sources rather than people who will go on the record or better yet, physical evidence. It's gotten crazy! Here's what Fisk had to say:

"...I find that an awful lot of my colleagues are quite happy to go along with stories planted or otherwise. Youve only got to see the number of times on the front page of the New York Times or the L.A. Times or the Washington Post when the phrase American officials say appears, particularly the L.A. Times. I can give an example of that, in which a whole story is repeatedly sourced, after 2003, when we know there werent any weapons of mass destruction, when we know the press was misled totally in the United States and went along with the war party.

Still we see everything being sourced and re-sourced back to American officials, as if the U.S. administration is the center of world truth. Ill give you an example. I was actually doing the book tour in Los Angeles, picked up my morning L.A. Times. Heres a story about Zarqawi, who may or may not exist, of course. U.S. authorities say, U.S. officials said, Said one Justice Department counterterrorism official, U.S. authorities say, officials said, U.S. officials said. It turns to page B-10. It gets worse and worse. Look. Several U.S. officials said, those officials said, U.S. officials confirmed -- stop me when you want -- American officials complained, U.S. officials stressed, U.S. authorities believe, Said one U.S. senior intelligence official, U.S. officials said, Jordanian officials said -- Amy, see, theres a slight difference here -- Several U.S. officials said, U.S. officials said, U.S. officials say, say U.S. officials, U.S. officials said, The American officials said, One U.S. counterterrorism official said. Welcome to American journalism today in Iraq. This is whats wrong. "


Fisk's comments were directed specifically at coverage of the war against Iraq, but they apply much more broadly, IMO. If TruthOut attributed their story to named sources, or had copies of memos or other physical evidence suggesting that an indictment had been handed down this entire dust up over who's credible and who's not would never have happened except in regard to the sources themselves, which is as it should be, IMO.

The argument that requiring named sources or actual evidence would make stories impossible to get only makes sense in the context of "getting stories" before they're truly credible yet, i.e. asking the readership to share in the authors' and editors' reasoned speculation. That's not good for journalism, IMO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clark2008 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:48 PM
Response to Reply #36
161. But the cold-water bath to this is that journalists may
Edited on Wed May-17-06 03:49 PM by Clark2008
not get stories of importance -- at all.

Most "unnamed sources" have to work for a living. They need their job, even if they feel something going on it important enough to alert the media. So they tip off the reporter on the sly so they don't lose their job - or their lives, in some cases.

The thing is that a journalist should get SEVERAL (at least three) sources who say nearly the exact same thing or provide nearly the exact information before running with the story. I rather suspect Fisk is talking about those who run with the story after speaking to ONE source (but attributing it to the plural).

But all this moot, anyway, since Will did reveal at least one of Leopold's sources - Joe Wilson.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onenote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:08 PM
Response to Original message
39. "the 24 hour thing" -- a couple of questions
From the article:

THE 24 HOUR THING
"We reported that Patrick Fitzgerald had, "instructed one of the attorneys to tell Rove that he has 24 business hours to get his affairs in order...." That does not mean that at the end of that 24-hour period, Fitzgerald is obliged to hold a press conference and make an announcement. It just means that he has given Rove a 24-hour formal notification. Fitzgerald is not obliged to make an announcement at any point; he does so at his own discretion, and not if it compromises his case. So we're all stuck waiting here. Grab some coffee."

My questions:

What is the point of a "formal" 24 hour notification if it doesn't mean anything. And where is there any requirement of a 24 hour notification before an indictment is made public?

Still skeptical
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:41 PM
Response to Reply #39
141. It means a little something to the indictee.
No one, however, is required to tell YOU a thing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onenote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:45 PM
Original message
well, that was helpful...not
The explanation was offered that Fitz gave Rove a "formal" 24 hour notification (apparently thus contrasted with an informal 24 hour notice). Not sure what is so out of line about asking if there is a source for a requirement of a 24 hour notification.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LSK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:43 PM
Response to Reply #39
146. what makes you think there is some 24 hour rule???
Seems to me it was just a courtesy thing that Fitz let them have.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onenote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:49 PM
Response to Reply #146
164. not me. the article. it refers to "formal" 24 hour notice
If its just a courtesy, why call it a formal 24 hour notice. Isn't it an informal 24 hour notice? And if its just an informal 24 hour notice, the next logical question to ask -- for which there may very well be a good answer, but that's why I'm asking -- is why would Fitz give Rove an informal 24 hour "heads up"?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
johnnie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:08 PM
Response to Original message
40. I kept thinking that the MSM is holding back for that reason
It only takes a few calls to stop the major networks to hold off. They want to be able to still be "in" with the administration.

Thanks Will for the update.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Shakespeare Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:09 PM
Response to Original message
41. Big back-pats to you guys for hanging tough.
Y'all have really been put through the wringer since Saturday; to some extent, that's to be expected (and I know you must have been bracing for it), but it's been unduly harsh.

An investigative scoop like this almost never happens without a stumble or two (that's what corrections down the line are for), but I'm guessing Leopold will be proved mostly right in the end.

And as a former reporter (occasionally of the investigative variety), an extra back-pat to you and Marc for sticking by Leopold. I'd hate to be in his shoes right now (well, actually I wouldn't--this is the stuff of adrenline rushes), but he's got the support of his editors, and that's so important.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kpete Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:09 PM
Response to Original message
42. Sounds good to me...
K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
radio4progressives Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:09 PM
Original message
thank you for the update..
just to add this note: I think the attacks on the authors of this story has been deplorable and of a certain pattern that I've been witnessing by so called "left" journalists (read Gatekeepers and Competitors) for a few years. I won't go into that again here.

I'm much more concerned with the conspiracy to cover up on the Domestic Spying programs at the moment. But it would be refreshing and would go a bit toward restoring a bit of faith in our governance system if justice will ultimately prevail.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BooScout Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:09 PM
Response to Original message
43. Hmmmmmmm....
Do I trust Rove and his henchmen or Truthout on this? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

I'm waiting.....the champagne is chilled. Rove is toast. And from the look of things........he's going to be burned toast very soon. :thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robertpaulsen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:09 PM
Response to Original message
44. Hang in there, Will.
It's great to hear you're getting additional confirmation and moral support. Personally, I can't provide additional confirmation, but you definitely have my moral support.

:yourock: :yourock: :yourock: :yourock: :yourock: :yourock: :yourock: :yourock: :yourock: :yourock: :yourock:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
novalib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:09 PM
Response to Original message
45. *I* Never Lost Faith In You and Jason!
ThankYouThankYouThankYOU!

Even though others here have chosen to be part of the group that has engaged in non-stop attacks of your credibility, I have always KNOWN that you and Jason speak the TRUTH -- TO POWER!!

THANK YOU FOR ALL YOU DO!!

I AM SOOOOOO HAPPY!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Media_Lies_Daily Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:11 PM
Response to Original message
50. Appreciate the additional info, Will! Full speed ahead, and....
...damn the naysayer torpedos! :-)

As to the situation with the MSM reporters that have contacted Truthout, I can only imagine the anger they're feeling at this point. But, I can also sense the fear of their superiors who find themselves in a very tight spot between telling the story and keeping their jobs.

Again, Will...many thanks to you and everyone at Truthout!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Connie_Corleone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:11 PM
Response to Original message
51. K & R!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DearAbby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:12 PM
Response to Original message
53. Thanks Will
Someday we will look back on this time, it will make an interesting documentary on the history channel. I can't wait for the movie, ala "All the President's Men". All this, after we restore our country of course.


I wonder who will play you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pharaoh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:12 PM
Response to Original message
54. Thanks for the update will
Of course they are all a bunch of liars so when they say something, you must assume the opposite is true........

K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KC21304 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:12 PM
Response to Original message
56. Thanks for the update. We'll keep on keepin on. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bigtree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:12 PM
Response to Original message
57. tough as nails
good. thanks for the update.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pithy Cherub Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:13 PM
Response to Original message
58. Keep the faith! Thanks for the update.
Instant gratification is not what the justice system is about. Go Jason!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dogday Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:14 PM
Response to Original message
61. Read this article and remember
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_I...


Targets of the investigation have already been notified, though in sealed indictments the information would be withheld from the public.


Sometimes, it just takes a little faith....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catherine Vincent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:33 PM
Response to Reply #61
113. World Nut Daily isn't a viable source.
Sorry. :-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dogday Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:38 PM
Response to Reply #113
129. Did you see the date?????
This is what happened to Libby.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catherine Vincent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:43 PM
Response to Reply #129
144. It doesn't matter.
You should find another website to prove your point. They are a major right wing nutty website. Sorry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dogday Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:52 PM
Response to Reply #144
173. It is history
It makes the statment... at least not to prove this point.... Your opinion, that is fine, but unless it is removed by mods, it will stand.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catherine Vincent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:05 PM
Response to Reply #173
208. I know it won't be removed but most DUers are hip to WND
You won't get that many responses. Just a warning.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dogday Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:11 PM
Response to Reply #208
224. Thanks, I have never posted anything
by them.. But found this article on what happened to Scooter Libby.. I appreciate it.. Been here over a year and still am finding out stuff... Thanks :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sammy Pepys Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:14 PM
Response to Original message
63. Question
Did these new sources share any further information? Clarify any points (i.e. the 15 hour meeting or the 24 hour deadline)? Was it just a straight up "Yup, Rove's been indtced" or did they have any new details?

Thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemReadingDU Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:15 PM
Response to Original message
67. maybe they're waiting for a more explosive story
something really really huge, that everyone would be watching and writing about (think Katrina). That's when we'll hear about Rove being indicted and hardly anyone would pay attention to Rove because they would be focused on the other explosive story.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EST Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:16 PM
Response to Original message
69. Dear Mr. Pitt,
I have defended you, TO, and indirectly, Mr. Leopold in this chaotic climate, although not loudly and aggressively.
I commend you and your organization in your efforts to ferret out and deliver the facts to an anxious, overheated public, fearful of the so blatantly obvious destruction of the society on which we've come to depend.
I am reminded of the time when, as a child, I was sent to find my sister, late getting home from her teenage job.
We lived way up in the hills, in the woods and there was no shelter, other than trees, in the face of an approaching granddaddy-of-em-all thunderstorm.

As a nine year old, I was quite mature and I located my sister, saw to her and my own safety and got her home as quickly as possible.
Of course, my mother was frantic, now with two kids unaccounted for, in inordinately violent weather, and she was so overjoyed when I finally got us home that she beat me damn near half to death!

Please be as patient as you can be with this angry, frightened bunch, especially in light of the fact that we are far less well informed than those of you in the persuasion of acquiring the evidence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:17 PM
Response to Original message
72. Aww, do they think it will go away if they ignore it?
I want a three foot banner WE TOLD YOU SO! when it comes out. Just for fun.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
treestar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:33 PM
Response to Reply #72
117. The WH could be trying to weasel its way out of it and hoped to
be able to do it without it ever getting reported in the media.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:48 PM
Response to Reply #117
160. I think it's more a case of being such a colossal blow
that no one wants to touch it until it's absolutely irrefutably bedrock official.

Suppose Rove caves and agrees to a spill your guts and anything else plea deal at the last minute? That alone makes a hesitation reasonable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DrDebug Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:17 PM
Response to Original message
73. Thanks
Recommended, because it takes quite a person to stay and explained yourself over and over again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SmokingJacket Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:18 PM
Response to Original message
75. It seems pretty astounding that a high-level member of the admin
could be indicted, and NO ONE but you guys report it. I mean, wow.

Man, do I hope you're right! But if so, how sick our media are...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
femrap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:27 PM
Response to Reply #75
103. Who do you think has put the 'gun' to the MSM's head?
Rove....the architect, that's who. Everyone knows how vindictive this asshole is.

I am not surprised in the least that MSM has been quiet on Rove's indictment. The editors have been told to stay off the story or ELSE....That's how it has been for a number of years now....Remember the Downing Street Minutes? Stolen Elections? Did the MSM cover these....hell, no!

The indictment of Rove will be unsealed soon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Generic Other Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:11 PM
Response to Reply #103
227. Bingo!
They will try and squelch the story until it's impossible not to report.

Only a matter of time...and I've waited 5 years. A few more hours or days won't kill me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
femrap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 11:39 PM
Response to Reply #227
428. Then I will get a fabulous bottle of champagne....
and bake a beautiful yellow cake! It's only a matter of time.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 05:53 PM
Response to Reply #75
314. As I have said elsewhere, Tweety reported it, Friday morning
But he didn't say that Rove HAD been indicted, he said it was forthcoming, either that day, Friday, or the following week.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cally Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:18 PM
Response to Original message
76. How all this turned into a constant discussion on Truthout
and it's reporting instead of the more important topic or Rove's and Cheney's outing an undercover agent is a sad commentary on all of us. I know Truthout is under intense pressure but I look forward to the story being corroborated and the then all of us can celebrate. :cheers:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
garybeck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:24 PM
Response to Reply #76
92. i disagree
I think all this discussion is good. it shows that we have some sort of self-regulation. we don't blindly believe everything that's fed to us. some are more skeptical than others. Plus all the hubbub and discontent adds to the fury and gets more coverage. bottom line, if it turns out to be true, then all this pre-announcement talk will have helped escalate the issue and put TO in a great position. It helped get TO noticed, which is good (assuming the story pans out; if it doesn't it's bad).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Witch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:20 PM
Response to Original message
78. I Still Believe!
Either it will come or it won't, but either way, I prefer to be optimistic and hope it will. Hell, if people can believe in a heaven, I can believe in an indictment, right!?

(wondering if my co-workers are interested in any of this at least as law-firm gossip...)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EminenceFront Donating Member (36 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:20 PM
Response to Original message
80. (cough)OK (cough)
Edited on Wed May-17-06 03:39 PM by EminenceFront
"Rove's spokesman Mark Corallo and Rove's attorney Robert Luskin.... categorically denied all key points of our recent reporting on this issue. Both said, "Rove is not a target," "Rove did not inform the White House late last week that he would be indicted," and "Rove has not been indicted." Further, both Corallo and Luskin denied Leopold's account of events at the offices of Patton Boggs, the law firm that represents Karl Rove. They specifically stated again that no such meeting ever occurred, that Fitzgerald was not there, that Rove was not there, and that a major meeting did not take place. Both men were unequivocal on that point."

I'll go with that for now. So far they've been consistent.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rhiannon12866 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:21 PM
Response to Original message
85. Thanks! I'll trust Truthout - it's an awfully long limb...
...they're climbing out on. But, the new details fill in a bunch of holes. Good to read.

K&R :thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Moloch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:22 PM
Response to Original message
89. You're living in a fantasy world, Pitt....
It's Judith Miller all over again.

I suppose you found the WMDs, too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
novalib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:25 PM
Response to Reply #89
100. HAVE YOU NO SHAME??!!
Have you no shame??!!

Here Mr. Pitt posts the latest update, provides us with useful (and happy) information, gives many of us hope, and you seem intent on throwing a wet blanket on everything!

I Cannot believe that you would do something like that!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arwalden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:29 PM
Response to Reply #100
108. Oh My Goodness!!
<< Have you no shame??!! >>

:rofl:

Have you no pride?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
novalib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:32 PM
Response to Reply #108
112. I Have LOTS of Pride.
I have pride in Mr. Pitt and Jason Leopold and EVERYONE who supports their valient efforts to get the TRUTH OUT to the rest of us.

Those honorable, decent people DESERVE OUR SUPPORT for what they are trying to do.

THANK YOU AGAIN, WILLIAM PITT!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arwalden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:37 PM
Response to Reply #112
123. What About Pride In Yourself?
<< Those honorable, decent people DESERVE OUR SUPPORT for what they are trying to do. >>

Sorry... I'm not joining the swooning groupie mom-mentality.

The depth of support one receives from me is inversely proportional to their ego and sanctimony.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
novalib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:42 PM
Response to Reply #123
142. Are You Suggesting That I LACK PRIDE IN MYSELF?
I hope you are NOT suggesting that I lack pride in myself!!!

Of Course I HAVE PRIDE IN MYSELF!!

WHAT a question to ask!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arwalden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:50 PM
Response to Reply #142
167. Well, Frankly... I Don't See Any Evidence Of It.
I do see sanctimony. I see you fighting other people's battles. I see cultish mob-think. But then again, evaluating someone ELSE's pride (and whether or not it truly exists) a purely subjective thing. So... if you think you have pride in yourself, then you obviously have pride in yourself.

Instead of my looking at the evidence at hand, I suppose I'll just have to take you at your word. After all... who am I to make such judgments about you, eh?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
novalib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:01 PM
Response to Reply #167
198. I am Far Too Polite
To make judgments about other people.

I would never accuse someone else of "sanctimony".

I would never accuse someone else of "cultish mob-think".

HAVE YOU NO SHAME!

Do you enjoy belittling other people?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arwalden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:07 PM
Response to Reply #198
214. Ooph! ROFLMAO!!
First you say:

<< I am Far Too Polite...To make judgments about other people. >>

and then, in the same message you ask:

<< HAVE YOU NO SHAME! >>

Yeah... no judgement there. None at all, eh?

Oh my! That's too precious!





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OzarkDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:52 PM
Response to Reply #123
175. Interesting
This whole strident backlash to the Truthout story, almost as if some people didn't want others to believe its true - Rove (and possibly Cheney) will be indicted. I'm sure the potential damage to the Bush administration and the GOP would be very upsetting to some people.

:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arwalden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:56 PM
Response to Reply #175
185. What People WANT And What's REAL Are Two Different Things.
The fact that someone points out questionable aspects, the lack of evidence... the fact that someone questions the credibility of the reporter (and supporters) doesn't mean that they don't also "wish" it were true.

Does someone's unwillingness to live in a fantasy world mean that they support Rove and hope that he's not going to be indicted? :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OzarkDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:15 PM
Response to Reply #185
232. And what some people want
is for everyone to stop talking about the looming disaster for Rove and Cheney.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arwalden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:22 PM
Response to Reply #232
239. And Others Prefer To See Tangible Evidence.
How do you figure?

Why do you equate someones desire to see tangible, verifiable evidence that such a thing has happened (or will happen) as being the same as a desire "for everyone to stop talking about the looming disaster for Rove and Cheney"?

That makes no sense. Am I misunderstanding you?

On what evidence are you reaching that conclusion?

Are you lumping the skeptics in with the Rove apologists?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 05:51 PM
Response to Reply #232
312. Who wants that?
Some people on DU want to resolve whether or not the Truthout story of last Friday is or isn't a disaster in itself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
coalition_unwilling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:26 PM
Response to Reply #175
246. Back when Libby was indicted, I read a few reports that said
that Fitzgerald had also delivered other non-Liddy papers (indictments? can't remember for sure) under seal to the judge presding. At the time, I was sure that Cheney was going to be named as an un-indicted co-conspirator or perhaps actuallly be indicted.

Does anyone know whether I was hallucinating about those other papers being submitted to the court? Did any news ever leak out about their contents?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oldtime dfl_er Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:09 PM
Response to Reply #112
220.  "It's Karl Rove's town and the rest of us just live here."
Edited on Wed May-17-06 04:13 PM by oldtime dfl_er
Quoting Dana Milbank. I believe Will and Jason, I also believe Karl Rove has almost limitless power and can cause endless delays, obstructions and obstacles. What's happening behind the scenes is something we will never know, and while I have faith in Fitz, I also believe Rove's power is going to change the whole face of things before it gets to the public. IF nothing comes of all this, it doesn't mean truthout was wrong, it only means there are powers stronger than truth, Fitz and the law.


http://www.cafepress.com/scarebaby/714748

Milbanks quote: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Moloch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:38 PM
Response to Reply #100
128. Yes...
I am ashamed that people would print lies and call it journalism and I'm ashamed that a lot of good Democrats, who only want to see justice served in this matter, are getting so excited only to be let down.

Rove is not going to be indicted this week. If he is, I will eat my hat.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
novalib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:45 PM
Response to Reply #128
153. I Bet You Don't Even Have A Hat!
I am ashamed that people would EVEN SUGGEST that William Pitt and Jason Leopold would try to mislead us!!!

Shame.

Shame.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Moloch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:59 PM
Response to Reply #153
192. oh lordy lordy
a bit melodramatic, don't you think?

Pitt and Leopold do not have ONE verifiable source. This is complete and utter bullplop.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
novalib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:02 PM
Response to Reply #192
200. I KNEW IT!
You do NOT have a HAT!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Moloch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:11 PM
Response to Reply #200
226. I do have a hat.
I'm not wearing it right now, but if you are right then I will made a video for all of DU to see of me eating it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
patcox2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:26 PM
Response to Reply #89
101. Leopolds sources have the WMDs.
They will reveal them in 78 business vacation weeks calculated at 3 weeks/year.

The third lacrosse player is one of the sources, and he has passed a lie detector test.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
novalib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:30 PM
Response to Reply #101
110. NOT Funny
Mr. Pitt is trying to share some news with us.

He is trying to bring some joy to some of us.

And you want to bring us sarcasm and bad vibes!

NOT Funny.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arwalden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:32 PM
Response to Reply #110
111. Have You Lost Your Sense Of Humor Too?
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
novalib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:33 PM
Response to Reply #111
116. I Have NOT Lost My Sense of Humor!
I just haven't seen anything funny.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arwalden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:37 PM
Response to Reply #116
126. You Take Yourself Far Too Seriously... Time To Lighten Up.
Edited on Wed May-17-06 03:38 PM by arwalden
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
novalib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:40 PM
Response to Reply #126
136. When It Comes To Supporting Decent People Like Mr. Pitt
When it comes to supporting decent people like Will Pitt and Jason Leopold, it is IMPOSSIBLE to take one's self Too Seriously.

This IS serious business, and Mr. Pitt and Mr. Leopold are HEROS!!

BTW -- Don't TELL ME HOW TO LIVE MY LIFE!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:44 PM
Response to Reply #136
147. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
novalib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:49 PM
Response to Reply #147
165. Are We Talking About the Same People??!!
I cannot BELIEVE that you are speaking about Mr. Pitt and Mr. Leopold like that!!

This thread is literally making me SICK.

I have a headache and a HEARTACHE!!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
patcox2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:51 PM
Response to Reply #165
172. Of course we are.
Edited on Wed May-17-06 03:52 PM by patcox2
You never noticed the cliche's? I notice them with every fiber of my being. I understand, though, when someone is telling you what you want to hear, you want so much to believe.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
novalib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:04 PM
Response to Reply #172
205. You MUST be talking about someone else!!
I LOVE reading William Pitt!

I can't believe you don't enjoy reading him!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
patcox2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:06 PM
Response to Reply #205
209. Who said I don't enjoy it?
I take it as satire.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arwalden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:08 PM
Response to Reply #205
215. "He's My Hero"
:puke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Iowa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:27 PM
Response to Reply #205
385. Are you serious?
I'm referring to the entire exchange here - not just this particular post. If I were the cynical type, I might think you were laughing your ass off while throwing up softballs for arwalden and patcox2 to slam out of the park. Either way, you sure aren't doing Pitt any favors.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
katinmn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:48 PM
Response to Reply #172
264. Stop it right there, patcox2!
You're killing me!

:rofl: :rofl:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jacobin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:59 PM
Response to Reply #147
191. I just spilled my popcorn all over my keyboard
:wow:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arwalden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:52 PM
Response to Reply #136
176. Ah... Now We're Getting To It. You See Them As "Heroes"... SWOON!
Until now I wasn't sure if you were serious, or just another Pitt-groupie.

Now I know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Generic Other Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:51 PM
Response to Reply #176
265. Why is it always about being someone's groupie if anyone
defends folks at DU? I like Will. Always have. He threw me a life preserver after 2000. I don't forget my friends. I don't remember anyone accusing him of being cliche or unoriginal in the days when Bush was riding the 80% approval ratings. Back then our voices represented the only critical ones anywhere.

I do remember Will and Scott Ritter taking lots of flack from the MSM on WMDs. The MSM never did eat that crow I was cooking for them back then. It's still in the freezer if Aaron Brown gets hungry.

I have been reading Truthout since its inception. They haven't steered me wrong as often as the WP or NYT. They found the stories the MSM ignored. How often has TO or DU for that matter been days, weeks, even months ahead of the curve? So often now that I sometimes think I am in the vortex. The fact that I have already heard the news 20 minutes before it is reported by MSM is largely due to the posters at DU.

I guess we now know why. If the powers that be determined not to report the story in the MSM, we know it what happenes. I've seen it happen repeatedly where underreporting/ignoring of war protests is concerned. We also know the truth can't be suppressed forever. Even Rove is gonna get his.

What is happening to DU? In the past few days I have been berated, called names, put on ignore...holy crap! And that was from my friends! All for supporting other people on the left! You would think I had become a Bushbot or slept with Rush or something.

arwalden, I have always enjoyed your posts. I would defend you in a minute if other DUers piled on you like what I have seen happen to Will. That does not make me a groupie. It means I value the work others do on the left. My job is to support them in their endeavors. It has taken all of us working together to get as far as we have.

When we turn on our friends, we are the ones who ultimately lose. We have driven away way too many good people by misdirecting our hostility on each other.

Next time I get a bug up my butt, I will go call a Repub and yell at them. They are the bad guys.

Sorry for ranting but I feel like some who are ganging up on Will and TO need to remember who the real target should be.

And I want to share toasts and make noise with you and all the others on this thread when Rove finally is brought down.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
no name no slogan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 05:06 PM
Response to Reply #176
280. Hmm... sounds more like Will's "stage mom", to me
Not that I don't discount Pitt & Leopold & TO-- I do visit the site, and I sincerely hope what they are reporting is true.

But the fanboi swooning over ANYBODY-- living or dead-- is just ridiculous-- and DANGEROUS as hell, too.

After all, that's how cults get started.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:39 PM
Response to Reply #116
131. How about Bush's double?
;)

I guess you just have to be a skeptic to find the humor in all this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
novalib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:43 PM
Response to Reply #131
145. Is Bush's Double Somewhere in this Thread??!!
I haven't seen Bush's double here.

This is serious business here, and some people just want to make light of it and be sarcastic.

It makes me sick.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
patcox2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:54 PM
Response to Reply #131
181. I heard the Rove Trial started today. Its a secret, of course.
I can't wait until he is secretly frogmarched to the secret prison to secretly serve his secret sentence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:08 PM
Response to Reply #181
216. I am secretly jumping up and down.
And secretly punching the recommend button over and over and over and over...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:45 PM
Response to Reply #111
151. Have you got one?
Really, it's not humor so much as desperate face-saving going on here.

Makes me laugh, it does. Not in a nice way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Moloch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:39 PM
Response to Reply #101
130. LMAO
I laughed so hard I nearly fell out of my chair.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftstreet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:49 PM
Response to Reply #101
162. ...
:spray:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
smb Donating Member (761 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:34 PM
Response to Reply #89
120. You Just Have To Take It On Faith
I suppose you found the WMDs, too.

He has SOOPER SECRIT EVIDENCE that he can't show anybody, just like the evidence for Saddam's WMDs.

In fact, this might serve as the script for a wacky movie, where the manila folders accidentally got switched, so now Pitt has the secret WMD evidence and Dubya has the secret indictment evidence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dogday Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:37 PM
Response to Reply #89
127. A Drive-By



A Real Drive-By
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dubyaD40web Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:24 PM
Response to Original message
94. If Mark Corallo and Robert Luskin lied...
that means it DID happen!

How many times has * & Co. lied about something that did happen?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Media_Lies_Daily Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:33 PM
Response to Reply #94
115. But some here would rather believe those folks than Truthout....
...go figure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 05:44 PM
Response to Reply #115
307. Show me a post of someone who believes those guys more than Truthout.
I'd very much like to see that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Semblance Donating Member (88 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:24 PM
Response to Original message
95. Timeframe
Is there a date and time at which Jason Leopold will announce who his sources were, if no indictment is announced?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Moloch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:51 PM
Response to Reply #95
170. Yeah, right.
Maybe if Jayson Blair.. oops I mean Leopold has to go to jail to protect his sources. The indictments supposedly were handed down on Friday May 12. All of this "24 business hours" crap is just a smokescreen to cover up that they got the story wrong. I'm sure they are hoping that you forget about all this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lapislzi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:29 PM
Response to Original message
109. I believed in the Red Sox, and I believe you
as an atheist, that's about as far as I go on the faith train. Hang in there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nutsnberries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:33 PM
Response to Original message
114. thanks for pointing to the update, Will! (I've got coffee & ...
...champagne!)

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LSK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:34 PM
Response to Original message
118. everyone remember this is Karl Rove we are talking about
He has a magical trance over the MSM that keeps them quiet about as much as possible.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
theboss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:34 PM
Response to Original message
119. So, where is the indictment?
The story is that he was indicted as of Friday. Where is it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LSK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:36 PM
Response to Reply #119
121. you mean the press conference
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
theboss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:10 PM
Response to Reply #119
223. No, the actual indictment
It's a piece of paper.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlooInBloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:36 PM
Response to Original message
122. Can the believers at least *understand* why there exists skepticism?
Given the complete and utter lack of publically verifiable evidence, skepticism seems perfectly reasonable, doesn't it?

I say that NOT casting aspersions on ANYONE, or any such thing.

It just seems like the believers are of the opinion that to even question an unverifiable (by us) claim is an ad hominem attack - and that view seems completely wacked to me. It's perfectly possible to refrain from believing until such time as there exists publically verifiable evidence, WITHOUT thereby attacking the believers.

Or am I bonkers?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:41 PM
Response to Reply #122
139. Everyone can and should doubt
It is on TO to provide facts to assuage those doubts. We are doing the best we can to do so; we reported the original story and were right to do so, and have received confirmation from a broad spectrum of mainstream media corroborating our story. The thing about them not corroborating on the record or in print...well...that's almost as big a story as the Rove indictment itself, and it'll out when the time comes.

There are those who have stood by us, there are those who have doubts and await confirmation...and there are those who have made this viciously personal. TO owes vast thanks to the first group, owes hard work to the second, and the third...is just going to do what it does.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlooInBloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:55 PM
Response to Reply #139
184. A fair answer... and while it's a much smaller issue...
Can the TO folks understand why some (including myself) FEEL that truthout has treated the reader like they're idiots on the "24 business hours" thing?

Even if the truthout folks don't AGREE that they've treated the reader thussly, can the truthout folks UNDERSTAND why a reader might FEEL that way?

Admittedly that's a small issue, compared to the main point, but oftentimes impressions are formed from the small stuff...

Thanks for your (previous) answer - I (at least) regard it as perfectly fair.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Media_Lies_Daily Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:23 PM
Response to Reply #184
384. What part made you personally feel like TO treated you like an idiot?.....
...They told us as much as they could without giving away sources.

What is it that you failed to understand about that?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bear425 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:00 PM
Response to Reply #139
194. At the the risk of being labeled a TO, Leopold, Pitt sycophant
by members of the third group, I want to thank you for your hard work and effort to bring us the truth.

bear425: gleefully hitting the recommend button
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:08 PM
Response to Reply #139
217. I don't see much wrong in placing trust
In those who have proved trustworthy. (I feel that way about you, Truthout, and Jason even when I disagree.)

I have met a few who could trust without that, who had to be betrayed before withdrawing trust, but most of us can manage to trust by reliable experience.

Some of us, possibly because of eternally damaging personal betrayals (we can't know), will always assume the worst, nastiest thing of any of us. No matter what.

We might want to remember this when the next person is set upon, not by hounds, but by our fellow Americans and Democrats who can no longer place faith anywhere, so sure are they of betrayal and ultimate despair.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlooInBloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:27 PM
Response to Reply #217
248. There seems to be a conflation of 2 separate things on the believers' part
(1) Withholding assent from truthout's claims, and

(2) Dissenting from truthout's claims.


As clearly as I can muster: withholding assent IS NOT THE SAME THING as dissenting.
They aren't the same.
They aren't the same.
They aren't the same.

Your phrase "will always assume the worst..." appears to be directed at someone who DISSENTS. But the dissenters seem to me to be but a small portion of the skeptics.

The vast majority of the skeptics, imo, are made up of those who are (merely) withholding assent - presumably, like myself, because of the lack of publically verifiable evidence.

We believe ill of NO ONE. We believe that intellectual honesty REQUIRES that we withhold assent until evidence is presented. It has NOTHING to do with "believing the worst, nastiest thing" of ANYONE. No matter how much you try to paint it that way.

There do exist reporters whose word I would accept without verifiable evidence - Hersch and Waas come to mind. So I'm not against the very *concept* of evidence-free assent. It's just that FOR ME, the author of the truthout article isn't one of those writers. Maybe he will be someday, maybe not. But that's not an insult to the writer - 99.9999% of writers don't get that kind of "carte blanche" from me.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 05:30 PM
Response to Reply #248
299. I do assent with your post.
:toast:

Well said. Well reasoned.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:05 PM
Response to Reply #248
340. "We," kimosabe?
First, I believe ill of MANY. So right away, I know you're not talking about me.

Second, your high, fine standards are not mine. Your breakdown of assents and dissents and withholding is not mine and the interpretation does not apply to anything I believe.

BTW, do you consider vicious character assassination at the lack of instant gratification to be a withholding of assent or does that move into dissent?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 05:12 PM
Response to Reply #217
287. Trust is not all or nothing for me. Is it for you?
It shouldn't be.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 06:58 PM
Response to Reply #287
336. I'm pretty sure I said nothing of the kind.
But interesting to see that's how you see it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:56 PM
Response to Reply #336
378. You implied that when someone has earned your trust
it's a betrayal of trust to then mistrust them for something else. For example, if I constantly read stories I trust on Truthout, I would be betraying their trust if I suddenly questioned a story on Truthout that struck me as not credible. By questioning that one story, you seemed to be saying, I am betraying the trust between Truthout and me. Would you agree with that?

I don't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Moloch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:39 PM
Response to Reply #139
261. LOL
... The thing about them not corroborating on the record or in print...well...that's almost as big a story as the Rove indictment itself, and it'll out when the time comes ...

That I can't wait to hear.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arcos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 05:56 PM
Response to Reply #139
317. Everyone except Skinner, right? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jumpoffdaplanet Donating Member (676 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:53 PM
Response to Reply #122
177. Don't understand it at all
Why would anyone believe anything said by anyone in the WH or close to the WH.

At this point every single thing that comes out of the mouths of Rove and his whores are lies.

Assume that, and the rest is easy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jumpoffdaplanet Donating Member (676 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:55 PM
Response to Reply #177
183. Btw
the very first "evidence" presented that Leopold was a liar was that DRUDGE said so.

Right there I realized that Leopold was being swift-boated. And it got worse from there.

Why do people fall for that kind of crap these days?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlooInBloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:00 PM
Response to Reply #177
195. (shrug) I just don't see it as "either you're on TO's side or...
... you're on the White House's side."

That just seems incorrect, and in a bullying way that appears to someone who wants evidence to be an attempt to quash the request for said evidence.

As if the only way to want rove in prison is to believe in claims made without publically verifiable evidence - that's just bizarre, to me at least.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 05:54 PM
Response to Reply #177
315. I've yet to see anyone who says they believe Rove or his lawyers or the WH
If you have, please link to it.

It's the "easiness" that's a problem for some of us. Either Rove is or he isn't indicted. If he is, great. If he isn't, it's not sane to believe he is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClayZ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:37 PM
Response to Original message
124. Wheeeeeeee! Thanks for the update, Will! K&R
And all your hard (GOOD) work!

:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Shrek Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:39 PM
Response to Original message
132. The blog entry says the meeting was observed by media
We also learned the following: The events at the office building that houses the law firm of Patton Boggs were not in fact a very well-guarded secret. Despite denials by Corallo and Luskin, there was intense activity at the office building. In fact, the building was staked out by at least two major network news crews.


Shouldn't there have been some coverage of some kind? Even if it was just footage of black SUVs along with some speculative commentary?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
annabanana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 05:59 PM
Response to Reply #132
319. not if the corporate media
is as compromised as I think it is....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thereismore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:40 PM
Response to Original message
135. Thanks for the update, Will. I believe you. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nothing Without Hope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:41 PM
Response to Original message
138. "They expressed frustration with superiors who would not allow it"
Edited on Wed May-17-06 03:42 PM by Nothing Without Hope
So is this the game then? Suppress the story and maybe take secret steps to quash the indictment behind the scenes - then pretend it never happened? If so, let's hope for whistleblowers to come forward about this conspiracy of silence by the bought-and-paid-for press.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SoCalDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:41 PM
Response to Original message
140. Hopefully when (and if) the indictment is announced,
the date on the original document will prove/disprove ..

This is the problem with "wanting to be first" to announce,.. The risk is huge.

Christmas comes on the 25th, even if an announcement is made on the 22nd.

The indictment is dated, and the document will vindicate, if vindication is due..

Un-named reporters' off-the-record protestations of how they are "being held back" do not do a lot for the credibility at this point..

I am patient.. I will wait until it's announced :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
im10ashus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:44 PM
Response to Original message
148. Thanks for the update!
K&R!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alcibiades_mystery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:45 PM
Response to Original message
150. I will be the first to say this
If Rove was in fact served an indictment last Friday, I will post the longest apology post ever issued on DU. I will prostrate myself, and urge repeated virtual ass-kickings from WillPitt and Jason Leopold, and all my various interlocutors over the last few days, each of whom I will list by name as my superior. I will use the following in my signature line for ONE CALENDAR YEAR:

"I disbelieved the truthout.org story about Rove's indictment, and falsely smeared both truthout and Jason Leopold without reason. I am a FOOL."

All this will come to pass if we are given definitive proof that the story was true, and that Rove was in fact indicted on Friday May 12 or before.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OPERATIONMINDCRIME Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:31 PM
Response to Reply #150
376. Great To Hear. But I Wonder How Many On DU Would Really Care.
Send him and anyone else the apologies via PM when the facts come out. Beating the living shit out of somebody because you thought they were hittin on your girl, but then apologizing when finding out they were merely asking for directions, isn't exactly honorable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alcibiades_mystery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 10:51 PM
Response to Reply #376
419. I'll do what I'll do
and will certainly not pay the least attention to you.

You know, it's funny. Your stuff on this has been so amateurish that it would be cringe-inducing if one could cringe and laugh at the same time. First, you write up some bizarre inspirational, portraying a news story as if it is the moments before the Battle of Agincourt. Cicero had a term for such nonsense: he called it the turgid style - using grandiose prose for minor occasions. I wouldn't be surprised if your next performance is a sonnet dedicated to your visit to the Chinese take-out place. Then you fall back on the lamest of rhetorical moves: "it's not only me, but everybody thinks your gross! Or a lot of people, anyway. Most, even." Most people see the distastefulness of such maneuvers roundabout the ninth grade. Not you. You're running this junior high school stupidity well into adulthood. Finally, when your other off-the-mark scribblings have fallen flat, you resort to diminutives, "Little Alci" and whatnot, as if anyone over the age of ten would take such a thing seriously. It's sad really, because you clearly aspire to the kind of powerful prose so often produced by your idol Will Pitt (who hits the rhetorical mark far more often than not), but you're always just a bit off, in the dirt where all bad writing lands. You should consider changing your name to OPERATIONMINDFAUXPAS.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
callous taoboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:45 PM
Response to Original message
152. What say you, OldLeftieLawyer? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:51 PM
Response to Reply #152
171. Tee hee. Don't be mean.
Much.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
theboss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:56 PM
Response to Reply #152
186. How does this post change anything?
It's just another "trust me" post.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
patcox2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:05 PM
Response to Reply #186
207. No way man, there is confirmation from a "broad spectrum" of MSM.
Its just that they can't go on the record, you see, because their bosses have spiked the story.

Don't you see it, man? This proves it absolutely.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
theboss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:10 PM
Response to Reply #207
222. Oh
So Will is quoting Leopold who is quoting his editor who is quoting an anonymous reporter.

That holds up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rhiannon12866 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:11 PM
Response to Reply #222
229. No, Mark Ash, Jason's editor, wrote the OP...
...Will's just quoting it and linking to it. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
theboss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:15 PM
Response to Reply #229
233. It's still a "trust me" situation
I'm waiting for the "It's really really true, honestly" story.

Times 100.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robbedvoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:03 PM
Response to Reply #152
201. OLL aka Luskin? "What crime did Rove commit?"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rhiannon12866 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:28 PM
Response to Reply #201
250. Good response!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robbedvoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 06:58 PM
Response to Reply #250
337. Thanks. I just remembered the venom against the Wilsons
and how they lost all credibility by staying visible. (despite my argument that for them visibility=survival)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sydnie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 03:10 AM
Response to Reply #201
449. You just might have something there
Things that make you go hmmmmmmmmmmmmm. There have also been claims that they have found out where Fitz was on Friday, but when asked, replies with ... find it for yourself. If it's a fact, why not just state it and let it stand on it's own merits, just like TO did?

Disinformation is everywhere I guess. :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
iilana X Donating Member (250 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:46 PM
Response to Original message
155. This is like waiting for the other shoe to drop.
The horrible lardass just has to go to jail.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:50 PM
Response to Reply #155
166. Neh. It's dropped.
This is more like trying to fish it out from under the bed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
iilana X Donating Member (250 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:58 PM
Response to Reply #166
189. It must be lost in a sea of dust bunnies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:11 PM
Response to Reply #189
228. Oh, then it's under my bed.
Maybe the cat's playing with it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
iilana X Donating Member (250 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:22 PM
Response to Reply #228
240. It it's Rove's shoe you might want to get your kitty a
rabies shot!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
npincus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:46 PM
Response to Original message
156. I've always believed in you.
thank you, all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
endarkenment Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:47 PM
Response to Original message
158. One more message to truthout:
Edited on Wed May-17-06 03:47 PM by endarkenment
You guys rock!

Ignore the provocateurs. Keep working your sources and keep publishing what you believe is the truth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rainy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:49 PM
Response to Original message
163. Remember when DRUDGE wrongly reported a John Kerry
affair during the race? Remember how EVERY main steam media outlet kept repeating it over and over again? They even said DRUDGE many times. This is so blatent that I can't stand it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lonestarnot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:52 PM
Response to Original message
174. GOD DAMN OWNERSHIP SOCIETY! I'm ready to blow!
Edited on Wed May-17-06 03:52 PM by lonestarnot
eeewwwww did I say that?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lancdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:53 PM
Response to Original message
179. Thank you, Will
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robbedvoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 03:56 PM
Response to Original message
188. I take you guys over MSM/Rove any day - not such a leap of faith
The naysayers range from healthy skeptics, to people with personal agenda - including one who believe Rove committed no crime & the Wilsons "jumped the shark" (Old lefty Lawyer).
So, it's been interesting...
And yeah, we knew for some time that it's not the reporters who decide what's printed - hence the fallacy of dubbing it "liberal media" because some reporters may bot be to the right of Atila.
Hopefully, we'll get new insights into the ways MSM is run - I for one would like some details of the Rathergate coup as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
democrank Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:00 PM
Response to Original message
193. Thanks for the update,Will.
I appreciate it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ginnyinWI Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:06 PM
Response to Original message
212. Thanks, Will
Keep up the good fight--well, I know you will. You have a lot of support out here that doesn't do a lot of posting--remember that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alamom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:08 PM
Response to Original message
218. Thank you, Mr. Pitt. Good to see you back.
I have no problem believing the MSM hand's have been tied and there is a story many would love to tell.
An administration who can steal 2 elections and get by with a War based on lies, (to name a few things this one has done), could very well "Shut everyone up who works for media who will not let them report the news or tell what they know".


I have no trouble believing this fact at all. It "has" happened before.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
northamericancitizen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 06:43 PM
Response to Reply #218
331. My thoughts exactly.
Too bad so many members of this board forget about that.

**MSN can't be trusted.

**Karrl is a powerful machiavelic man.

**If he goes down, the VP will, followed closely by the dictator himself.

**Fitz and his team are facing a dangerous and powerful establishment.


I don't understand why some members of this board let their ego take over and start streets fights with the one out in the open looking for the truth.


Pitt was obnoxious last week end? Probably. Insulting at times? Probably

What's more important? Him apologizing or him standing by and working with the TO team so Karl's power is reduce to nothing?

Peace

northamericancitizen
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
theboss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:09 PM
Response to Original message
219. Why do I get the feeling that this is all about Rove testifying again?
The timeline on this story makes no sense.

If Rove was indicted, Fitzgerald knew prior to any fifteen hour meeting with his legal team on Friday. In other words, the indictment would have come down prior to Friday.

Or Fitzgerald believed that the indictment was coming down this week. In that case, why would there be some sort of marathon meeting? Fitzgerald did not have the goods at that point.

And has anyone actually confirmed Fitzgerald's physical location on Friday?

And why is the Grand Jury meeting today?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Snivi Yllom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:32 PM
Response to Reply #219
255. you make too much sense
All of your points are excellent.

I would challenge the authors of the story we have been told to explain all of your questions, each of which torpedo the story.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeftNYC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:18 PM
Response to Original message
237. Its always the superiors...Corp media whores...nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
theboss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:24 PM
Response to Original message
242. Honest question: what is the date on the indictment?
I really no longer know if the story is speculative or not. It seems to be morphing before our very eyes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
5X Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:29 PM
Response to Reply #242
251. Seems that way, doesn't it.
Like the '24 hours' morphed into '24 business hours'.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
katinmn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:30 PM
Response to Reply #242
253. OP says "Friday May 12, 2006"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

WilliamPitt (1000+ posts) Wed May-17-06 03:02 PM
Original message
When the documents come out
they will have dates on the top.

Those dates will be Friday May 12, 2006.

Just as we said.
If I lead, follow me. If I pause, push me. If I retreat, kill me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
theboss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:33 PM
Response to Reply #253
257. So, it is a sealed indictment
Why aren't they saying that then?

It is so simple to write, "A sealed indictment."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wishlist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:58 PM
Response to Reply #257
272. How could indictment have occurred 5/12 if GJ didn't meet with Fitz then?
My biggest concern about the indictment report is that there has been no confirmation that Fitz even met with the GJ on May 12th or anytime since Rove testified back in April (Fitz was expected to meet with GJ today May 17). The GJ met on May 12 but they are involved in other cases besides the Plame Leak and there were apparently no sightings of Fitz arriving or leaving from meeting with GJ on May 12 or any other day since the day in April when Rove testified. Very unlikely that GJ would have voted to indict back in April immediately after Rove testified without any further actions on the case until last Friday. Leopold's report says "The grand jury hearing evidence in the Plame Wilson case met Friday on other matters while Fitzgerald spent the entire day at Luskin's office" with no mention of when Fitz met with GJ to obtain indictment.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onenote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 05:23 PM
Response to Reply #272
295. maybe they secretly came over to patton boggs and met there
j/k
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catrina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 06:30 PM
Response to Reply #257
327. In Jason Leopold's article, it did say the indictment was sealed. You also
asked about Fitgerald's physical presence on Friday. We know that there was a hearing regarding Libby's pre-trial motions in Judge Walton's court on Friday. As far as I know, Fitzgerald was there. That court is in DC.

Luskin said to Jeralyn Merrit that he thought Fitzgerald was in Chicago on Friday. Like a lot of people, he seems to be confusing the Libby case re the Plame GJ and the court dealing with Libby's case (which are in DC) with Fitzpatrick's other case which IS in Chicago, the Gov. Ryan case (now over) and now the Conrad Black case.

So, Jason Leopold did say the indictment was sealed. He said there was a meeting between Fitzgerald and Rove's lawyer, Luskin. Luskin denies this.

Is it possible that neither Luskin nor Fitzgerald were involved in the meeting, but rather other attorneys representing both sides? Just a thought.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
theboss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 08:04 AM
Response to Reply #327
456. Re-read the article
Where is the word "Sealed?"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vidar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:27 PM
Response to Original message
247. Thanks for the update, Will. Hang in there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zorra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:27 PM
Response to Original message
249. Simple logic:
If: Karl Rove is a republican,

And: He spoke when he testified before a Grand Jury,

Then: Rove lied to the Grand Jury.

And Fitz seems to be a competent prosecutor, so Rove must be busted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wiggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:32 PM
Response to Original message
256. There's the next story for Marc Ash
"When we asked why they were not going public with this information, in each case they expressed frustration with superiors who would not allow it."

I want a major story about media behavior the last 5 years. I want to know who the superiors are that stifle journalistic investigation and writing. I want to know why and how and when. A thorough research job would surely turn up dozens, if not hundreds, of instances of news manipulation. I bet that you'd find that manipulation occured in favor of one party at the expense of another 9 times out of 10 (similar to the election glitches).

This is heinous.

At least it sounds like Ash and TO are going to be lookin good shortly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tiptoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:53 PM
Response to Reply #256
268. agree! n/t
Edited on Wed May-17-06 05:15 PM by tiptoe
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Balbus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:43 PM
Response to Original message
262. And the ever-changing story changes again....
How many business hours now?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Time for change Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:52 PM
Response to Original message
267. Confirmation by the MSM -- Wow, that's encouraging
This sure is hard to figure out. I wonder why Rove's people would go to so much trouble to deny a story that will come out soon anyhow. I have to admit that that question has me a little worried.

Thanks for all your work on this!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
savemefromdumbya Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 05:03 PM
Response to Reply #267
277. seems like the lull before the storm?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
savemefromdumbya Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 04:59 PM
Response to Original message
273. Will is the indictment sealed?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tibbiit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 05:02 PM
Response to Original message
274. After hearing about the
President signing statement today about how the phone companies can lie to the people if Negroponte says okay... could bush have made a secret statement that those under view by the justice department can lie to the public ? Or could bush have already pardoned rove? in secret?
tib
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
suffragette Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 05:03 PM
Response to Original message
278. Keeping the Armagnac on hand to open, but will
Edited on Wed May-17-06 05:04 PM by suffragette
content myself with some good coffee and patience 'til then.

:donut:

Thanks for the update, Will. Hang in there.

edited for pesky typo
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tom Joad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 05:06 PM
Response to Original message
281.  Yeah, right, Whatever.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JackORoses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 05:06 PM
Response to Original message
282. read the article again
The whole business hours bit is bullshit.

Nowhere in the article did it say the announcement would come in 24 hours. It only said Karl would be given this time to get his affairs in order.

However it did say this:

"An announcement by Fitzgerald is expected to come this week, sources close to the case said. However, the day and time is unknown."

Strange how the naysayers keep bringing up the '24 hours' but never mention this.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sheelz Donating Member (869 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:02 PM
Response to Reply #282
339. The operative word is expected.
We went through this last week. Do you remember who the naysayers were?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BeatleBoot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 05:09 PM
Response to Original message
286. Mr. Pitt - You are experiencing the "stuff" for your next book
I know you probably realize that already.

But these days you are currently experiencing - from breaking the story until everything comes out - would make for some interesting reading.

I'd buy it anyways.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orsino Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 05:17 PM
Response to Original message
289. Can someone explain a couple of points to me?
1. How is it possible that an indictment has been issued whose very existence is still secret? Can a sealed indictment accomplish this? Is this a tool that a prosecutor can use to encourage cooperation?

2. Would not a sealed indictment still be dated? Would Rove be able to deny its existence before a certain date once it's unsealed? In other words, why would Rove lie now when the revelation is inevitable? Is the unsealing of such an indictment inevitable? Could the indictment magically disappear?

3. What is the difference between "our own sources" and "additional sources"?

I'm trying to reconcile apparent reality with Mr. Pitt's known credibility. He still say he's sure, so I'm trying to take the matter seriously.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 05:25 PM
Response to Reply #289
296. Those are very good questions.
I hope you get answers.

:toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
johnnydrama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 05:40 PM
Response to Reply #296
305. lawyers
Why would Rove's lawyers blatantly lie about Rove being indicted?

It's called timing. The denials all came on Monday, hours before a major primetime presidential speech?

You think Rove will let them admit, or even say no comment to that story right before Bush's speech?

Now I have no idea what's true, or what's not true, but there certainly are reasons for them not to have
wanted the story to break earlier this week.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 05:49 PM
Response to Reply #305
311. We can speculate all we want about motive.
Does anyone here know for a fact if Rove was indicted?

I don't have any evidence to think so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spazito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 06:01 PM
Response to Reply #289
320. Here is a NYT article where there was knowledge of sealed
indictments being handed down:

snip

Thirteen other current and former administration officials and associates were previously indicted on misdemeanor counts, and the grand jury handed up an additional 14 sealed indictments yesterday.

On Aug. 29, Mr. Fletcher issued a blanket pardon covering everyone who had been indicted up to that date and anyone who might be indicted in the future except himself. The additional 14 indictments under seal are awaiting a final ruling from the Kentucky Supreme Court on whether the grand jury may continue to indict people who could be covered under the pardon, which the lower courts have approved.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/12/us/12kentucky.html


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jazzjunkysue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 05:44 PM
Response to Original message
308. I'm usually a tough skeptic. That's good. But listen? Do you hear it?
<crickets>
<crickets>
<crickets>
<crickets>


That's the sound of all the GOP TV pundits coming out to defend KKkkarl and disparrage all the Leopold believers.

Nothing. Nada. Why?

Because Rove is toxic waste, and everyone knows it.

This is just a matter of time, and I believe that TO is doing it's duty: Giving the truth when the Main Stream Media won't.


If the whole GOP is agreeing with TO, then it's a little hard to shoot down the story.


Or, you can just believe that they'll let this little story go and not make hay out of it at our expense.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 05:57 PM
Response to Reply #308
318. I've noticed that peculiar silence myself.
It might just be the sound of wingers letting lefties devour each other.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jazzjunkysue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:17 PM
Response to Reply #318
345. When did they ever let an opportunity pass to ridicule us?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gasperc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 05:47 PM
Response to Original message
309. ROVE N BUSH DESPERATE TO LAND A PLEA DEAL
I think Fitz wants a guilty confession of some sort that Rove won't agree to
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
goodboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 05:52 PM
Response to Original message
313. Will...check yer PM
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sendero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 06:08 PM
Response to Original message
321. Which side do I take?
Edited on Wed May-17-06 06:20 PM by sendero
Well, who knows. But just because the indictment hasn't been reported in the MSM doesn't mean much to me. The FACT that it can be kept secret, if sealed, for a very long time seems lost on many here.

Hey, I know one thing - if I were the one of the principals involved and it turns out my story WAS true, I'd be posting an EAT SHIT thread at every opportunity. Since the detractors have posted nothing but EAT SHIT threads for days now.

But that's just me, I'm a bit vindictive when people treat me like an asshole.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Geek_Girl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 06:18 PM
Response to Original message
324. Thanks for the Update
Keeps us posted!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
livvy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 06:23 PM
Response to Original message
325. Thanks for the update.
Keepin' the faith here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bonito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 06:36 PM
Response to Original message
329. Kick! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mdmc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 06:38 PM
Response to Original message
330. thanks for the update
peace!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pacalo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 06:50 PM
Response to Original message
333. Thanks so much for the update, Will!
Tell Jason to hang in there!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Justice Is Comin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 06:53 PM
Response to Original message
334. Seeing nobody posted
I thought I'd go ahead and post :rofl:

Truth Out...Truth In...Truth Up....Truth Sideways, don't matter. ..... I think it's the truth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
northamericancitizen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:00 PM
Response to Reply #334
338. Can,t let you have the last word
You forgot : Truth from above.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
warrior1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:13 PM
Response to Reply #338
343. Hang there Will and Jason too!
Full support for all the hard work you guys do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Freedom_Aflaim Donating Member (745 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:15 PM
Response to Original message
344. non-stop attacks
"For the past few days, we have endured non-stop attacks on our credibility, and we have fought hard to defend our reputation. In addition, we have worked around the clock to provide additional information to our readership"

Any professional reporter should certainly understand the non-stop attacks on their credibility, when they break a story which fails to materialize, which is then ammended with a lame "business hours" excuse, and then still fails to materialize when the business hours excuse doesnt pan out either.

Personally, I feel like I have been had as I believed and celebrated this story when it "broke".

IMO, I think it was a journalistic gamble based on a perceived high likelihood that he was indicted (but perhaps not confirmed.

Perhaps Truthout was played by Rove, perhaps they gambled and lost. Either way, a great number of people have been made a fool of.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Singular73 Donating Member (999 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:34 PM
Response to Original message
351. Leopold would be Drudged if this turns out to be true.
Imagine if he's right.

Released 1+ weeks earlier on the blogs.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
msanthrope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:41 PM
Response to Original message
355. Thank you and keep up the good work!! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tlsmith1963 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:51 PM
Response to Reply #355
361. If This is True...
then the MSM aren't doing their job, as usual. I am so sick & tired of how they try to protect members of the Bush Admin. But if the Leopold thing isn't true, I am going to be pretty angry. I have wanted Rove to get his for so long, & I don't like to be tricked. So we'll see who feels my wrath. :evilgrin:

Tammy
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cocoa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:47 PM
Response to Original message
357. if Rove was indicted, it would come out eventually
it doesn't make sense to my why the mainstream media, or Rove himself, would care so much about which day people found out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Roy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:47 PM
Response to Original message
358. Does anybody remember the Dean scream........
or.....
"I was instrumental in the creation of the internet"
or any other misconstrued or taken out of context uttered by a dem or dem supporter?

After seeing this story, there is no way MSM 'DID NOT' contact Roves' legal team for a 'confirm or deny', which you would have think would be the same vehement denial mentioned in the OP.

If they got an emphatic denial, does anyone honestly think the MSM would pass on a chance to discredit a liberal blog and the liberal online communities as kooks and liars?

They would lead into every segment with this as if it was the equivalent of the 'Dean scream'. They would cancel commercials and feature Ann Coulter, John Fund, and all their friends to analyze how evil these liberals are to slander and libel a fine man like Mr. Rove

They would be using this to try and bolster Bush's' poll numbers by portraying the poor victim Mr. Rove, lied on again by them evil liberals.

The silence I believe tells us that this reporting is probably true and the MSM knows it.

When the truth finally outs, watch how the focus will be on Mr. Fitzgerald or any side issue other than the treason of Karl Rove.
The gloaters only have a few more days to gloat, so I say let them, for most will be signing in under different names soon to try and stir up more discontent on future issues.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jack Rabbit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:00 PM
Response to Original message
364. Thanks for the update
:popcorn:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
meti57b Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:04 PM
Response to Original message
365. I say celebrate now. If it's untrue, we won't be able to celebrate later.
:toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SharonRB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:08 PM
Response to Original message
366. Thanks for the update, Will
I trusted you and Jason from the beginning. The wait is killing me, though.

I hope KO was one of the MSM sources!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cassiepriam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:22 PM
Response to Original message
371. Right or wrong, they are at least acting like real reporters......
not lap dogs....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
YDogg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:29 PM
Response to Original message
374. I want to believe
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lochloosa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:04 PM
Response to Original message
380. K/R
deleted bullshit....i'm drnuk.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lookingforbear Donating Member (4 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:08 PM
Response to Original message
381. Thank you Will!!!!
I can't take another day withoout some resolution. This has brought me out of lurkdom.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wise Doubter Donating Member (458 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:22 PM
Response to Original message
383. 24 hour thing
What a way to mind-f#ck him.

"I might come today - I might not. Maybe the next day. I`ll have to think about it, and so will you. Mwhaahaaahaaa." :evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Inland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:37 PM
Response to Original message
390. *sigh* Only possible "update" is "Rove indictment announced!".
That's not entirely true. "Rove indictment not announced" is also an update, but we already had that one.

I felt the effort to scoop secret grand jury proceedings was a waste of time at best, dangerously foolhardy at worst. Continuing with "updates" like this won't change my mind any.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/Inland/83

I'll wait for Fitzgerald's announcement.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
guruoo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:42 PM
Response to Original message
393. DUers are acting like a bunch of old...
Thought I was going to say 'old women' didn't you?
Sure you did.
Shame!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
progressoid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:43 PM
Response to Original message
394. Jeez, only 392 posts? C'mon people lets start flinging some mud!
:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ShaneGR Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:44 PM
Response to Original message
396. I'm sorry Will, but I think it's time to end the "speculation"
News should be fact, and you're fishing fiction at this point. RETRACT the speculation, regardless of source. It's pretty clear Rove didn't get indicted last Friday. Leopold was wrong.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Inland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:52 PM
Response to Reply #396
401. I think that's right.
Edited on Wed May-17-06 09:53 PM by Inland
At this point, there should be less, not more.

I'm interested in Rove and an indictment. Does this update bring us any information on that point? Not really. It's a defense of an attempt to scoop the world.

The explanations of why there's no announcements are getting more tenuous and frankly, serve no purpose except to defend the good intentions behind the original scoop/report. I'm not all that interested, because I'm not interested in Leopold's future as a journalist.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Media_Lies_Daily Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 10:08 PM
Response to Reply #396
406. You seem desperate for Jason to be wrong. Why is that?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eleny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 10:02 PM
Response to Original message
403. Thanks!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
usregimechange Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 10:27 PM
Response to Original message
413. kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Roland99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 10:35 PM
Response to Original message
415. Damn liberal media at it again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 10:51 PM
Response to Original message
420. How many more business hours do we have left? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
understandinglife Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 11:17 PM
Response to Original message
425. Thank you Jason Leopold. Thank you Marc Ash. Thank you Will Pitt.
Edited on Wed May-17-06 11:17 PM by understandinglife
That covers it.

And, just why would any person with the slightest clue ever believe anything "Gold bars" and some schmuck spinshitermeister have to say about anything, ever.


Never Forget: George W. Bush willfully violated National Security to cover-up his willful launch of a war of aggression and illegal occupation of Iraq.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bleever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 11:52 PM
Response to Reply #425
433. '"Gold bars" and some schmuck spinshitermeister...'
Because I know you to be a highly intelligent person, I have to say: you've got a sense of humor to match.

:7
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
understandinglife Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 07:18 AM
Response to Reply #433
454. Thank you :)
:hi:


pro-Bu$h = Anti-America
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rpannier Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 11:40 PM
Response to Original message
429. I'll say what I said before
I'm always the skeptic. I expect the worst and hope for the best.
If you're mad at Will because the story hasn't panned out to your liking, that's sort of your own fault. You wanted it to be true and so far nothing has happened. Be angry if you like, but it's sort of on you.
If you're mad at Will for insulting people, then that's another story. I have not seen these venomous posts, but I'm sure they exist. If he attacked Skinner and other DUers then Will is wrong for that and the people he attacked and their friends should be angry.
But, like it or not, prosecutions do not move like an episode of Law & Order, they move like a glacier -- very, very slowly. If that irritates you, then maybe you'd appreciate it, if it was you that was being investigated. You wouldn't want FitzGerald or anyone else rushing to indict you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lebkuchen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 11:48 PM
Response to Original message
431. Carry on w/reporting other news.
Edited on Wed May-17-06 11:50 PM by lebkuchen
When comparing blogger news to the MSM, both may as well be on different planets. That's why I depend on bloggers for information. However, bloggers need to be careful not to hitch their horse to the wrong wagon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
October Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 12:46 AM
Response to Original message
438. Thanks, Will. DU is unrecognizable sometimes...
This is a disturbing thread. I've watched this site become mean over the years. I know we're all angry and eager for justice, but the comments are too often ugly and spite-filled. It's become quite uncivilized. There's just so much hatred and mis-directed anger (on a lot of threads, not just yours) and more than that, there is a sickening amount of condescending tones from quite a few. People throw their "credentials" around as if to trump one another, or in an attempt to squelch and demean the other guy's viewpoint because they might differ.

There are so many attacks where once there was dialog. I mean, you could post a seemingly innocuous, factual statement, along with a link to a story or whatever, and then sit back and wait. You'll be insulted in no time.

One thing I have noticed, though, and that is that while the number of posts seem high on such threads, you quickly realize it's a lot of the same people posting and bickering. Take comfort in knowing that a lot of people read without posting and wouldn't dare jump into such a fray as this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_In_AK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 01:48 AM
Response to Reply #438
445. You're absolutely correct... n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 12:50 AM
Response to Original message
439. We just need to wait William, just wait
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
genieroze Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 01:14 AM
Response to Original message
442. Madsen thinks it will be Friday.
THE NEWS

May 17, 2006 -- LATE EDITION -- WMR can report tonight on more details concerning the confusing reports regarding Karl Rove and Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald from last Friday. WMR can confirm that the appearance of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales before the Grand Jury at the US Federal Courthouse in Washington was a formality in which the jury informed the Attorney General of their decision to indict Karl Rove. That proceeding lasted for less than 30 minutes and took place shortly after noon. Gonzales's personal security detachment was present in the courthouse during the Grand Jury briefing. From the courthouse, Gonzales's motorcade proceeded directly down Constitution Avenue to the Department of Justice.

According to sources within the Patton and Boggs law firm, Karl Rove was present at the law firm's building on M Street. WMR was told by a credible source that a Patton and Boggs attorney confirmed that Fitzgerald paid a visit to the law firm to inform Rove attorney Robert Luskin and Rove that an indictment would be returned by the Grand Jury against Rove. Contrary to other reports, some of which may have emanated from the Rove camp in order to create diversions and smokescreens, the meetings at Patton and Boggs did not last 15 hours nor was a 24-hour notice of intent to indict delivered to Rove. In the Scooter Libby case last October, after the Grand Jury decided to indict Libby on Friday, October 21 and the Attorney General personally heard the decision the same day at a meeting with the jury, the actual indictment was issued the following Friday, October 28. Several sources have told WMR that an announcement concerning the indictment of Rove will be made on Friday, May 19 generally following the same scenario from October 28, 2005 -- the posting of the indictment on the Special Prosecutor's web site followed by a press conference at Main Justice.

WMR was also told by a credible source that part of the reason for Fitzgerald's visit to Patton and Boggs was to inform Rove attorney Luskin that he has moved into the category of a "subject" of the special prosecutor's investigation as a result of a conversation with Time reporter Viveca Novak, in which Novak told Luskin that Rove was a source for Time's Matt Cooper. The special prosecutor, who has prosecuted one defense attorney in the Hollinger case, is reportedly investigating whether Luskin, as an officer of the court, may have violated laws on obstruction of justice.

WMR has also discovered that last year Rove, realizing he remained a lightning rod in the CIA Leakgate scandal, made preliminary plans to move into the private sector from the White House to take political heat off the Bush administration. However, as it became clear that he was in over his head legally and his legal bills piled up, Rove decided to remain at the White House.

http://www.waynemadsenreport.com/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tavalon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 02:06 AM
Response to Original message
447. But, but, but...
Luskin, Corallo and especially Rove have always been so straightforward with us. Why would they lie now? Huh, can you explain that one, huh, can ya buddy!!??!!

:sarcasm:

And with that, I'm moving on. I will wait for the rest of the damn dam to break. It will, and we will have had the pleasure of watching our own generation Bernsteins (not Woodward - I would spit on his grave if he would get around to dying) in real time. That's beyond cool, IMO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
donheld Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 04:11 AM
Response to Original message
450. Will, This is exactly what I suspected
The White House will do their best to keep the truth of this from coming out. Secrecy will be their 1st priority. This could have a lot to do with the whole immigration speech etc. to distract us from what is going on. I'm sure most rank and file reporters would tell what they know, but their management will make them sit on it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peter Frank Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 04:20 AM
Response to Original message
451. K & R... n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WePurrsevere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 07:27 AM
Response to Original message
455. True or not , only time will tell. I've waited this long, I can wait a bit
longer. For some things... I can be very very patient. :D

IME all things hidden will be revealed in time. Some of the best things (like babies, soufflee's, diamonds, etc) need to stay hidden until they're properly developed and ready to come out into the world.

For many it's very difficult and frustrating not really knowing what's going on. Unfortunately we really don't have any control over this and there's nothing that we can do to make it come any faster (certainly killing the messenger won't).

Fitzgerald seems to be doing his job correctly so although it may be today or it may be a bit longer sooner or later I believe "Fitzmas" will arrive. Meanwhile DH and I are going to take some slow deep breathes, chill and enjoy the side show the GOP has so kindly provided for us, "What Karma May Come" (the ongoing saga of how the GOP house that lies and crimes built is imploding before our very eyes). :evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pola Donating Member (272 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 09:10 AM
Response to Original message
457. hope it's today/ tomorrow - standing by TruthOut all the way

fingers crossed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skinner ADMIN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 09:48 AM
Response to Original message
458. Locking
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat Aug 18th 2018, 09:21 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC