NBC: KARL ROVE WILL NOT BE INDICTED

[matcom]

just announced

[Swamp Rat]

1. NO FUCKING WAY!!!

[nolabels]

88. Yea fucking way

Like some here been studying and following the wholesale looting and fraud that is been done at D.C. central for decades. After awhile your instincts become more accurate than what your actual eyes see. So stick around, you can get the hang of it too

I am not buying it, the whole CIA \Plame\ Novak Thing is B.S.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=445076

[nolies32fouettes]

90. Hwy, swamp rat, I don't believe it's over.

I think Luskin is playing games with the media.

http://www.progressiveu.org/100931-rove-roller-coaster-derailed#comment-47791

[high density]

2. CNN just said the same thing RE: CIA Leak case

"White House senior adviser Karl Rove won't be charged in the CIA leak case, according to his attorney."

[Skidmore]

3. On Washington Journal too--first half hour will take calls on this

topic. Vent your outrage!

[Cooley Hurd]

4. Did they flip him (against Cheney, perhaps)?

:shrug:

[Marie26]

85. We can hope!

Honestly, really, I think this might be good news. Fitz was obviously pressing Rove for information - maybe he got what he needed.

[Heidi]

5. ABC reporting it now, too.

No story yet, but it's the banner on their website.

http://abcnews.go.com/

[BeatleBoot]

6. Nothing on RAW STORY at 7:06 am Eastern

Hopefully he's cooperating and they aren't through yet.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

18. He isn't cooperating.

He isn't being charged. It's over.

[johnfunk]

66. He isn't cooperating? I think you're 100% wrong -- I think he's "flipped"

From Christy Hardin Smith at firedoglake:

First, the NYTimes article from David Johnston this morning. (And a hat tip to Holden for the heads up on the article.) If Luskin is coming out and saying publicly that they got a letter from Pat Fitzgerald which says that Rove will not be charged, there are two things that I want to see and know: (1) what does the letter actually say, word for word; and (2) does it say something along the lines of "Please thank Karl for his cooperation in this matter."

And there's more...

... to spin this as the case being over is laziness on the part of David Johnston — and the media writ large, frankly — who have never dug into this case to realize that the players were larger than the Libby and Rove narrative frame that the corporate media types have conveniently used throughout the investigation. And that the be all and end all of the case was not the ultimate criminal charges, but the exposure of the smarmy underbelly of the Bush Administration and their standard MO of attacking, with a vengeance, anyone who dares to question them — even when those questions are not only appropriate but also expose them in a lie.

Just go read the whole thing.

[greyl]

24. They're being careful to not get ahead of the news cycle. ;) nt

[arwalden]

58. Ooph!

:rofl:

[bdamomma]

60. Raw Story

headlines


http://apnews.myway.com/article/20060613/D8I7AD180.html

[bklyncowgirl]

7. Goddamnit. nt

[napi21]

8. Yea, I heard this on KGO radio. What a way to wake up!

I guess the whole day is going to be disgusting now!

[never_get_over_it]

14. Yep me too

just a few minutes ago on KGO - woke me up too - only said this just in Karl Rove will not be indicted - that was the extent of it.

Man what a rotten thing to wake up to.

[helderheid]

92. Yea, and I have a headache from hell to top it off.

[LaurenG]

9. Arrrgh!

Did they give any other details? Man that is so wrong!

[Heidi]

10. Here's the link to the NY Times article:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/13/washington/13cnd-leak.html?hp&ex=1150257600&en=e40da3e03155858f&ei=5094&partner=homepage

(I hope the link works for you. I'm a membr, so it's OK for me.)

[LaurenG]

23. Thank you Heidi, darn he got away with it!

Such is life I suppose but how disappointing.x(

[Marie26]

84. Thanks

"The prosecutor in the C.I.A. leak case on Monday advised Karl Rove, the senior White House adviser, that he would not be charged with any wrongdoing, effectively ending the nearly three-year criminal investigation that had at times focused intensely on Mr. Rove.

The decision by the prosecutor, Patrick J. Fitzgerald, announced in a letter to Mr. Rove's lawyer, Robert D. Luskin, lifted a pall that had hung over Mr. Rove who testified on five occasions to a federal grand jury about his involvement in the disclosure of an intelligence officer's identity."


It's over, folks.

[neoblues]

11. Air America Reporting Same...

Just now.

[notadmblnd]

12. They're talking about it on CSPAN

nt

[malaise]

13. According to his lawyer

Damn I can't take much more of this.

[Ioo]

15. ATTORNEY SAYS A LOT OF THINGS, He is your PR Firm..

I want to here what Fitz says

[malaise]

20. I'll wait for Fitz n/t

[The Backlash Cometh]

57. I will too.

But I feel it's like waiting to hear if my nephew-in-law made it back from his job at the Twin Towers on 9/11.

[malaise]

86. Yes it is hard

but only lunatics still trust MSM and Luskin. I'll wait for an update from Fitzgerald's website. Until then I'll chill on the subject.

[neoblues]

16. Did we really think...

we'd every lay a finger on any of the 'principals'? Even if we got an indictment, it would have been suspect whether the courts would be unbiased; depend on which judge/court was selected... Anyway, it was a nice fantasy while it lasted.

[Philosoraptor]

17. I'm not shocked or dismayed, saw it coming.

[shaniqua6392]

19. Well if Rove did not leak Plame's name

then I want Fitzy to tell us who did. Her whole career was ruined over this. Someone leaked in that White House and that is bad for America and bad for the CIA. A crime was committed and Fitzgerald has taken years and has not indicted anyone for the leak. Maybe he is not the man we thought he was.

[seaglass]

21. He DID leak her name. That's the wonderful thing about how

the law sometimes works - the bad guy gets away with it.

And it's the reason that Heaven and Hell were invented.

[jus_the_facts]

40. Yeah we're living in Hell as I type....this proves it beyond any doubt...

...once again. :nopity:

[Ioo]

22. CNN JUST SAID : Letter from Fitz to KR's Laywer was the Source

So Fitz said it?

[matcom]

25. yup. Fitz informed his attorney

5 trips to the Grand Jury. :shrug:

[joeunderdog]

27. Someone's leaking false info then...

I realize a few diaries have already talked about RedState user OhSure's comment (supposedly confirmed by good sources) that Rove is to be indicted soon, but here's a little more on the coming indictment from Dissident Voice's Joshua Frank (the link comes courtesy of Come And Take It, a community of Texas left wing bloggers):

Occasionally I get emails from Washington folks who work on the Hill claiming to possess juicy insider digs on our public servants and their corporate paymasters. I usually delete said emails, as I don't want to be responsible for propagating dirty rumors or false information that can't be corroborated. I'd rather let Judith Miller and the New York Times do that. Nonetheless, in the past 24 hours I have been contacted by three separate congressional Democrats in Washington, by email and later phone, who all say the same thing: Karl Rove is about to be indicted.

Joshua Frank also makes note of the RedState comment:

Apparently, I'm not the only one who has been leaked this information either. Over at Redstate, a right-wing Internet blog, one member who calls himself "Ohsure", also claims that " Great sources confirmed" the matter, and later added: "I not only don't do this, I have never done this. But here it is; `Karl Rove will be indicted late this, or early next week.' I'm trusting a source. So either I am made a into an overzealous horses a**, or..., I have good sources and may be more trusted to get these things right."

http://www.mydd.com/story/2005/7/6/125319/6928

This is the usual smokescreen one way or another :mad:

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

30. Please, just... stop. n/t

[KharmaTrain]

26. But...But...But...

Where's the indictment? I can hear the large DU thud already happening...all the build-up for this Fitzmas gift...and could be that Santa is about to drop a coal instead. I hoped there'd be an indictment...but I also believe Fitz has done his job with the law and justice first and partisanship second...and I'm seeing a bigger picture here.

However, I also expect this place should turn into a morgue...and those who had the highest hopes and wishes will be the most upset...looking for someone to blame...be it that the "fix was in" or Fitz being a Repugnican or a dozen conspiracy theories. Also, let the Truth Out flames reach a boil again. All a lot of angst that was needless in the first place.

From watching Fitzgerald work here in Illinois, he "squeezes up"...and his target here hasn't been Rove. Remember, his deal is to find the guy who threw the sand in the umpire's eyes. While Rove probably tried, he wasn't the one Fitz was refering to.

This case isn't over...it's just starting. There's been an indictment and a trial and Libby still stands a very good chance of being convicted here.

Today's prescription...a large chill pill.

Peace...

[matcom]

28. agree 100%

up up and away!

[seaglass]

29. Justice doesn't always happen and in this case it didn't. Rove

did leak her name, so there's a reason people are justified in being disappointed.

[KharmaTrain]

34. And You Have Facts Fitzgerald Doesn't???

You nor I sat in on that Grand Jury testimony. We haven't seen the evidence that has been collected. All we have is second-hand information or a lot of reading of Tea Leaves.

The case isn't about how leaked her name. Yes, we have evidence Rove had Plame's name...but that's not what the case has turned to. It's about who "threw the sand in the umpires eyes"...in Fitz's investigation it appears Rove either wasn't the biggest sand thrower or the sand he threw didn't create the obstruction here.

Whatever dissapointment people have is by getting ahead of a case that has proceeded slowly and is based purely on the law...not politics.

Fitzgerald has thoroughly investigated Rove...how many more times can he bring him back to testify? He couldn't find a charge that he could get a conviction on. Rule one of prosecutors is never to bring a case they can't win.

If you're disappointed its cause you took the words of others and wished for a conviction...nothing more, nothing less.

[5X]

38. Well said. n/t

[seaglass]

46. Cooper testified that Rove leaked her name to him. That is the basic

truth.

You know nothing about me so don't try to fit me into your pre-conceived notions. I don't speculate, I don't wear a tin-foil hat and I have not been involved in ANY of the excitement about who would be indicted, how many would be indicted, Fitzmas etc., I was just patiently waiting for the truth to come out.

I was disappointed when OJ was found not guilty too and I don't believe justice was served.

I'm sure you know what they say about people who ASSume.

[KharmaTrain]

48. So You Sat In The Grand Jury?

You don't speculate? Then spinning. Same difference.

Fitzgerald had kept a very tight lid on this investigation. I have seen many who have attempted to play court room lawyer/pundit. Some have developed big names here and on the blogosphere by fueling this story and have all but convicted everyone involved here cause it feels good and makes 'em popular.

Yes, Cooper finally came forward and fingered Rove, but we don't have all the pieces that would make this germain to what Fitzgerald was investigating. Remember his original mandate was to find the person who had leaked Plame's name. We will find out in Libby's trial why Rove's leak wasn't worthy of an indictment...and until then I continue to defer to Mr. Fitzgerald's judgement in this case and not those offered by others.

Yes, we sure do know what they say about the ass between you and me...and some are pissing and moaning about this plot or that "fix" that played into this decission...purely based on emotion.

Peace...

[seaglass]

102. You're neither generating good kharma nor creating peace

with your nasty-ass responses.

You responded to ME. Someone who has not played court room lawyer/pundit, has not developed a big name, has not fueled the blogosphere, has not convicted anyone about their beliefs on this case, who does not feel good about any of this, who has not pissed and moaned and who has not said ONE negative thing about Fitzgerald and his judgment.

I don't give a shit about any of that.

So next time, think before you post.


And HOW DARE YOU post responses like yours and then whine about circular firing squads on other sites.
:puke:

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

54. It the Shrub did sign an Executive Order giving Cheney and himself the

ability to declassify at will, no crime would have been committed. I think that this is the center of the whole case.

[leveymg]

72. If they failed to tell Fitz about that order, it's still OOJ for both.

Obstruction of Justice. Five years imprisonment for each count. That's a lot of leverage. Whether or not the crow bar was applied, and the end result, we still don't know.

[KittyWampus]

95. Fitz very well may have enough to indict Rove and actually DID indict Rove

but decided to not bring case to trial cause Luskin/Rove made a deal/cooperated.

[KharmaTrain]

96. Conjecture...Sorry...Play Again

I deal with hard facts in a real world...not with what could have been or I wish could be.

I've never heard of a an indictiment that wasn't an indictment. If Fitzgerald felt Rove had committed a felony that was worth prosecuting and he could win...he would have brought charges. That was/is his responsibility and showed it in bringing such an indictment down on Libby. If he didn't indict Rove it's cause he didn't have the evidence that could convince a jury that he was a principal player in this cover-up or that his role, while it may look like a crime, didn't rise to the level of beyond reasonable doubt.

If there was another deal, we'll find it out during the Libby trial. I would imagine Rove will be called to testify or that some or all of Fitzgerald's investigation of this matter will be introduced during the trial if its germain to the charges. Otherwise its time to accept reality and move along.

I wish for lots of things...doesn't make them true.

[prettykitty]

52. This case isn't over...it's just starting - lol

it's been going on for years and the big fish are getting a pass apparently... same as it ever was

[Cha]

73. SAge Advice from

the KharmaTrain..It's a bummer on so many levels but there're a lot of other fronts to fight without getting Mired down in bush's not so sharp brain.

[Coexist]

74. I don't need a chill pill - I'm too sad.

This sucks.

[Marr]

94. I agree.

I haven't had any expectations on this case from the beginning. Fitzgerald has seemed like a real professional, and if he's decided not to bring an indictment, I have to assume it's because the evidence simply isn't there.

[yasmina27]

31. So far, is the only source

for this Rove's lawyer? That's the only one I've seen and I wouldn't take his word for anything.

I'll wait for this info from someone more reliable - like Fitzy.

[Jersey Devil]

33. Well, they're saying Rove's lawyer will speak to press shortly

and if he does presumably he'll have the letter from Fitz that he's been talking about. So we should know for sure very soon whether it's confirmed or another bullshit alarm.

[Minnesota Libra]

32. Well Duh, is there anyone who didn't already know this? The..........

.....neocons/fundies won't allow there own to be indicted. Why do you all think the grand jury's finding were Sealed v Sealed?? :shrug:

[Junkdrawer]

35. Above . The . Law

This only USED to be a nation of laws.

[C_U_L8R]

36. It could be another Rove trick

to bait Fitz into saying something

Wouldn't surprise.

[Hubert Flottz]

37. Seedy Gonzales to the rescue...

I got a bad feeling the minute I heard Gonzo was on Fitz's ass about a month ago. They rig everything. They are the Mega-Mob.

[Supersedeas]

76. smells like an Alberto

[capi888]

39. Karl Rove sang loud and Clear....sealed vs sealed....

Hang in there folks, Fitz is going for the top!!! When he put that indictment sealed vs sealed, it was for pressure. ROVE, Come clean or else. He is going for the "BIG FISH"! The one that actully did the crime! Why did he put Cheney's writings on the Wilson article.out for all to see..hummmm . Disapointed about "ROVE" , YES, but it ain't over yet!!!

[Ganja Ninja]

41. Scooter is going to take the fall all by himself.

Though he may not know it yet.

[stop the bleeding]

42. Someone nominated this ?!?!?! WTF

We can only hope now for new information and new charges(conspiracy etc.) to come out of the Libby case.

This fucking blows that pig is cooperating.

[East Liberty Denizen]

43. Did they get to Fitz?

In DC, Rove would have easily been convicted following indictment, and we would be a lot closer to taking them down.

Although perhaps there is something more to the story.

[bridgit]

44. oh but no, haven't you heard...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=1406622&mesg_id=1406622

[dogday]

45. Where is the public statement

from Fitz's office... Seems to me, they need to make a statement.. To say they won't comment, does not look well either....

[bridgit]

47. i don't think that's the way this prosecutor works, he doesn't...

have to make a statement one way or the other to the press or anybody in particular, but to the court and for that matter only if & when.

he's played his entire hand close to the vest. he owes nothing to anyone here and i agree with that. he owes his certitude to the dispensing of justice in this matter, which is part of why i don't think any of his people are likely to have leaked anything from then to now regardless of what truthout alludes to. my sense all along was that whatever TO heard was not from his people but theirs...and we say routinely round here 'they cannot be trusted' so :shrug:

Fitz likely understands that these guys are nit-picky, anal retentive shit-head detail freaks from the Gitmo, and he doesn't want to go down in history as being the guy that messed up this very important case.

at least that is the way i would prefer it...do not fuck this up cause this is big

[dogday]

49. Understood, but if he has cleared Rove

Then he needs to let us know publicly... So he can put all of this to rest... They won't comment on it.. All they have to say is he has been cleared.. What is the big deal in that???

[bridgit]

56. well, like i say, it is not a clothes line so as to say, not a running...

tutorial; it is a legal matter. and i, myself, very much prefer that this momma duck get all her baby ducks in a row before she starts walking them across that street, again with the metaphor i know but there it is.

the greater let down will be if Fitz, at the end of the day...does nothing...that would be a shame. i, again myself, do not live for this news about, "is rove up, is rove down", leopold-truthout-pitt's back & feeling groovey stuff (though he needs to send me my face back, de bastid!)

i just want it all done right this time

[dogday]

59. If a letter was sent and a phone call was made

and they dragged his name through the muck with 5 Grand Jury appearances, you would think they could at least confirm that the letter was sent... I don't trust Attorneys, ever since David Westerfield, I understand that Attorneys lie and do things in their client's best interest and all the while knowing their client is guilty... That is their job.. I would just like more than Rove's Attorney's word, ya know?

[bridgit]

63. sure, that works and not just in the abstract, but Fitz shouldn't be...

placed in the position of having to release that statement to the public imo if that's what you're asking here; that letter would go to rove's guy...again, if & when. but when it does i'm sure rove's guy will crow to high heaven.

you guys just had a big ole trial down there the other day; can you believe that Lay & Skilling actually thought they were going to get off right up until the verdict was read...Scott Free!!

that's how tight i want this case. i want this thing so tight that a ghost couldn't slip his vaporous ass through one...single...crack in this case.

cause if they can they will

there may also be restrictions on the flow of information...i wouldn't mind that either if it went to maintain the integrity of this prosecution of some of the slimiest scum this nation has ever known, doesn't bother me in the least...just get them the hell out of here

[dogday]

68. I was glad to see them

get the guilty verdict here in Houston, so many people affected by this, however appeals and pardons have a way of popping up.


If Fitz's office sent a letter, then the Lawyers should show it... I need more than their word on this....


Was yesterday the last day for this Grand Jury? I thought I had heard that somewhere?

[bridgit]

71. "appeals and pardons have a way of popping up" for the wealthy...

as a routine happenstance, i wouldn't rule it out for the likes of rove, libby, cheney, bush; any of them for that matter. they are on that societal tier where pardons sprinkle down like snowflakes, darlin...

i really don't know when the last day of GJ deliberation is though, couldn't tell you

[meisje]

50. but but but some of you knobs stood with Liepold!

[Name removed]

51. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[dogday]

53. Shame on you

is that all you can do is call names and berate people?

[meisje]

67. I was labeled a cretin, I guess that's ok......

[dogday]

69. Look I have been called

many things worse than that. You just compound a difficult situation, instead of trying to help...

[DisgustedTX]

104. Once again. NBC reports

Oh my.

[bdamomma]

55. This just sucks

there is so much underhandness going on, how can this sleaze get away with it? Libby can't be the only one going down.

this just sucks, that means that this sucker will be spreading his lies during the mid term elections, :grr:

Rachel Maddow talking about this now. Michael Isakoff Newsweek reporter just finished talking about Rove.

[arwalden]

61. Are You SURE?? Maybe We Should Wait 24 BUSINESS HOURS To Be Positive.

:shrug:

[greyl]

62. Oooph! :) nt

[Seabiscuit]

98. Apparently some on DU will be willing to wait even longer than that, if

there is such a thing as "longer than 24 business hours."

[Bluebear]

100. NBC is clearly behind the news cycle!

:crazy:

[flpoljunkie]

64. "...does not anticipate seeking charges against Rove." Wiggle room, Fitz?

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/13/washington/13cnd-leak.html?hp&ex=1150257600&en=e40da3e03155858f&ei=5094&partner=homepage

In a statement, Mr. Luskin said, "On June 12, 2006, Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald formally advised us that he does not anticipate seeking charges against Karl Rove."

Mr. Fitzgerald's spokesman, Randall Samborn, said he would not comment on Mr. Rove's status.

(Perhaps this is the way it is done by prosecutors, but using the above phrase "does not anticipate seeking charges against Rove" does not seem to totally shut the door for a future indictment.)

[leveymg]

65. The ground rushes up.

I saw the news that Rove won't be indicted first thing this morning, and my initial feeling was like that of a passenger flying on board a plane that one knows hasn't received scheduled maintenance. You're shocked, but not very surprised, when the ground finally rushes up at you.

Like the rest of this saga, this chapter has been full of uncertainty and plot twists. The fact (finally we can speak of facts) that Rove wasn't indicted could either mean a tragic ending -- there won't be any more prosecutions (and BushCo gets away with it) -- or, a dramatic end -- Fitz is moving up the food chain, and Rove has sung -- or, a surprise end (a deal has been struck whereby Cheney and then Bush leave office early, or otherwise give up power, but don't go to jail). I still expect some sort of surprise ending, but that's just my take on it.

It seems some of us have learnt a bit about reality (such as about sealed cases), and one hopes a little humility. I also wish that some others would try a little compassion for those among us who have made mistakes.

- Mark

[PRETZEL]

75. leaning toward dramatic end.

I like the analagy of the possibilities. I do think there'll be more indictments but who is anyone's guess. We still don't know who initially leaked her name and the connection to WHIG in all this. I tend to think this is very important. The fact that Rove was a member of WHIG may not necessarily mean he orchestrated this. Part of the conspiracy (and I do believe there was one) was to insulate those involved in order to provide cover for each other. Where one member was the leaker the others would be confirming sources and it would go round and round from there. Novak's primary source may not have been the same as Miller's or Cooper's or Russert's but those who media people when they went to confirm the information were actually going to the same people who are ultimately involved.

Personally I think Fitz allowed Rove to clear himself (via the 5 GJ appearances) and at the same time strengthened his case against those who would have been in the position to originally obtain the fact that Ms. Plame was a NOC operative. If you want to call that a deal then it's a deal with Rove. I tend to think that Rove wasn't the main source anyway so he really was just a small fish in the big pond.

[treestar]

70. Do prosecutors commonly do this?

Tell someone they "won't be indicted?" Seems unwise - what if they unearth something later? But it's not a committment of any kind. Until the statute of limitations is up, it is always still a possibility. If they find evidence, they can't just not prosecute because they "told someone they would not be indicted."

This only means he will not be indicted in the near future. Or they are taking him up on some type of deal.

[Marie26]

83. No - unless

there's a swirl of unending rumors & stories of a Rove indictment? That might make Fitz feel compelled to out-and-out deny the allegations.

[petepillow]

77. Two Words

horse shit.

[lonestarnot]

78. Just cannot believe this, just cannot.. If he comes out of this

unscathed, our justice system is worse off than I had previously thought. We are so fucked. We will never see a dirtier son-of-a-bitch than red rover. This stinks somewhere.

[leveymg]

79. I don't think Rover is going to come out "unscathed", exactly.

While the Bush Brigade always does a good job of maintaining the outward appearance of hanging together to protect every rotten crab apple from falling to the ground, it appears that Rove lost his highly-protected perch a while ago. More like he was granted immunity from prosecution, and stinks so badly that the others have simply shuttled him over to a side office away from the President. Read Christy Hardin Smith (Redhead) over at FireDogLake this morning: http://www.firedoglake.com/2006/06/13/dodging-cipa-graymail-bulletsand-other-legal-notes/

Jeralyn has been saying all along that she thinks that Rove cut some sort of cooperation deal. I really want to see whatever wording was in (Luskin’s words) the letter from Fitzgerald before I get too far down this road on the what’s going on speculation. And I’m hoping that some enterprising reporter…cough…Murray…cough…will get the scoop on just what IS going on with all of this.

In his statement Mr. Luskin said he would not address other legal questions surrounding Mr. Fitzgerald’s decision. He added, "In deference to the pending case, we will not make any further public statements about the subject matter of the investigation. We believe that the Special Counsel’s decision should put an end to the baseless speculation about Mr. Rove’s conduct."

But it was evident that Mr. Fitzgerald’s decision followed an exhaustive inquiry into Mr. Rove’s activities that had brought the political strategist dangerously close to possible charges. In October, when Mr. Libby was indicted, people close to Mr. Rove had suggested that his involvement in the case would soon be over; speculation about Mr. Rove’s legal situation flared again in April when he made his fifth appearance before the grand jury.

Hmmm…interesting that Luskin, who has blathered about town about every hangnail that he’s ever witnessed on any person involved in this matter suddenly clams up, isn’t it? And that he mentions the ongoing investigation…and that he limits his comment on speculation to Rove and Rove alone. (Although, he is Rove’s paid attorney, so that does make sense in a "you pay my hourly rate and the other guys don’t" sort of way.) Here’s what I do know: Karl Rove has been moved out of his palatial White House digs into a smaller, windowless room across the hall. Joshua Bolten has been wielding more and more influence with Bush of late, and Rove has slunk back into the background for the moment. In DC, loss of power and influence — even if it is only the perception of it — can be a painful thing. But for Rove, the most painful thing of all would be for the Democrats to re-take Congress. Guess what I’m going to be working on for the next few months? Help me mete out a little justice in the form of a Democratic victory this fall, won’t you?

And Dick Cheney? Well, his worst nightmare is anyone finding out about what he has been doing the last five years, hence all the secrecy and the selective classification and such. Won’t his time on the witness stand be precious? And wouldn’t he just looooove a Democratically-controlled House and Senate? Oh, if ever there were incentive to work your ass off for the Democratic candidate of your choice, this is it.

SNIP

[lonestarnot]

81. Thanks leveymg. Yes maybe this will serve to unite. We shall see.

[PRETZEL]

89. her post tends me to ask this about Cheney

and how it relates to Rove. There undoubtedly is a major power struggle between the Cheney camp and the Rove/Bush camp especially as it relates to Iraq. If we go on the premise that Cheney is the key figure in this (and especially his PNAC philosophy) I tend to think he had the most to gain. Bush may well get the legacy and the historical benefit but Cheney gets the credit within the inner workings of the neo-conservative movement. If that premise is plausible and has some degree of credibility why would Cheney trust Rove to do the dirty work necessary to carry out this plan? Wouldn't Cheney entrust those he's most close to like John Bolton, Steve Hadley etc. to carry out and garner the information needed to expose Ms. Plame and Brewster-Jennings. I,for one, tend to think of this from time to time as just political payback on Ambassador Wilson at the expense of what was the true crime, the damage to Valarie Plame/Wilson and her work. That is the underlying crime that is being investigated.

[DemReadingDU]

99. makes sense to me too, thanks for you thoughts

[Avalux]

80. Rove always weasels out of trouble. Always.

And yes, we are fucked. Completely.

[lonestarnot]

82. Well not in the end, he won't.

[BooScout]

87. Ya know what...........

I am beyond giving a shit about it any more. Bush and his cronies have gotten away with it all. Fuck it all to hell.

[helderheid]

91. Just saw this in my inbox from WaPo

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/13/AR2006061300267.html

[Marie26]

93. Truthout referred to in WP article

"Speculation about Rove's fate has hung over the White House for months, fueled by repeated appearances by Rove before the Federal grand jury investigating the CIA leak.

One Website even reported without attribution that Fitzgerald had already obtained a secret indictment against Rove."

D'oh!

[Clarkie1]

103. Truthout=National Enquirerer for Political Junkies, no? n/t

[Seabiscuit]

97. OK, now I can "get over it" if you can.

Snidely lecturing me to do so before the news broke today was uncalled for.

I can't imagine that you still imagine I was ever "jealous" of anything or anyone concerning the Leopold fiasco.

End of game.

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

101. Somebody's face must be red