Editore"s Note
Tilting at Windmills

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

June 13, 2006
By: Kevin Drum

NO FROGMARCH FOR ROVE....Is this the final word on Karl Rove's involvement in the Valerie Plame case?

White House senior adviser Karl Rove has been told by Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald that he will not be charged in the CIA leak case, according to Robert Luskin, Rove's lawyer.

"In deference to the pending case, we will not make any further public statements about the subject matter of the investigation," Luskin said in a written statement Tuesday. "We believe that the special counsel's decision should put an end to the baseless speculation about Mr. Rove's conduct."

Of course, it's still possible that Rove is cooperating with Fitzgerald in some other aspect of the case, but that's baseless speculation too. Wait and see.

Kevin Drum 11:28 AM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (175)

Bookmark and Share
 
Comments

'Of course, it's still possible that Rove is cooperating with Fitzgerald in some other aspect of the case....'

If 'ifs' and 'buts' were candy and nuts, you'd all have a Merry Fitzmas.

Posted by: Patrick R. Sullivan on June 13, 2006 at 11:32 AM | PERMALINK

It will be a Blue, Blue, Fitzmass without Rove.
Yes, a Blue, Blue, Fitzmass without Rove.
No new indictments, on a Blue Fitzmass tree.

Posted by: Zarquwi Done Dead on June 13, 2006 at 11:36 AM | PERMALINK

its possible rove dropped a dime on cheney....


Posted by: thisspaceavailable on June 13, 2006 at 11:37 AM | PERMALINK

All that is left is the pardon of Libby, and all this distraction will be over. Then we can go back to attacking the Axis of Evil: Abortion, Gay Marriage, and the Death Tax!

Posted by: Freedom Phukher on June 13, 2006 at 11:39 AM | PERMALINK

This will be over when Patrick Fitzgerald says it's over, and not until then.

Posted by: JB (not John Bolton) on June 13, 2006 at 11:44 AM | PERMALINK

WASHINGTON

Top White House aide Karl Rove has been told by prosecutors he won't be charged with any crimes in the investigation into the leak of a CIA officer's identity, his lawyer said Tuesday, lifting a heavy burden from one of President Bush's most trusted advisers.

Attorney Robert Luskin said that special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald informed him of the decision on Monday, ending months of speculation about the fate of Rove, the architect of Bush's 2004 re-election now focused on stopping Democrats from capturing the House or Senate in this November's elections

Posted by: Zarquwi Done Dead on June 13, 2006 at 11:45 AM | PERMALINK

I don't see why this is such a surprise. The investigation, after all, has been pointed at the Veep's office for some time.
.

Posted by: Grand Moff Texan on June 13, 2006 at 11:45 AM | PERMALINK

It's Over.

Posted by: Patrick Fitzgerald on June 13, 2006 at 11:46 AM | PERMALINK

how much has fitzmas cost in total?....i was slobberring over the prospect of a Rove frogmarch...now my mouth is dry with disappointment...was this a waste of time, money and dashed expectations?

I give up...the repugs can have this country...no way will the dems win the house or senate in 2006 and the pres in 2008.... this is a wasteland

Posted by: neil Smith on June 13, 2006 at 11:51 AM | PERMALINK

It seems to me that if the indictment is dropped, then whatever cooperating Rove has agreed to is already done.

Posted by: Chuck on June 13, 2006 at 11:53 AM | PERMALINK

Since I am not one to enjoy the misery of others, I will make no snide remarks about the clearing of Rove. So sorry guys no Fitzmas for you. Next!!

Posted by: Chicounsel on June 13, 2006 at 11:56 AM | PERMALINK


Not in the least. If there is a deal, it could easily be contingent on testimony that he will have to provide at trial or be subject to cross examiniation as a hostile witness. It will depend on the terms of a deal, if one went down. Luskins statement tends to lead me to believe a deal was struck.

Posted by: hebisner on June 13, 2006 at 12:04 PM | PERMALINK

Neil: Last I checked, Fitzgerald's bill was pretty minimal. He and his staff are already on federal payroll, and about his only expenses are travel and I think one special grand jury. We're talking a fraction of what Starr spent over the same time period.

As for the story -- reading Luskin carefully (which is HUGELY important) it sounds like "immunity for testimony". Rove was in front of that Grand Jury a lot.

Posted by: Morat20 on June 13, 2006 at 12:04 PM | PERMALINK

As much as I'd like to see Rove commit suicide in Gitmo, I'd trade him for Cheney. Rove isn't being cleared because he's innocent, he's walking because he's got something to sell. So roll on, Fitz!

Posted by: craigie on June 13, 2006 at 12:04 PM | PERMALINK

So, now conservatives believe that a refusal to indict proves Rove's innocence.

LOL.

I guess that must mean that Clinton's and Simpson's acquitals were proof beyond a reasonable doubt of innocence, at least under conservative standards, and conservatives will quit proclaiming their guilt.

Hah!

Chicounsel: . . . the clearing of Rove.

Since Rove wasn't cleared, it would be hard to make snide remarks about it.

You are either a pathetic excuse for an attorney, in terms of competence and your understanding of the legal significance of a refusal to indict, or you are a liar.

I choose to believe the latter.

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 13, 2006 at 12:04 PM | PERMALINK

*pindrop*

Posted by: J.C. on June 13, 2006 at 12:05 PM | PERMALINK

I wish we had a quote of exactly what Luskin said (not the reaction, but how he described what he had been told by Fitzgerald) rather than a paraphrase; the White House claim goes further yet in claiming not only that Rove has been cleared but that Fitzgerald has finished his deliberations entirely.

Certainly Luskin and the White House want to create the impression that this is all over, OTOH, while I might trust Luskin to tell the literal truth about what happened, I don't trust him beyond that (including in public descriptions of what it means) to do anything but spin to make things look best for his client.

And, it almost goes without saying, I don't trust the White House at all.

Posted by: cmdicely on June 13, 2006 at 12:07 PM | PERMALINK

well, it's not like I told you so or anything....

and we can put to rest the idea that truthout or raw story have any reliability whatsoever?

Posted by: Nathan on June 13, 2006 at 12:11 PM | PERMALINK

Hmm, Let's dream....
Fitz is giving immunity to Rove, so Rove can testify against Libby. With this hanging over his head, Libby testifies against Cheney, who gets convicted, then booted.

This, of course, all happens after the November Elections. So, the Dems then impeach Bush, who eventually resigns because his mommy tells him to. So the Speaker of the House becomes the President? Hmm, Murtha?

Posted by: Lethonomia on June 13, 2006 at 12:13 PM | PERMALINK

For the record, if Rove traded immunity for cooperation against Cheney, that'd be hunky-dory with me.

It's interesting to speculate what might have motivated Rove to get into a pissing match with Cheney, and risk his wrath and that of his minions.

That said, it's been enlightening and disgusting to see the Bush Cultists celebrate this carefully-phrased announcement from Luskin. But Fitz hasn't folded his tent yet.

Posted by: Gregory on June 13, 2006 at 12:18 PM | PERMALINK

Just curious my little wingnuts, who are you guys gonna scream at when the bill comes due for all this fiscal insanity the right is heaping on us innocent citizens??????????????

Posted by: folks on June 13, 2006 at 12:18 PM | PERMALINK

have you at least put an end to the baseless speculation about Mr. Rove's conduct?

I guess OJ was innocent too.

Posted by: craigie on June 13, 2006 at 12:19 PM | PERMALINK

Looks like the illegal deletion (OOPS !) of all those White House e-mails worked.

So who does the Rosemary Woods memorial trophy get awarded to ?
.

Posted by: VJ on June 13, 2006 at 12:19 PM | PERMALINK

What's the difference between "baseless speculation" and mere "speculation?"

Posted by: Slothrop on June 13, 2006 at 12:19 PM | PERMALINK
So the Speaker of the House becomes the President? Hmm, Murtha?

Murtha has announced plans to contest for Majority Leader if the Democrats take the House, not Speaker, IIRC; best I know, there hasn't even been a strong rumor of a challenge to Pelosi for the speakership.

Posted by: cmdicely on June 13, 2006 at 12:21 PM | PERMALINK

Cheney: . . . have you at least put an end to the baseless speculation about Mr. Rove's conduct?

A refusal to indict, even assuming true and it isn't until Fitzgerald himself says so not Rove's attorney, does not make the speculation about Rove's conduct baseless.

If Fitzgerald confirms, it would make speculation about Rove's indictment baseless, but not speculation about his conduct.

So, you are lying too, just like chicounsel.

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 13, 2006 at 12:23 PM | PERMALINK

Nathan: well, it's not like I told you so or anything....

Since the highly confident prognostications you're always proffering here are wrong 19 times out of 20 (and, when proven wrong, are accompanied by an amusing dearth of acknowledgement from you), we can be forgiven for casting a skeptical eye on the 20th.

To the topic at hand, it would have been nice if Fitz had been able to indict Rove. That he did not speaks to Fitz' history of never stepping off perfectly solid, prosecutable ground rather than to the actual culpability of the person in question. Libby will be convicted. And then he may well be pardoned.

Posted by: shortstop on June 13, 2006 at 12:23 PM | PERMALINK

as long as any conviction on Bush's impeachment is after January 20, 2007, Condi is eligible to run for TWO terms after that

Of course, Charlie/Cheney/Chuckles the Clown presumes Rice would win. Barring victory, she is eleigible to run for as many terms as she likes....

Posted by: Gregory on June 13, 2006 at 12:24 PM | PERMALINK

If Leopold got burned by the source who told him that Rove had already been indicted, I would love to see Leopold burn that source right back. I don't think confidential sources who lie to you have any right to expect that confidentiality to continue. And it would be nice to know if it was Rove himself who planted that little tidbit.

Posted by: Boots Day on June 13, 2006 at 12:27 PM | PERMALINK

If Rove is still implicated but receiving immunity in exchange for testimony couldn't the Wilsons still sue the fat bastard, drag him through the courts, cost him lots of money and distract him from stealing the next election? I'd donate to that cause.

Posted by: Chrissy on June 13, 2006 at 12:28 PM | PERMALINK

And then he may well be pardoned.

Whereupon he will go on the lecture circuit, being paid $25K a time to denounce the country that allowed him to lie cheat and steal his way to a comfortable retirement.

Why is it that cowardice and treason are so close to the Republican heart? We'll have to ask Oliver North, I guess...

Posted by: craigie on June 13, 2006 at 12:43 PM | PERMALINK

As much as I'd like to see Rove commit suicide in Gitmo, I'd trade him for Cheney. Rove isn't being cleared because he's innocent, he's walking because he's got something to sell. So roll on, Fitz!

Shorter version, "The pony must be under the other pile."

Boots, Leopold didn't get "burned." He tried to burn you.

Posted by: rnc on June 13, 2006 at 12:44 PM | PERMALINK

And it would be nice to know if it was Rove himself who planted that little tidbit.

It would be fabulous to know Rove planted this story. He's got a decade of playing liberals for morons and this would merely prove he's still at the top of his game

Posted by: rdw on June 13, 2006 at 12:45 PM | PERMALINK

craigie: Why is it that cowardice and treason are so close to the Republican heart? We'll have to ask Oliver North, I guess...

Yes, and your OJ reference made me smile, as I'd just been thinking that the same people shouting that no Rove indictment proves his innocence are likely the same ones who to this day go into apoplexy when they think of Simpson's acquittal.

Posted by: shortstop on June 13, 2006 at 12:47 PM | PERMALINK

rdw: It would be fabulous to know Rove planted this story. He's got a decade of playing liberals for morons and this would merely prove he's still at the top of his game.

Praise, says rdw, to the individual who had false stories about pedophilia and child molestation planted about a political opponent.

rdw the liar worships a liar.

How revealing about rdw's moral character (or actually lack thereof), but unsurprising.

Which is probably why he lied about Strickland and DeWine too - simply a character flaw which makes his mendacity unavoidable.

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 13, 2006 at 12:51 PM | PERMALINK

shortstop opines,

To the topic at hand, it would have been nice if Fitz had been able to indict Rove. That he did not speaks to Fitz' history of never stepping off perfectly solid, prosecutable ground rather than to the actual culpability of the person in question.

Right. Also, Hillary Clinton murdered Vince Foster. The only reason she wasn't indicted is that the prosecutors wouldn't step off perfectly solid, prosecutable ground.

Posted by: GOP on June 13, 2006 at 12:51 PM | PERMALINK

Big Pharma today is celebrating the fact that only one admin official is being indicted in this Plame business, that bush's polls have "skyrocketed" to 38% & this super-secret trip to Bagdad highlights just how great things are going over there.

It's funny what passes as good news for the brownshirts.

Posted by: gmf on June 13, 2006 at 12:52 PM | PERMALINK

rdw: He's got a decade of playing liberals for morons . . .

No, he's got a decade of lying and immorality.

But rdw has him trumped, since rdw has at least a couple of decades of lying and immorality, even with respect to his own children.

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 13, 2006 at 12:52 PM | PERMALINK
Why is it that cowardice and treason are so close to the Republican heart?

Because conservatism is the ideology of using the power of the state to defend established advantage out of fear of a level playing field, of using public institutions to advance the narrow self-interest of the already powerful at the expense of the common interest.

Cowardice and betrayal -- treason, if you will - are therefore its natural fruits.

Posted by: cmdicely on June 13, 2006 at 12:52 PM | PERMALINK

One wonders, Advocate, whether rdw sees any place whatsoever for the exercise of ethics and honor in government and personal conduct, or whether his "he with the most toys wins, regardless of the means" philosophy can sustain him through any old dark night of the soul.

One wonders, but not for very long.

Posted by: shortstop on June 13, 2006 at 12:55 PM | PERMALINK

GOP: Also, Hillary Clinton murdered Vince Foster.

The only difference being, of course, that Sen. Clinton didn't murder Vince Foster, but Rove did lie.

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 13, 2006 at 12:56 PM | PERMALINK

You guys are wrong again.
Chalk up another victory for Bush and company.

Winning in Iraq, economy booming and you stupid asses moaning.
Your such schmucks.

Posted by: Chaufist on June 13, 2006 at 12:57 PM | PERMALINK

shortstop: One wonders, but not for very long.

No, because cmdicely has provided a good description of the reason rdw is as rdw is, at least in part:

"Because conservatism is the ideology of using the power of the state to defend established advantage out of fear of a level playing field, of using public institutions to advance the narrow self-interest of the already powerful at the expense of the common interest."

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 13, 2006 at 12:58 PM | PERMALINK

there hasn't even been a strong rumor of a challenge to Pelosi for the speakership.

Please, please keep Nancy at the top. She's the best possible combination of a SF Lib and an airhead. Gotta love her move of replacing Harmon as the ranking house Democrat on the House intelligence committee with Alcee.

What a brilliant move! In the Democratic party having been impeached is a good thing. So much the better he also leaked secret justice dept information. Well were else would you put an impeached leaker but on the intelligence committee?

It's just common sense!!! In San Francisco maybe.

I sure Harmon is overjoyed. Just the thing to unite the party. It's perfect timing as well just as there's a fight for the 'majority' leaders slot. That'll bring the party together even more. Civil Wars are like that!

You must know the more certain Nancy is of becoming speaker the less likely it is that it will happen!

Also gotta love WHY she's turning to Alcee. Princess pissed off the black caucus and if she doesn't want a racist charge tossed her way she better get her ass back in line. Just because William 'the freezer' Jefferson demolished her long standing culture of corruption is no excuse for forgetting your place.

Princess got her ass back in line!

Posted by: rdw on June 13, 2006 at 1:00 PM | PERMALINK

As hinted above, looks like the unindicted co-conspirator will oneday be charged and ruled against in a civil suit.

Posted by: Cassandro on June 13, 2006 at 1:02 PM | PERMALINK

Chaufist: Winning in Iraq, economy booming and you stupid asses moaning.

Well over 50% of the American people say you're wrong about the first.

The DOW's inability to hold 11,000 while remaining mired well below the high under Clinton says you are wrong about the second.

And since there appears to be no moaning by liberals in sight, you are lying about the third.

Wow.

Oh for three.

Typical performance for a Bushista.

Just like their leader.

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 13, 2006 at 1:02 PM | PERMALINK

cm

Lighten up. You just nailed why liberals keep losing. We all know you are morally superior to the rest of us. But must you rub it in our faces?

That's just not very nice. Play nice or learn how to enjoy your lofty position on the sidelines.

Posted by: rdw on June 13, 2006 at 1:04 PM | PERMALINK

Yes, and your OJ reference made me smile, as I'd just been thinking that the same people shouting that no Rove indictment proves his innocence are likely the same ones who to this day go into apoplexy when they think of Simpson's acquittal.

Yeah, that's right. The Karl Rove and O.J. Simpson cases are clearly comparable. No indictment of Rove means nothing more than no conviction of O.J.

Today's news on Rove has sent shortstop into such a tizzy of anger and frustration that she's decided to take one of her frequent excursions to Crazytown.

Posted by: GOP on June 13, 2006 at 1:04 PM | PERMALINK

rdw: We all know you are morally superior to the rest of us.

If you know that, then why are conservatives continually claiming to be morally superior to liberals and everybody else?

Oh, yeah, you are liars.

GOP: Today's news on Rove has sent shortstop into such a tizzy of anger and frustration that she's decided to take one of her frequent excursions to Crazytown.

Since your were born in and have never left Crazytown and "shortstop" is never getting there, you are going to have a long wait to see that dream fulfilled.

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 13, 2006 at 1:08 PM | PERMALINK

Shit.

Posted by: Tilli (Mojave Desert) on June 13, 2006 at 1:08 PM | PERMALINK

The only difference being, of course, that Sen. Clinton didn't murder Vince Foster, but Rove did lie.

Yeah, of course he did. And we all know how much you care about lies.

"I (thump) did (thump) not (thump) have (thump) sex with that woman, Ms Lewinsky."

Posted by: GOP on June 13, 2006 at 1:11 PM | PERMALINK

looks like the unindicted co-conspirator will oneday be charged and ruled against in a civil suit.

Civil suit on what basis. The Wilsons became immediate celebities and made a fortune. They went from faceless bureaucrats to the cover of Vanity Fair. Joe was unemployed. They're now liberal royalty.

This is one of those win/win/win stories. Scooter is making more money than he ever dreamt of and he too will be a long time fixture on the book and lecture circuit with a bright future as a lobbyists if he doesn't just stay at a think tank as he is now.

The news distracted the liberal press and the lefty bloggers but never stopped GWB from completing our transition out of Europe and into Asia and while no one was watching he completed a dozen free trade deals and a deal to supply India with all of the nuclear material it'll ever need.

No MSM outlet has reported on the 14.7% surge in unit exports in the 1st Qtr yet. The anti-globalization people are getting their heads handed to them even worse than the eco-freaks.
The biggest winner is of course Karlm the great Houdini. The legend grows.

Posted by: rdw on June 13, 2006 at 1:13 PM | PERMALINK

Yep.

What I thought.

Bottom line was always: "George declassified her".

Didn't matter if he did it before or after the leak, they can always "executive privilege" that little part.

The really painful bit is - Bush's dishonest (but technically legal) press announcement that he was going to "take care of" the leaker, when he knew damn well what was going on, served it's purpose: It got him through this problem long enough to get re-elected.

You can fool all of the people some of the time.

Posted by: Osama_Been_Forgotten on June 13, 2006 at 1:23 PM | PERMALINK

Who really cares? Does this make any difference in anyone's life?

Big deal, rove walks. Next?

Posted by: At the end of the day on June 13, 2006 at 1:26 PM | PERMALINK

If you know that, then why are conservatives continually claiming to be morally superior to liberals and everybody else?

I don't claim moral superiority. I don't claim to be especially brilliant. I think liberals are dumb. Allow me to share one of my favorite sayings. "If one is 20 and they are not a socialist they don't have a heart. If one is 30 and they're still a socialist they don't have a brain".

That about sums up my opinion of the left. We know all about the incredible bloodshed of the last century caused by socialism. We see Western Europe coming apart now. We see the UN failing every day. Fidel Castro is a turd. Yet you celebrate him. You are a turd for that.


Posted by: rdw on June 13, 2006 at 1:28 PM | PERMALINK

Because conservatism is the ideology of using the power of the state to defend established advantage out of fear of a level playing field, of using public institutions to advance the narrow self-interest of the already powerful at the expense of the common interest. Cowardice and betrayal -- treason, if you will - are therefore its natural fruits.

You liberals are really on the verge of a full-scale meltdown today, aren't you.

Next up: cmdicely will tie together his political craziness and his religious craziness and assure us that conservatism is nothing less than....the work of Satan!

Posted by: GOP on June 13, 2006 at 1:29 PM | PERMALINK

Yes!!!!!!!!! And the witch hunt is over.

Posted by: photosmart on June 13, 2006 at 1:31 PM | PERMALINK

...The Wilsons became immediate celebities and made a fortune. They went from faceless bureaucrats to the cover of Vanity Fair. Joe was unemployed. They're now liberal royalty.
Posted by: rdw on June 13, 2006 at 1:13 PM | PERMALINK

ahhh, rdw's unique delivery of the old "blame the victim" game.

Posted by: Osama_Been_Forgotten on June 13, 2006 at 1:32 PM | PERMALINK

'Advocate' posted:

"Typical performance for a Bushista."

First you have to drink the Kool-Aid, only then you will understand why the RightWingers absolutely know their right.
.

Posted by: VJ on June 13, 2006 at 1:33 PM | PERMALINK

OBF: You can fool all of the people some of the time.

You really can. Lambs to the slaughter.

Posted by: shortstop on June 13, 2006 at 1:34 PM | PERMALINK

GOP: And we all know how much you care about lies.

Again, we know how little you care for the truth.

The claim raised by yourself and your fellow conservative goons is that Rove didn't lie (that failure to indict is proof that he didn't lie), not that the lie was unimportant.

Liberals (in general) never claimed that Clinton didn't lie or that his lying was okay, but merely that it wasn't related to his performance of presidential duties and therefore not a basis for impeachment.

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 13, 2006 at 1:34 PM | PERMALINK

rdw's unique delivery of the old "blame the victim" game.

Quite right. Can you imagine the suffering in posing for that cover? And those endless book signings. Plus the agony of hiring accountants and tax lawyers so they can count and keep all that money!

Those poor, poor people!!!! The inhumanity!

Posted by: rdw on June 13, 2006 at 1:41 PM | PERMALINK

Advocate,

Well over 50% of the American people say you're wrong about the first.

Since when have you cared what most of the American people believe? One of the hallmarks of your particular brand of loony leftism is utter contempt for popular opinion, unless it happens to coincide with your own.

Posted by: GOP on June 13, 2006 at 1:42 PM | PERMALINK

Well, this morning has been a very happy one in the Rove family. Especially pleasing has been watching all my enemies crying in their cereal bowls. Better luck next time!

p.s.

Merry Fitzmas to all!

Posted by: Karl Rove on June 13, 2006 at 1:42 PM | PERMALINK

Leopold better pour fucking gasoline on the source(s) before he lights them on fire this time because he fucking owes us now or he is dead to us forever.

Posted by: MNPundit on June 13, 2006 at 1:43 PM | PERMALINK

Rep. Patrick Kennedy (D-MA) has reached a deal with prosecutors to plead guilty to a charge of driving under the influence of prescription drugs . . .

Too bad his name isn't Rush. Then he could ignore the law too.

Posted by: craigie on June 13, 2006 at 1:45 PM | PERMALINK

Liberals (in general) never claimed that Clinton didn't lie or that his lying was okay

[Guffaws of laughter]

Clinton was a victim, you see. A victim of those Big Bad Mean Republicans. He had to lie. What else could he do?

Posted by: GOP on June 13, 2006 at 1:46 PM | PERMALINK

rdw: don't claim moral superiority. I don't claim to be especially brilliant.

Yes, you do.

But given that you lie with every posting, we hardly expect you to admit it, just like you continue to refuse to admit to lying about Strickland and DeWine's standing in the polls.

That's okay, though, since everyone here is perfectly aware of your mendacious nature and none are in need your admission of the same.

Fidel Castro is a turd. Yet you celebrate him. You are a turd for that.

And you lie about what "we" celebrate.

Guess that makes you less than a turd, eh, rdw?

I mean, how low is the guy who falsely claims that someone else is a turd based on an equally mendacious claim that they support an evil dictator, especially when that same guy also has actually supported those conservative leaders who have given real, not imagined, support to evil dictators.

You supported Reagan and Bush 41 who funded Saddam and gave him international support and thereby helped Saddam with his attempted genocide against the Kurds and the mass murder of his own people.

Seems like by your own definition, only a turd (you, Reagan, and Bush 41) would support such a dicatator.

Flush yourself.

GOP: You liberals are really on the verge of a full-scale meltdown today, aren't you.

Just like the insurgency in Iraq, right?

For what, the gazillionth time.

Tell it to Dickless Cheney.

He will believe you.

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 13, 2006 at 1:47 PM | PERMALINK

Wow, the conservative posters are out in force today. About the only poster I have respect for is American Hawk, at least he shows up and posts nonsense when the issue clearly runs against him.

Your defined, in part, by what you do when your team is down. I'll stand with the Democrats and direct my energy towards helping them win, and these developments don't hurt that.

In fact, it is the conduct of this administration in particular that has gotten me more politically active than I've ever been. I've donated, changed my lifestyle to help out on the environmental front, and will help my party directly come these November elections.

In the 2 to 1 district of Cunningham, the opponent won by about 44%. Impressive gains, and nice trend heading towards falls in more competitive areas. So, keep up the gloating, and continue to raise the ire of true patriots, your victories are hallower than Bush's Gay Marriage Ban Amendment from the party of freedom.

Posted by: Boorring on June 13, 2006 at 1:51 PM | PERMALINK

If you want to engage in wild speculation, here's mine: Mr. and Mrs. Clinton willfully engaged in fraud in the Whitewater scam. Mrs. Clinton is a very smart corporate lawyer and it boggles the mind to think that she didn't know what she was doing. The two of them successfully avoided prosecution by convincing their various co-conspirators and other witnesses either to lie for them or to go to jail rather than testify truthfully against them.

Unhappily, the special prosecutor was unable to put the screws to the co-conspirators and other witnesses, and so failed utterly in proving the Clintons' guilty participation in the Whitewater fraud scheme (although he did obtain convictions of a bunch of other people for their participation).

Anyhow, that's what I believe happened. We'll never know for sure, though.

Posted by: DBL on June 13, 2006 at 1:52 PM | PERMALINK

Cheney: Every liberal I know harped about Clinton did not commit perjury (i.e. LIE under oath).

Then you should have plenty of links to back you up, even assuming for the sake of argument that "lie" and "perjury" are completely equivalent terms, instead of the latter merely being a special subset of "lie".

In other words, for your pea brain, one can lie but not commit perjury.

In fact, one can often lie under oath and not commit perjury, depending on the jurisdiction.

In any event, disclaiming perjury does not at the same time disclaim lying.

Thus, one may state that Clinton did not commit perjury and that Clinton did lie - your statement implies that a claim of one includes a claim of the other.

And that means that you are lying by saying the two terms are coextensive in their meaning.

LOL with that, since most people know the difference between the two and know that commission of a lie is not necessarily commission of perjury.

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 13, 2006 at 1:53 PM | PERMALINK

You liberals are really on the verge of a full-scale meltdown today, aren't you.

If holding malefactors in government responsible is a "liberal" trait, then I suggest that it's the so-called "conservatives" (better known as Bush Cultists) who have already melted down.

And by golly, they keep posting the evidence right here!

Posted by: Gregory on June 13, 2006 at 1:54 PM | PERMALINK

rdw pulls out the old Castro gambit again! Castro, exports, Asia, and your classic linkage of all non-wingnut governments to "socialism". Tell your programmer you need an update. Please keep defending and celebrating amoral politics. There will be a special place in hell for you

Posted by: DiscoStu on June 13, 2006 at 1:54 PM | PERMALINK

Wow, the conservative posters are out in force today. About the only poster I have respect for is American Hawk, at least he shows up and posts nonsense when the issue clearly runs against him.

Your defined, in part, by what you do when your team is down. I'll stand with the Democrats and direct my energy towards helping them win, and these developments don't hurt that.

In fact, it is the conduct of this administration in particular that has gotten me more politically active than I've ever been. I've donated, changed my lifestyle to help out on the environmental front, and will help my party directly come these November elections.

In the 2 to 1 district of Cunningham, the opponent won by about 44%. Impressive gains, and nice trend heading towards falls in more competitive areas. So, keep up the gloating, and continue to raise the ire of true patriots, your victories are hallower than Bush's Gay Marriage Ban Amendment from the party of freedom.

Posted by: Boorring on June 13, 2006 at 1:55 PM | PERMALINK

Every liberal I know harped about Clinton did not commit perjury (i.e. LIE under oath).

Dishonest as always, Charlie/Cheney/Chuckles omits that perjury must be about a material fact. Clinton's answers, however evasive, were not in regard to a material fact, and therefore not perjury.

Posted by: Gregory on June 13, 2006 at 1:56 PM | PERMALINK

Booring,

Nice moral victory for you in the CA-50. That's the kind I like. You get the moral victories we'll take the real victories. Nancy's 'Culture of Corruption' is obviously a failure no small thanks to William 'icebox' Jefferson. What next? I wonder if your moral victory has Arnold sweating? I think not! How Rob Reiner doing?

Posted by: rdw on June 13, 2006 at 1:56 PM | PERMALINK

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HAAAAAAAAAA! You sorry left wing, wack-job liberal 'intelligentsia' retards must be sooooooooo mad that Rove isn't getting "frog marched" out of town. Too bad, sooooo sad for you. It is so funny to read your reasons and 'ifs' and 'buts' because you all KNEW that Rove was guilty. You KNEW it!! It must be a conspiracy!!! Oh well, you can always go back and start your "Bush Lied, People Died" mantra to make you feel better. Or maybe get the news to talk about how the earth is melting due to Global Warming, or maybe you could burn an Ann Coulter effigy. Haaaaaa ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!!!!

Posted by: Harry Crumb on June 13, 2006 at 1:58 PM | PERMALINK

Clinton lied to my face on national TV. I would think the office of President should be above lying to the nation and a person who would do so should be impeached. But the liberals don't think so.

Now there is a rumor constantly pushed from this blog and other left leaning ones that Rove lied - no proof is given other than "sealed indictments" and rumors - and the liberals condemn him even when an indictment does not happen.

There is a group of people who are divorced from reality on the left who see exactly what they want to see. And today they have been imprisoned by their own false hopes. So sad.

When you want to join the real world, liberals, let us know. We will help you out.

Posted by: Orwell on June 13, 2006 at 1:58 PM | PERMALINK

GOP: One of the hallmarks of your particular brand of loony leftism is utter contempt for popular opinion, unless it happens to coincide with your own.

Even if that were true and you weren't lying about liberal contempt for the truth (a real hoot coming from someone who supports the biggest liar on WMDs in history), obviously the figures I gave happen to coincide with my opinion which means that I do not, under your very own claim, have utter contempt for popular opinion in this instance.

Thus, your implication in the first sentence that neither I nor liberals ever care about popular opinion is contradicted by your second sentence which says that we do when it coincides with our own opinion.

Cheney: I believe history will vindicate Bush re: Middle East.

You also believed that Saddam had "massive stockpiles of WMDs".

Your record, then, of beliefs being confirmed is not very good and you'll pardon us while we all laugh hysterically at your inanity.

DBL: Anyhow, that's what I believe happened.

Also someone who believed that Saddam had massive stockpiles of WMDs.

Pardon us while we laugh hysterically at you too.

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 13, 2006 at 2:01 PM | PERMALINK

Disco,

Fidel is a terrific prop. One of the most pathetic men of the last 90 years and a lefty hero along with his former chief executioner, Che! Are there better examples of the depravity of the left? I mean besides Arafat, Mao, Stalin, Gorbachev, etc.?

Posted by: rdw on June 13, 2006 at 2:01 PM | PERMALINK

Rep. Patrick Kennedy (D-MA) has reached a deal with prosecutors to plead guilty to a charge of driving under the influence of prescription drugs . . .
Posted by: Cheney

Do you really want to get into a laundry list of the legal problems of congressional reps? Not a smart move, even for a dumbass like dickhead.

Posted by: MeLoseBrain? on June 13, 2006 at 2:03 PM | PERMALINK

Yo, rdw, I knew exactly what I was getting into posting during the big gloat. Enjoy your victories while selling out your own citizens, you can sleep easier than I can...

Posted by: Boorring on June 13, 2006 at 2:04 PM | PERMALINK

I've searched in vain today to find a direct statement from Fitzgerald. I find a lot of reporting about what he supposedly has said to one of the parties in the investigation. I find nothing from Fitzgerald or any spokesperson.

Posted by: Piehole on June 13, 2006 at 2:05 PM | PERMALINK

Harry Crumb: Oh well, you can always go back and start your "Bush Lied, People Died" mantra to make you feel better.

It not only makes us feel better, it works!

Thanks for the unnecessary advice, sport!

rdw: Are there better examples of the depravity of the left?

Since Castro, Arafat, Mao, and Stalin aren't examples of persons the "left" has supported or made into heroes, there must be some better ones out there.

On the other hand, here are some real and true examples of people the "right" has supported:

Saddam Hussein, dictator, murderer, and torturer.

The Shah of Iran, dictator, murderer and torturer.

Noriega, drug dealer and murderer.

Rios Montt, murderer and torturer.

Pinochet, murderer and torturer.

The Taliban, murderers and torturers.

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 13, 2006 at 2:09 PM | PERMALINK

Do you really want to get into a laundry list of the legal problems of congressional reps

You've got to admit the timing is perfect with Nancy's culture of corruption campaign and all. It's funny how there's one set of rules of the Kennedy's and another for the rest of us. How are William 'icebox' Jefferson and Harry 'ringside' Reid doing? How's that culture of corruption working?

Posted by: rdw on June 13, 2006 at 2:13 PM | PERMALINK

BTW, Orwell, Rove lied!

Don't you just love blog comments...

Posted by: ecoboz on June 13, 2006 at 2:13 PM | PERMALINK

Orwell: Clinton lied to my face on national TV.

So did Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Powell, and Rice.

When will you be writing your congressional representatives demanding their impeachment?

I would think the office of President should be above lying to the nation and a person who would do so should be impeached.

No you don't or you would be demanding Bush's impeachment.

But the liberals don't think so.

Not when the lie has nothing to do with being president of the United States and that office's duties or when no one is killed, maimed, or negatively impacted economically by the action.

Yet somehow, a lie with far more important consequences that relates directly to the duties of president is overlooked by conservatives like you!

Now there is a rumor constantly pushed from this blog and other left leaning ones that Rove lied - no proof is given other than "sealed indictments" and rumors - and the liberals condemn him even when an indictment does not happen.

It's not a rumor: Rove told one or more reporters that Plame sent Wilson to Africa - that she made the decision. This was a lie. Senior CIA officials made that decision, not Plame.

Rove also lied to the grand jury.

He "corrected" that lie quickly the minute he found out there was another person who could confirm he lied.

Conservatives claim the "lie" was simply a "memory lapse".

Liberals claim the "lie" was a "lie" and he corrected the "lie" only when he found out he was going to get caught in the "lie."

Nothing about the above is rumor.

Like usual, however, conservatives like you lie about every aspect of this and other matters that impact negatively on the Bush administration.

There is a group of people who are divorced from reality . . .

And they are called "conservatives", not liberals.

When you want to join the real world, Orwell, and quit lying, let us know. We will help you out.


Posted by: Advocate for God on June 13, 2006 at 2:18 PM | PERMALINK

In general, people far to the left of folks here have supported some pretty unworthy folks. The difference is that when Mao and Stalin had their crimes revealed, they lost most of their support. Castro, where he is praised, is praised very critically. The nice list of right wing, US supported dictators above. Hell, it's been a badge of honor for the right to support thugs who kill poor people. Nice company you keep.

Posted by: DiscoStu on June 13, 2006 at 2:19 PM | PERMALINK

Advocate

Thus, your implication in the first sentence that neither I nor liberals ever care about popular opinion is contradicted by your second sentence which says that we do when it coincides with our own opinion.

Ha ha ha ha ha. Not only have you now proved that you don't even know what a sentence is, but you've also proved that you don't know what a contradiction is. A statement of the form "You believe X, except under condition Y" is neither a contradiction nor two sentences, you idiot.

This is fun. You're clearly flustered and insecure, hence your pathological need to respond to every post here that is critical of you and your fellow travelers. The meltdown is in full swing.

Posted by: GOP on June 13, 2006 at 2:19 PM | PERMALINK

Pretty sure that Harry Crumb is a 12 year old.

Posted by: ckelly on June 13, 2006 at 2:20 PM | PERMALINK

rdw: It's funny how there's one set of rules of the Kennedy's and another for the rest of us.

Yep.

The rules Kennedy followed are the rules of the law: he broke it, admitted it, and paid the consequences.

For conservatives: they break it, they refuse to admit it, and they do everything in their power including committing more crimes to avoid paying the consequences.

So, if you mean that Kennedy plays by a different set of rules than conservatives have to play by, you are right: he plays by the rules and you don't. You just lie. Constantly. Ubiquitously. Without shame. Lie.

How's that culture of corruption working?

Excellently.

Bush approval: 42%

GOP approval: 27%

Yes, working quite well.

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 13, 2006 at 2:23 PM | PERMALINK

AFG,

You're babbling. All of these people are dead and out of office in many cases due to conservatives. Fidel is alive and well and still giving 6 hour speeches. Che still adorns the chest of many a lefty moron in Europe and a few here.

Look at what is going on in Palestine. The left is done. European support for terrorism has collapsed and they're getting tired of supporting the Palestinians. Plus they just can't affort it.

Iraq and Jordan are both demanding apologies from the govt of Palestine regarding their praise of Zarqawi. Seems the people are tired of getting blown up by Al Qaeda and are outraged at the Palestinians for their praise.

Seems like ever since GWB has been President Palestinian and Al Qaeda and taliban fortunes have been in the toilet. It's funny that GWB did exactly the opposite of Clinton and the Europeans. Or is it?

Not too worry about Europe. They know they're multi-culturalism. I'm certain when the islamic minority becomes a majority they're respect European culture. Of course they will!

Posted by: rdw on June 13, 2006 at 2:23 PM | PERMALINK

Liberals make a mistake: Some reporters and bloggers are made to look goofy based on speculation on the best available evidence. Rove keeps his job. Most people unconcerned by case.

Conservatives make a mistake: Billions spent and thousands dead based on speculation on the best available evidence. American world reputation ruined. 60% of Americans unhappy with results.

Posted by: Snohomish on June 13, 2006 at 2:23 PM | PERMALINK

You're babbling.

so he's speaking your language.

Posted by: haha on June 13, 2006 at 2:44 PM | PERMALINK

For anyone that hasn't yet figured it out, GOP is the real/old Don P.

Posted by: Dismayed Liberal on June 13, 2006 at 2:45 PM | PERMALINK

You're clearly flustered and insecure, hence your pathological need to respond to every post here that is critical of you and your fellow travelers.

Wow, this might be the worst case of projection I've ever seen.

Posted by: haha on June 13, 2006 at 2:46 PM | PERMALINK

American world reputation ruined

You have it exacty backwards. The world understands America much better today. The Europeans are pissed terrorist chic is no longer chic and they're looking like fools as well as pissed over the fact the global economy has left them behind. Their per capita income is less than 70% US levels and headed rapidly to 50%.

Can you imagine that? As early as 2020 US per capita income will be double French per capita income. No wonder they're pissed. They're going to be much poorer AND they'll be praying 5x's a day. Of course they hate us. We make them look worse every day

Posted by: rdw on June 13, 2006 at 2:47 PM | PERMALINK

ha ha...your smart

Posted by: Boorring on June 13, 2006 at 2:49 PM | PERMALINK

I would think the office of President should be above lying to the nation and a person who would do so should be impeached. But the liberals don't think so.

Au contraire -- especially when the President lies to gin up support for a wasteful, destructive war that's damaging to US national security.

Posted by: Gregory on June 13, 2006 at 2:50 PM | PERMALINK

As early as 2020 US per capita income will be double French per capita income.

So the top 1% of Americans get even more rich, while the bottom 99% lose ground--meanwhile the average European continues to be much better off than the average American.

They don't hate us, they just laugh at us--especially at dumbshits like you.

Posted by: haha on June 13, 2006 at 2:51 PM | PERMALINK

I just love it. I plant a story about me being indicted, and when the opposite is revealed, my enemies implode in a blathering wisp of fart dust.

Posted by: Karl Rove on June 13, 2006 at 2:55 PM | PERMALINK

Yes, the "truth" is revealed by none other than Rove's lawyer, a proven liar.
Not even sure why this is news. I suppose the 33% of deadenders who are willing to follow Bush off a cliff need something to smile about.

Posted by: haha on June 13, 2006 at 3:00 PM | PERMALINK

ha ha...your smart

thanks, "your" smart too.

Posted by: haha on June 13, 2006 at 3:02 PM | PERMALINK

Wow, rdw sure has an anti-Europe fetish. Did a European give you the finger while you were vacationing Wooten? And what's all this nonsense about Europe being terrorist chic? You're a blithering idiot.

What's wrong? you forgot to mention the 12 free trade agreements and nuclear carte blanche to India that somehow in your twisted world makes the US stronger and Bush a genius.

Posted by: ckelly on June 13, 2006 at 3:03 PM | PERMALINK

LOL, craigie - bring it on! BTW: have you at least put an end to the baseless speculation about Mr. Rove's conduct?
Posted by: Cheney on June 13, 2006 at 12:11 PM

I didn't get a ticket on the way to work today I guess that proves I wasn't speeding.

Posted by: bushburner on June 13, 2006 at 3:03 PM | PERMALINK

"It's not a rumor: Rove told one or more reporters that Plame sent Wilson to Africa - that she made the decision. This was a lie. Senior CIA officials made that decision, not Plame."

One or more reporters? That sentence itself would define the word "rumor" oh Gregory the Wise. We know that reporters never report rumors, don't we?

Oh and the fact that Clinton cared more about the action going on under the desk than trying to dismantle Al Queda when it hit us in Yemen and the first Twin Tower bombing - we know those lives weren't his fault right? Or how about Serbian and Ruwanda?
Please spare me the babbling, every decision the President makes impacts thousands if not millions of lives. Every politician before the war in Iraq said the same thing President Bush said; so they all lied? Conspiracies are fun to imagine aren't they?

Like I said, join us in reality when you are ready. Rove walks and all the "indictment" junk you been pushin' has been hauled away to the land fill.

Posted by: Orwell on June 13, 2006 at 3:04 PM | PERMALINK

GOP: A statement of the form "You believe X, except under condition Y" is neither a contradiction nor two sentences, you idiot.

GOP posted the following:

Since when have you cared what most of the American people believe? One of the hallmarks of your particular brand of loony leftism is utter contempt for popular opinion, unless it happens to coincide with your own.

Two sentences. One a rhetorical question.

GOP even lies about his own postings.

Talk about a meltdown.

Again, when you are tired of lying, even about your own postings, please, please reach out to us for help.

rdw: AFG, [y]ou're babbling.

Sure.

You're lying and have lied continuously in these threads.

About a host of things, including Strickland and DeWine.

Snooze.

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 13, 2006 at 3:11 PM | PERMALINK

Props to Orwell. His post was a strawman stuffed with an extra creamy hypocrisy filling wrapped in a yummy Republican talking point smothered with lies.

Who's hungry?

Posted by: ckelly on June 13, 2006 at 3:16 PM | PERMALINK

"Did you have any knowledge or did you leak the name of the CIA agent to the press?"

Karl Rove:......"No."

- ABC Sept. 29, 2003

Posted by: thisspaceavailable on June 13, 2006 at 3:21 PM | PERMALINK

Have a Fitzmas sandwhich ckelly. It will fill you up.

Oh no, now the moonbats are calling us liars! What shall we do?

Strawman! Strawman! The charges just pain me so much.

Rove. Free. check please.

Posted by: Orwell on June 13, 2006 at 3:23 PM | PERMALINK


rove's answer was a lie

Posted by: thisspaceavailable on June 13, 2006 at 3:23 PM | PERMALINK

Have a Fiztmas sandwhich ckelly. It will fill you up.

Rove. Free. check please.

Posted by: Orwell on June 13, 2006 at 3:24 PM | PERMALINK


orwell: I would think the office of President should be above lying to the nation and a person who would do so should be impeached.


here's two lies...


"We found the weapons of mass destruction.." Bush, Interview in Poland, 5/29/03


"Any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires -- a wiretap requires a court order. Nothing has changed, by the way." - GWB 4/20/2004

Posted by: thisspaceavailable on June 13, 2006 at 3:27 PM | PERMALINK

Or[un]well: One or more reporters? That sentence itself would define the word "rumor" oh Gregory the Wise.

I said that, not Gregory.

Try to keep up, Dumbwell.

BTW, Rove said it to the reporters. The reporters reported the matter as first hand knowledge, personal knowledge of Rove's statement. A rumor is reporting second hand knowledge or that someone said that Rove said.

Get a dictionary.

Then, get a brain so you can understand the words in the dictionary.

rdw: All of these people are dead . . .

When exactly did Saddam die, rdw?

We're all curious, because you'd think that would be all over the news!

And Noriega is alive too.

As are many Taliban.

Hmmmmm.

You seem to be lying even more than usual today.

BTW, do you think that the conservative removal of Saddam, Noriega, and the Taliban (in part) makes up for all the murders and torturing that went on during their rule with conservative financial and political support and assistance?

If so, then you truly are the moral equivalent of the Islamic fanatics.

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 13, 2006 at 3:28 PM | PERMALINK

It should be obvious by now it is not what you do that matters to conservatives, only what you can't get away with doing. A short time ago I would mistakenly believed it was 'what you can do without getting caught' but Rush et. al changed that.

Posted by: bushburner on June 13, 2006 at 3:31 PM | PERMALINK

It should be obvious by now it is not what you do that matters to conservatives, only what you can't get away with doing. A short time ago I would mistakenly believed it was 'what you can do without getting caught' but Rush et. al changed that.

Posted by: bushburner on June 13, 2006 at 3:33 PM | PERMALINK

Orwell: Oh no, now the moonbats are calling us liars! What shall we do?

Lie again by denying it, of course.

And suffer the public consequences, just like Bush has.

Clinton: lowest second term approval rating = 53%.

Bush: currently 42% or lower and has been mired their for months, nearly reaching Carter and Nixon territory.

Rove. Tarnished.

Bush. Tarnished.

GOP. Tarnished.

Conservatism. Tarnished.

WMDs. Nowhere to be found.

Game, set, and match.

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 13, 2006 at 3:44 PM | PERMALINK

Orwell: Oh no, now the moonbats are calling us liars! What shall we do?

Lie again by denying it, of course.

And suffer the public consequences, just like Bush has.

Clinton: lowest second term approval rating = 53%.

Bush: currently 42% or lower and has been mired their for months, nearly reaching Carter and Nixon territory.

Rove. Tarnished.

Bush. Tarnished.

GOP. Tarnished.

Conservatism. Tarnished.

WMDs. Nowhere to be found.

Game, set, and match.

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 13, 2006 at 3:47 PM | PERMALINK

AFG

Bush. Still President. Poll numbers rising.

GOP. Congress, Senate, Supreme Court. Will be in 2007

WMD. Chemical weapons did exist - according to Clinton. Iran is next.

Conservatism. News of its death is premature. Keep the dream alive.

Rove. Free and forming new strategy. Look out.

Liberalism. Failures abound. Howard Dean. Nuff said.

Oh and one more thing - Karl Rove is not under indictment, did I mention that all ready?

Posted by: Orwell on June 13, 2006 at 3:58 PM | PERMALINK

Advocate,

Two sentences. One a rhetorical question.

You only quoted one sentence. You then claimed it was two sentences and that it contradicted itself.

Keep melting.

Posted by: GOP on June 13, 2006 at 4:02 PM | PERMALINK

Jason Leopold was just on the Ed Schultz show. I typed what he said as fast as I could. Bottom line: He's not backing off his story... yet. Most convincing argument: Fitzgerald has made no announcement that this Grand Jury term -- in which Rove was the key target -- is over.

Posted by: PW on June 13, 2006 at 4:04 PM | PERMALINK

Josh Marshall: The question going back three years ago now is whether Karl Rove knowingly participated in leaking the identity of a covert CIA operative for the purpose of discrediting a political opponent who was revealing information about the White House's use of intelligence in the lead-up to the Iraq War.

That was the issue. From the beginning, Rove, through Scott McClellan, denied that he did any of that. There weren't even any clever circumlocutions. He just lied. From admissions from Rove, filings in the Libby case, and uncontradicted reportage, we know as clearly as we ever can that Rove did do each of those things.

Orwell (rdw): Bush. Still President. Poll numbers rising.

You can't disguise your mendacity about Strickland and Orwell by changing monikers, rdw.

Rasmussen says you are wrong about poll numbers rising, but since when have you ever told the truth!

Chemical weapons did exist . . .

So did Nazi Germany.

Just not in 2000-2003.

Conservatism. News of its death is premature.

Nope. Its postmature. Conservatism died a long time ago, to be replaced by the GOP and the modern wingnut.

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 13, 2006 at 4:06 PM | PERMALINK
Bush. Still President. Poll numbers rising.

with the Bush Index near a whopping 1.5 points above its all time low of 33.4, that's hardly something to brag about.

Posted by: cmdicely on June 13, 2006 at 4:09 PM | PERMALINK

AFG, ckelly, and Gregory - since you are all the same person;

President Bush went to Iraq, Think it is safe over there? Or is the president braver than he looks? Not a good answer for you either way.

PRESIDENT Bush should have waited so that the Rove release would take over the news of the day. (Did I mention he is still the President?)

If only the puppet master Rove would have thought it through.

It really stinks to see your conspiracy fall apart doesn't it? Reminds you of how small you are and how little control you have over worldly events.

I feel your pain.

Posted by: Orwell on June 13, 2006 at 4:20 PM | PERMALINK

rdw is a different person than last night. Last night's rdw was goofy and sex-obsessed. Today's is vengeful and sharper tongued. The great flood of troll posts in the eastern AM is evidence of something orchestrated by the right, because Kevin's Truthout post from last night was barely touched by the trolls. Or maybe its just a spontaneous Brownshirt thing.

Posted by: troglodyte on June 13, 2006 at 4:26 PM | PERMALINK

I wont waste time reading all these posts in this thread, but the first dozen or so are curiously tone-deaf about the comments of most on this blog. Most posters have been skeptical of the truthout story, though everyone would have loved to see Rove pay his debt to society. Yet this morning the trolls all claim that we have been baying for blood and hanging in desperate hope that truthout was right. It really does sound like that orchestrated Rovian head-fake that many of us speculated about last night. Sorry trolls, not many fell for it, despite what you say.

Posted by: troglodyte on June 13, 2006 at 4:31 PM | PERMALINK

troglodyte,

Oh comeo on, is it so hard to just admit that I gotcha?

Posted by: Karl Rove on June 13, 2006 at 4:35 PM | PERMALINK

If what Luskin says this document says/means is true, why hasn't he shown/published it for all to see? Luskin has a track record of spinning things significantly for this client since he was hired and so taking what he says Fitzgerald said at face value with no corroboration from any other source is going farther out on the limb than there is room for.

For one thing Rove may well have cut a significant deal to avoid criminal charges against himself. We do not know whether this is true or not, something that if Luskin had published this clearance letter he trumpets so loudly proves his client's innocence we could be able to discern.

The only person that has any credibility as to what Fitzgerald is going to do is Fitzgerald himself. Indeed Luskin understands this which is why he is saying this is what Fitzgerald said, but in his refusal to actually show the letter Fitzgerald sent him on this matter Luskin may yet again be misleading in what the contents of this letter really are. We simply do not know.

What is most important is to find out who leaked the identity of a clearly covert operative, was it for political retribution against her husband who had become a prominent critic of the rationale for the Iraq war, especially regarding the nuclear case. If Rove cut a deal to expose that then he has to testify to that fact in a trial down the road and while he may avoid criminal sanction by doing so I somehow doubt he will avoid political sanction for it. At this point this is being made far more of than it is worth, especially by the Trolletariat. Not that this is any shock seeing as making far more out of things is a core requirement of membership in the Trolletariat be it positive for their side or negative against their opponents.

Posted by: Scotian on June 13, 2006 at 4:38 PM | PERMALINK

Ciao Karl,

Still monitoring Kevin's blog, I see. Time on your hands these days! How did that job overseeing the New Orleans reconstruction work out?

Posted by: troglodyte on June 13, 2006 at 4:59 PM | PERMALINK

I don't see how people can't tell the difference between lying about what isn't a crime and lying to cover up a serious crime. Yes the former was morally reprehensible, and Clinton got his just desserts and appropiate punishment. But the appropiate punishment for lying to cover up a serious crime is jail. If Rove is not cooperating, then, if this story is true, it is surely a travesty and joke.

Posted by: bblog on June 13, 2006 at 4:59 PM | PERMALINK

with the Bush Index near a whopping 1.5 points above its all time low of 33.4, that's hardly something to brag about.

True. Still, the guys you put up against him seem to be doing even worse.

From a New York Times/CBS News poll reported in the New York Times on May 10:

"The political situation has not helped some of the more prominent members of the Democratic Party. Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts, who was Mr. Bush's opponent in 2004, had a lower approval rating than Mr. Bush: 26 percent, down from 40 percent in a poll conducted right after the election. And just 28 percent said they had a favorable view of Al Gore, one of Mr. Bush's more vocal critics."

Talk about An Inconvenient Truth.


Posted by: GOP on June 13, 2006 at 5:02 PM | PERMALINK

GOP: You only quoted one sentence.

Not too good at grammar, eh, GOP.

A question is a sentence.

Two end of sentence punctuation marks: a period and a question mark. Two sentences.

Keep on proving your stupidity and dishonesty.

And we'll keep on laughing at your buffoon-like attempts to extricate yourself from your lies about your own postings!

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 13, 2006 at 5:44 PM | PERMALINK

Advocate,

Two end of sentence punctuation marks: a period and a question mark. Two sentences.

Your quote: "One of the hallmarks of your particular brand of loony leftism is utter contempt for popular opinion, unless it happens to coincide with your own."

One period. No question mark. One sentence.

And we'll keep on laughing

I'm laughing at you now.

Posted by: GOP on June 13, 2006 at 5:50 PM | PERMALINK

Orsmell: President Bush went to Iraq, Think it is safe over there? Or is the president braver than he looks?

Since no one has said that every corner of Iraq is unsafe, which is a necessary but false predicate to your conclusion, there is no contradiction: the president is a coward and Iraq is unsafe can both be true.

Thus, you lie.

Again.

Like you did with Strickland and DeWine.

But ask the dozens of people dying each week in Iraq just how safe it is.

I guess it helps to have a phalanx of marines clear out a zone of safety before you land.

Now, when Bush actually picks up a gun and goes into battle, with the same lack of body armor and troop support he has forced on our service men and women, then you can call him brave.

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 13, 2006 at 5:53 PM | PERMALINK

"It really stinks to see your conspiracy fall apart doesn't it? Reminds you of how small you are and how little control you have over worldly events."

Orwell - As if somehow George W. and Dick C. have control over world events... What if you/we are being played ? That this whole jihadi/terrorist/muslim dust-up is just small time theatre for small time despots and their fierce minions. I just can't imagine that Vladimir Putin is losing sleep over Americas's next (Iran) blunder on the world stage. This whole middle east fiasco is small time... a tempest in a tea cup... There are people out there watching and waiting - bideing their time while this cowboy fool from Texas swaggers around as if somehow he's in charge. They must laugh themselves to sleep every night...

Posted by: Tank Man on June 13, 2006 at 5:59 PM | PERMALINK

AFG not only passes off lies and rumors as established truth, AFG stabs in the dark about my real identity.

It's me Tbroz.
No it's me GOP.
No it's me the flip side of shortstop.

Typical liberal; make an assertion about something you have no clue what you are talking about and claim the other guy is lying.
Keep being confidently clueless while the rest of us keep the country running. We only need your opinion for a good show.

Rove is still off the hook and do you think he might be driven to try and crush the opposition now that he is free? I think so.

Get ready for another conservative wave.

Posted by: Orwell on June 13, 2006 at 5:59 PM | PERMALINK

No really Tank Man, the smoking man is running everything.

None of us have control of world events and we create this lame conspiracy theories to make us feel like we are "in the know."

Those who have spent all their energy on hopes that this conspiracy theory of the Bush Administration would fall because of Rowe now have to make up another theory.

It just stinks to see all your mental energy go to waste only to be reminded that you are powerless. Just trying to help the libs start their road to mental recovery.

Posted by: Orwell on June 13, 2006 at 6:03 PM | PERMALINK

GOP: One period. No question mark. One sentence.

Now you are simply and forthrightly lying about what I posted.

Oh, well, par for your play.

Posted by Advocate for God at 3:11 PM:

Since when have you cared what most of the American people believe? One of the hallmarks of your particular brand of loony leftism is utter contempt for popular opinion, unless it happens to coincide with your own. [Quoting GOP]

Two sentences. One a rhetorical question.

Yep. AFG quoted two sentences by GOP.

Then, GOP lied about it.

I never claimed in the 2:01 posting that I was restricting my comments to the quoted passage, but clearly indicated I was commenting on your entire post (by describing the first sentence), of which the quoted part was only a portion.

This type of argument is typical of conservatives, however, just like they changed the context of intel in order to concoct a case for WMDs in Iraq - cooked the book on WMDs and cooked the book on my comments above.

Bravo for your consistency!

Consistent mendacity that is!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 13, 2006 at 6:06 PM | PERMALINK

...just 28 percent said they had a favorable view of Al Gore, one of Mr. Bush's more vocal critics."

We could also look at this Fox News Poll that tracks a Gore v. McCain match-up (I'm assuming that the 22nd Ammendment is still in place in '08). Over the course of the last 8 months McCain has lost 9 points, Gore has gained 7, and unsure has increased by 3. Gore's not doing to bad for a guy who isn't campaigning:



5/16-18/06
McCain
48%

Gore
36%

Other/Unsure
17%


3/14-15/06
McCain
52%

Gore
34%

Other/Unsure
14%


9/27-28/05
McCain
57%

Gore
29%

Other/Unsure
14%


Posted by: cyntax on June 13, 2006 at 6:06 PM | PERMALINK

Al Qaeda identified a Saudi militant, who was killed in 2004, as the 20th hijacker in the September 11, 2001, attack on the United States . . .

Gee, another Saudi, and still no Iraqis.

Bush lied, soldiers died, civilians died, children died, women died, freedom died, honor died, integrity died . . . .

. . . conservatism died.

Well, at least we got one positive thing out of it.

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 13, 2006 at 6:08 PM | PERMALINK

GOP: I'm laughing at you now.

Must be the hysterical laughter of someone caught by their own lies!

:-)

I LOVE IT!

Orwell: It just stinks to see all your mental energy go to waste only to be reminded that you are powerless.

So powerless we've reduced the presidents approval by 50 points!

I LOVE IT!

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 13, 2006 at 6:12 PM | PERMALINK

Get ready for another conservative wave.

I'm still waiting for ANY conservative anything from this admin of Bozos. Any conservatism out there? Hello? I'd take any conservatism at all over what we've had the last 5 years.

Posted by: ckelly on June 13, 2006 at 6:13 PM | PERMALINK

"It just stinks to see all your mental energy go to waste only to be reminded that you are powerless. Just trying to help the libs start their road to mental recovery."

Orwell - Your shit rings just as hollow as you imagine theirs does....

Posted by: Tank Man on June 13, 2006 at 6:24 PM | PERMALINK
Still, the guys you put up against him seem to be doing even worse.

So what?

Midterm elections aren't generally seen as a referendum on the candidate that failed to win the previous Presidential election. Nor is Kerry the visible leader of the Democratic Party.

Kerry's national approval rating means absolutely nothing.

Talk about An Inconvenient Truth.

I think you need to learn the difference between "Inconvenient" and "Irrelevant".

Posted by: cmdicely on June 13, 2006 at 6:33 PM | PERMALINK

True. Still, the guys you put up against him seem to be doing even worse.

Oh, so that's why Repubs like Der Arnold want Bush to campaign with him, right? LOL!

Same old doh-dee-doh-doh-doh around here, I see.

Personally, I don't give a hoot how Bush ranks against Dem 2008 presidential candidates. I care about how Bushwacko drags congressional Repubs down. Seems to be working since Dems lead Repubs by 12 points for the House (June 6-11, 2006, USAToday/Gallup).

It'll be nice for Dems to have subpoena power again. Right, Cheney? ; )

You trolls have fun with your usual hazing. Hint: We don't want to join your brat of frat house. Too busy working on taking back the House. Buh-bye.

AFG: Not too good at grammar, eh, GOP. ...A question is a sentence.

AFG,
Hope you don't get whiplash from the Pissypant Squad's deflections, projections, and/or apparent stupidity. Blatant dishonesty is an attribute most Americans have come to expect from the Right.

Do they have smart, moral College Repubs, e.g., members of the Trolletariat, anymore? I guess family values flew out the door when Bush-Cheney-Rove ascended to the throne and set the tone for "[dis]honor and [in]decency." Just another broken promise in the era of Republicanism. Today, the CRs are just dumb and mean. Reading this thread is like watching Dumb and Dumber with a sequel, Mean and Meaner.

Scotian,
I want to read Fitz's letter...see if he congratulated Rove for his cooperation, a smart move to save his skin under the pressure of the sealed indictment. No love lost for Cheney in the Bushie WH. Bush needs his Brain, but Cheney? Who needs him? I hope Fitz wraps up his investigation in time to hit the midterms. We're gonna party like its 1994!

ckelly: I'd take any conservatism at all over what we've had the last 5 years.

Me, too. Not a conservative in sight. I want Guilani to run in '08 just to watch him either make a HUGE flip-flop or see if Dobson's head will spin off.

Time to return to the work of taking back the House.

I love it!

Posted by: Apollo 13 on June 13, 2006 at 6:45 PM | PERMALINK

cmdicely,

So what?

So, the guys you put up against Bush seem to be doing even worse.

Midterm elections aren't generally seen as a referendum on the candidate that failed to win the previous Presidential election. Nor is Kerry the visible leader of the Democratic Party.

I wasn't talking about midterm elections. I was talking about the approval ratings of the two most recent Democratic candidates for president, both of whom ran against Bush and lost, and both of whom now (or at least, as of last month) have lower approval ratings than Bush.

Kerry's national approval rating means absolutely nothing.

Nonsense. It means, amoung other things, that Kerry's approval rating is lower than Bush's.

Posted by: GOP on June 13, 2006 at 6:45 PM | PERMALINK

The only thing that appears to have saved Rove from his just desserts is the fact that his own personal loyalty is less than the sum total of his integrity and his rampant megalomania. He traded responsibility for actions by dishing dirt on his co-workers. Hooray for that. Thus is it true that he was not exhonerated but rather cast off the last thread of decency that may have bound him to erstwhile "friends." It is the same disgraceful behavior that allowed Rove to live with himself after shirking his draft obligations as a part time student with a full time deferrment. Amorality is not what the GOP claims to represent, yet that is the image they project everywhere. Truly sad.
OOoooo. Fox News polls. When Americans stand together and repudiate the sleeze and malfeasance that is Karl Rove, we may have a chance in Hell of recovering our national prestige. Eventually. Maybe. The orchestrated rantings of a few multi-named trolls trumpeting the good news of the cackling Henchman escaping jail for treason and other felonious acts that imperil all of our collective security is truly sad. The current partisanship reminds me of the sectionalism that brought us low with Bush's Great Great Grandfather. But it is impossible for good people to not oppose the treachery and evil that the GOP leadership has become--much like the Yankee reluctantly leaving his farm to fight an ideological battle to the death without much chance of personal advancement or survival. If this nations stands for anything, it must be justice and equality; with career paths fairly compensated. Currently, it is enslaved by the lazy, greedy and unenlightened--of which Rove is surely the prime exemplar. Since he dodged the draft while not actually completing school, he stands in defiant triumph to cronyism, incompetence, and institutional decadence. Hooray indeed. Maybe he can channel Nero.

Posted by: Sparko on June 13, 2006 at 6:48 PM | PERMALINK

Advocate,

Now you are simply and forthrightly lying about what I posted.

No, I'm not. It's right there in your post of 2:01pm. You quoted only one sentence of mine, and then hilariously claimed that it is two sentences and that it is a contradiction. And now you're lying about what you posted.

Oh well. It's all part of your on-going meltdown today. That news about Rove really set you off, didn't it.

Posted by: GOP on June 13, 2006 at 6:50 PM | PERMALINK

'DBL' posted:

"If you want to engage in wild speculation, here's mine: Mr. and Mrs. Clinton willfully engaged in fraud in the Whitewater scam."

Except they made an investment (by signing on to a $200,00 bank loan) and LOST MONEY ($42,000).

.

"Mrs. Clinton is a very smart corporate lawyer and it boggles the mind to think that she didn't know what she was doing."

She knew EXACTLY what she was doing. Nobody, let alone the Clintons, ever argued that she committed a crime but didn't realize it.

.

"The two of them successfully avoided prosecution"

Because there was no crime to prosecute.

.

"by convincing their various co-conspirators and other witnesses either to lie for them or to go to jail rather than testify truthfully against them."

The evidence is just the opposite. Starr is the one who coerced witnesses to lie to the court.

.

"Unhappily, the special prosecutor was unable to put the screws to the co-conspirators and other witnesses, and so failed utterly in proving the Clintons' guilty participation in the Whitewater fraud scheme (although he did obtain convictions of a bunch of other people for their participation)."

Untrue.

Others were convicted, but for events unrelated to "Whitewater".

You really should read the extensive Pillsbury Report if you're at all interested in the facts.
.

Posted by: VJ on June 13, 2006 at 7:33 PM | PERMALINK

'Orwell' posted:

"Oh and the fact that Clinton cared more about the action going on under the desk than trying to dismantle Al Queda when it hit us in Yemen and the first Twin Tower bombing"

Oh REALLY ?

Then why is it that President Clinton was able to hunt down, capture, return to America, place on trial, and imprison those that committed the "first Twin Tower bombing", yet the Boy Emperor Clown Criminal is unable to do the same with those that committed the 9/11 attacks ?

It was President Clinton who sent a team to pluck the mastermind of the first World Trade Center attack, Ramzi Yousef, out of Pakistan and return him to the U.S. for trial. He is serving a 240-year prison term, plus another life sentence just in case, all to be spent in solitary confinement. The 5 co-conspirators involved in the bombing were also captured by the Clinton administration, and all are also serving life prison terms.

As to "Al Queda when it hit us in Yemen", in an agreement made with the Clinton administration, the 6 men involved were all in a Yemen prison since that time, UNTIL they escaped during this administration last year.

The Boy Emperor Clown Criminal had Osam bin Laden, Mullah Omar, and the thousands of al-Qaeda Special Forces who attacked us on his watch surrounded at Tora Bora, but his incompetence allowed them to escape, so the Bushies cooked up the distraction of illegally invading Iraq, and they STILL can't find them.

Incompetent BOOBS.
.

Posted by: VJ on June 13, 2006 at 7:38 PM | PERMALINK
I wasn't talking about midterm elections. I was talking about the approval ratings of the two most recent Democratic candidates for president, both of whom ran against Bush and lost, and both of whom now (or at least, as of last month) have lower approval ratings than Bush.

Maybe you had trouble understanding, but I got that and was saying "So what?"

The "approval rating" of past national candidates who haven't been running the country is meaningless to anything of significance.

But if you need them for a security blanket to feel better about Bush's ratings, which are miserable for an actual serving President, go right ahead and keep chanting about them to yourself.

Posted by: cmdicely on June 13, 2006 at 7:44 PM | PERMALINK

Rasmussen ran a poll on May 15 concluding that Kerry would beat Bush by 7 points if the election were held today. Kerry's popularity is not exactly awe-inspiring, but Bush's is lower:

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/2006/May%20Dailies/Bush%20Kerry.htm

Posted by: Bruce Moomaw on June 13, 2006 at 9:04 PM | PERMALINK

WTF?

Is it going to take a silver bullet and a wooden stake through his black fucking heart to take this scum-sucking viper down?

Posted by: angryspittle on June 13, 2006 at 9:24 PM | PERMALINK

A possibility I haven't seen mentioned.
Isn't possible that Bush gave Rove a premtatory "pardon" under some secret clause of one of the unpatriot acts?

This would explain why no one has seen anything in writing and why Fitzgerald can't comment on it.

Posted by: Ken on June 13, 2006 at 9:31 PM | PERMALINK

cmdicely,

Maybe you had trouble understanding, but I got that and was saying "So what?"

I told you so what. So, the guys you put up against Bush seem to be doing even worse.

The "approval rating" of past national candidates who haven't been running the country is meaningless to anything of significance.

Nonsense. Not only does it suggest that the American people still believe they made the right choice in rejecting Gore and Kerry in favor of Bush, and not only does it suggest that both Gore and Kerry have little chance of being elected should either of them run for president again, but it also suggests a profound dissatisfaction with the Democrat opposition more broadly. If Bush's legacy as president had been even remotely as bad for the country as ranting liberals like you claim it is, the Democrats would be on a roll. Instead, they're struggling just to try and regain the Senate at the next election cycle.

Posted by: GOP on June 13, 2006 at 9:54 PM | PERMALINK

Man, don't you people have jobs?!?

Posted by: Boorring on June 13, 2006 at 10:59 PM | PERMALINK

Sadly, this is their job. Welcome to the new economy. Evil is a service job for rent.

Anyway, Rove was given four extra chances to correct his story--it now appears that the prosecutor we held in such esteem was part of the fix. Too bad. He has cast his lot with insanity it appears, and in a fell swoop went from hero to goat. It shows you how rare real courage is--most people will yield to the dictates of their job or to the allure of power and money. The real heroes answer only to themselves, suffer immensely, and make a difference they rarely get to enjoy. Fitzie was no William Wallace--more like Grommet's Wallace. And as this thing dragged on interminably, I think most of us knew that it would end up this way. For every Olbermann, there are 10,000 Hannitys. For every Shortstop or Stefan, there are Al-Bots autoposting thousands of times. It is the way of the world, because there are never enough courageous people. How many have died in our vanity and name in Iraq? For every one of those fine soldiers, there are 10,000 Karl Roves looking for an easy way to cheat someone.

I think what is so depressing is that these people operate outside of the law and are still getting away with it. How can we ask for civility when there is separate justice? The separation of powers has come to mean separation of the rich and powerful from prosecution and the common people. Things had better start turning around quickly, or there will be one of those Marie Antoinette type mass-epiphany problems. People are really, really, really unhappy right now. Paid shills and morons aside, the people who care about the country are heart-sick--from all parties and persuasions. America at its best was never so partisan post-Civil War as it is now. It is as if Adams and Jefferson's squabbles were writ large on a Superpower. The we of 1866 has broken down again to us and them. I just wish commity and clarity would return to the MSM--and maybe with it to our politics. But the wars and rumors of war engulf us: Gays and Zarqawi, flags and illegals, and even Canada is losing its mind.

Posted by: Sparko on June 13, 2006 at 11:55 PM | PERMALINK

The conservative posters here have claimed the moral right, then when direct quotes from their fearless leader showed them lying (WMDs, Rove denials), they simply claimed "no indictment, we win." You guys claim to be the morally right party, the "family values" club. When is lying a family value? And when isn't admitting your mistakes a family value? You guys spit out insults and victory dances, while our constitution and open government crumble. Sure guys, call me a pussy whiner, its what your good at. I'll check in for your "I told you so" when the Bush house of cards collapses, somehow it'll be my fault.

As for the Wilsons profiting from the shameful outing, until someone asks them whether they prefer it this way and they say yes, I'll assume they still feel betrayed by their government. rdw, money is not everything, your assumptions that they prefer it this way are self-serving. Oh, wait, your a right-winger, money is everything.

Posted by: Captain on June 14, 2006 at 12:53 AM | PERMALINK

Last night before retiring, I read what Rove said about Democrats in a speech at a New Hampshire fundraising dinner earlier in the evening, and wrote this. But it failed to quiet my fury, which spurred this revelation. I couldn't sleep until I wrote it all down.

Then I really couldn't sleep.

Imagine my surprise (shock) when I heard the news today. All that was left to write was this.

Prescient, maybe. It's happened before, but I think it comes more from my cynical distrust of people. Republican people.

I saw this coming about a month ago.

Unlike many in the left blogosphere, I've never been enamored of Pat Fitzgerald. And in this time where we can't even get Democrats to act like menches and represent the people's interests, I certainly don't expect it from a Republican prosecutor in Al Gonzalez' DOJ.

Lillian Hellman, in bed with Dashiell Hammett: "Dash, do I keep you from writing?" Hammett replies: "Sleeping, Lilly. You keep me from sleeping."

I guess I'll sleep come the revolution.


Posted by: Maeven on June 14, 2006 at 2:14 AM | PERMALINK

Now, let's see if we can't get William Jefferson to be frogmarched before the cameras, shall we?

Or his he just another innocent politician caught in the conspiracy of Carl Rove?

Don't worry, you still have Nagin to keep New Orleans in order.

Posted by: Orwell on June 14, 2006 at 7:40 AM | PERMALINK

Sparko,

Anything is possible, of course, but I don't think you're calling it right with Fitzgerald. Have watched his work here in Chicago/Illinois, from bagging Daley administration thugs to nailing the Republican ex-governor and his staff, very closely and I remain convinced of his integrity. Based on his history, I really believe that his failure to bring an indictment against Rove indicates that he couldn't make an airtight case against him, not that Fitz has fallen in with the band of liars and thieves in the White House. Remember his sand-in-the-umpire's face analogy in the Libby press conference? That fits here as well.

That isn't to say that it's certain Fitz hasn't made mistakes along the way, but he's an extremely skilled prosecutor and by far the best we could have seen on this case. Sometimes the justice system lets us down. It's frustrating. But I like to think that what separates us from the GOP in these instances is that we're willing to see guilty people go free to avoid the wrongful conviction and punishment of the innocent. A Republican, of course, would say just the opposite.

Posted by: shortstop on June 14, 2006 at 9:17 AM | PERMALINK

GOP: No, I'm not. It's right there in your post of 2:01pm. You quoted only one sentence of mine, and then hilariously claimed that it is two sentences and that it is a contradiction. And now you're lying about what you posted.

Again, since you are clearly stupid beyond anyone's ability to teach in anything less than repetitive pointers, I never claimed that my comments were limited to the quoted passage or referring only to the quoted passage. Which is why, when referring to the "first" sentence, I described it, rather than referring to the immediately preceding quote.

Implying that I referred to the immediately preceding quote is, yes, a lie.

You've simply projected your own desire for this imaginary statement of mine to exist, a conservative method of setting up a strawman that we are all familiar with, sorta like their projections for WMDs to exist in Iraq.

So, obviously, you can't, or won't, read or are just willing to serially lie.

No less that what we've come to expect from the right.

However, I bet you can read this: Bush at 42% approval, despite the fact that the number two Al Queda leader has been killed, albeit 4 years after it should have happened and would have happened but for Bush's mendacity and corruption.

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 14, 2006 at 9:29 AM | PERMALINK

Perhaps now our side can turn its attention to winning a few elections? As pleasing as the image of Rove in prison garb might have been, the judicial process was never the way to take back the country.

Posted by: chasmrich on June 14, 2006 at 10:00 AM | PERMALINK
Perhaps now our side can turn its attention to winning a few elections? As pleasing as the image of Rove in prison garb might have been, the judicial process was never the way to take back the country.

Neither is winning elections, really, which is why the narrow tactical focus on doing that has turned the parties national dominance into the electoral disaster of the last several cycles.

The way to take back the country is to sell a vision and get the public to buy in to it as the best set of ideas out there.

Winning elections is the result of taking back the country, not the route to it.

Posted by: cmdicely on June 14, 2006 at 12:01 PM | PERMALINK

Oh, forget the official site! Get the real story from "Patrick J. Fitzgerald", blogger!

Go check out bra-a href=http://patrickjfitzgerald.blogspot.com-ket Is this for real bra/a-ket

See the comment at bra-a href=http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=18142441&postID=115002355715479849-ket R. Rancourt bra/a-ket by a poster who claims it's real (in a sense) but still winks anyway. Yet this site has good posts and comments!

PS - I have tried doing the HTML in every imaginable permutation and it just won't work right here. Something is wrong.

Posted by: Neil' on June 14, 2006 at 12:53 PM | PERMALINK

The way to take back the country is to sell a vision and get the public to buy in to it as the best set of ideas out there.

The party's leaders are not ignorant of this fact. However they can't come up with a vision to satisfy it's special interests. THe idea of deficit reduction is excellent and about all Cliton left but then how can you please all of your special interests while holding the line on spending.

It won't do to promise middle class tax cuts as Clinton did and not deliver. It won't do to try to nationalize health care either. The only way to appeal to a larger base is to move toward the center yet the looney left won't have any of that.

The GOP has serious issues. But they appear to learn eventually. The Senate immigration bill won't pass. GWB and Rove now understand the GOP house has saved them from disaster. The GOP is also getting a bit more serious about spending. More enough but more serious. The GOP has a larger base and they're much saner. Deliver on on creased border security and the the GWB will do OK in November. Deliver on lower spending ad that will help. Take an aggressive approach on judicial nominations and the GOP will get it's base out and old it's own.

The Democrats can't get the Senate and have only a small shot at the house. Pelosi's 'culture of corruption' was a disaster and after 6 months of work has to be dumped. Dumping Jane Harmon Alcee is briadead. Leaving Conyers in place is a disaster waiting to happen. Rove will use impeachment fears to get the base out and spook independents. You've got 8 people running for President and 6 appear to be fighting to get further left. Dean, Gore and Kerry are dicks and you can't control either of them.

There is simply no way for your party to adapt a 'vision' many can agree on and you don't have a group that can sell anything. kerry is at war with his opponents. He wants that seat.

Posted by: rdw on June 14, 2006 at 1:25 PM | PERMALINK

"The way to take back the country is to sell a vision and get the public to buy in to it as the best set of ideas out there." - I don't disagree with you substantively. We can't win elections without articulating ideas with which the majority of voters agree, and a vision sufficiently compelling to induce them to get out and vote for our candidates. But I don't think we should wait for some sort of sea change in public attitudes before trying to win elections. I disagree with most of rdw's post; but he is probably correct in asserting [at least if I correctly decode his spelling] that the right-wing base is larger than the left-wing base. Which means that, for the foreseeable future, successful Democratic candidates will in general be those closer to the center, rather than those further to the left.

Posted by: chasmrich on June 14, 2006 at 2:03 PM | PERMALINK

Which means that, for the foreseeable future, successful Democratic candidates will in general be those closer to the center, rather than those further to the left.

Then you understand the dilemma. The looney left is very important in primaries. In order to win the nomination any centrist candidate will have to move left. This is especially hard for a Senator. The reason kerry voted against it after voting for it was because he felt pressure from Dean on the left.

It's not going to be easy for a candidate to please the left in order to win the primary and then move to the center to appeal to a larger bloc. Not in this media environment.

Posted by: rdw on June 14, 2006 at 8:07 PM | PERMALINK

RdW: The radical right-wing is in charge right now--I think Newton's law means you are in for some rough sailing.

Posted by: Sparko on June 14, 2006 at 11:47 PM | PERMALINK

Sparko: RdW: The radical right-wing is in charge right now--I think Newton's law means you are in for some rough sailing.

Which he'll close his eyes and deny seeing as he blathers on about the one book he read this year, Why Europe Makes Me Scoff, Yes, Scoff!, at interminable, skull-crushing length. But that's not our problem unless we actually read his posts on purpose instead of accidentally.

Posted by: shortstop on June 15, 2006 at 11:10 AM | PERMALINK

Sparko, shortstop

What exactly is the radical right wing? Is that the dreaded neocons or the dreaded religious right?

It's always good to have a radical component. Average conservatives are merely moderate by comparison.


The left has a different problem. The liberal base is much smaller and more radicalized. John Kerry was forced to vote against it before he voted for it. He won the nomination and then spent the rest of his campaign on defense.

One of the things I expected to do more damage for him was a promise he made to run to Europe and apologize. Maybe it did hurt him but it wasn't publized much. Probably because the SBVs and the flip floppers dominated. Because there's such a power alternative media the liberal candidate is under a level of scrutiny they've never experienced.

This same media also protects the conservative candidate from smear shots. For example CBS announced today Dan Rather is off 60 minutes and will have no relationship with CBS. He's a great message to MSM hacks to make sure they have real evidence. In 1992 we'd never have found out his story was a total fraud.

The bottom line is in previous campaigns Democrats could nominate a weak candidate and pull it off. There's no way Bill Clinton gets elected today. Hillary thinks her great stock trades are a settled issue. She's out of her mind. The MSM will never touch that story. It will be prominent in her campaign however.

A conservative candidate can say something as simle as "Clarence Thomas and Anton Scalia are my idea of a good Surpreme Court justice" and that's all they need do to lock up the conservative vote.

A liberal could not possibly say, "Ruth Ginsburg is my idea of a good justice". A liberal candidate has to do what Kerry did. Ban the term liberal from their bio and be exceedingly careful of appearing desperate to get the looney left.

Pray Hillary doesn't win your nomination. She can't possibly beat Rudy or McCain. The GOP will nominate one of these two because the won the middle. Your only shot is a Mark Warner type facing off against a geniune conservative. This is the looney lefts worst nightmare but the country has moved right. You will not win until you acknowledge this.

Posted by: rdw on June 15, 2006 at 1:11 PM | PERMALINK

rdw: You will not win until you acknowledge this.

The Democrats will win when the Right stops cheating, lying, and stealing.

Some of them have already been forced to stop because they are now in jail.

More to follow.

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 15, 2006 at 1:59 PM | PERMALINK

AFG,

Who is in jail?

Duke Cunningham? How did that work? Did you see Nancy is interested in trying out a new campaign slogan since "culture of corruption" is about as dead as dead can be. It didn't work in CA-50 and her good buddy Icebox Jefferson didn't help much.

Gotta love the fact after over-reacting to the icebox he black caucus puts her in her place by forcing her to name Alcee to replace Jane Harmon as senior Democrat on the house intelligence committee. Hey, OK so Alcee is an impeached judge who among other things leaked secret Justice Dept info. What's the big deal? Where else for alcee than the intelligence committee?

I'm sure Jane Harmon is pleased.

Hate to break the news but your party is stupid.

Fitzmas never came. Rove is more powerful than ever and Scooter is fast becoming a wealthy man. He'll easily beat this case AND he'll be smearing the press as he does it. The morons at the NYTs could not have played a poorer hand. They spent a fortune on lawyers and lost every case including a 9 - 0 ruling at the Supreme court. Their 'star' reporter sat in jail for 90 days and then they paid her a fortune to go away.

No wonder the Times was placed on credit watch and DOWNGRADED! You think Al Gore and John Kerry have suffered at the hands of GWB. The NYTs has had 3 layoffs and lost 70% of their market value. They've fired several editors and the family publisher might lose his job.

I don't blame liberals for hating GWB. He's been devastating.

Posted by: rdw on June 15, 2006 at 2:52 PM | PERMALINK

rdw: I don't blame liberals for hating GWB. He's been devastating.

You are exactly right.

Bush has been devastating to America's reputation, to its economy, to the national budget, to our health care system, to the environment, to innocent Iraqis, to the civil rights of the American people, to world peace, to nuclear non-proliferation, to freedom and democracy, and to the truth.

Unfortunately, he has not been devasting to Al Queda or the terrorists that attacked the US on 9/11 or to tyrants in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.

Yes, liberals have plenty of reasons to hate Bush, as do all loyal Americans.

He's destroying the country they love and self-loving, America-hating conservatives like you, rdw, are helping him.

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 16, 2006 at 2:30 PM | PERMALINK

rdw: Who is in jail?

Nearly a half-dozen GOP operatives with more to follow.

But we don't expect someone like you who lies continuously and lives in a fantasy world to be able to keep track.

You'd lie about it anyway.

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 16, 2006 at 2:33 PM | PERMALINK




 

 

Read Jonathan Rowe remembrance and articles
Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

Advertise in WM



buy from Amazon and
support the Monthly