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 19, 2006
By: Kevin Drum

MORE ROVE WEIRDNESS....As if the Jason Leopold/Karl Rove story weren't already bizarre enough, today it gets even weirder. Rove obviously hasn't been indicted, as Leopold reported several weeks ago, but it turns out that Leopold and Truthout are standing behind their story anyway.

Long story short, Truthout says that (a) Rove was secretly indicted, (b) Rove and his lawyer then went back to prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald and made "concessions that Fitzgerald considered to be of high value," and (c) Fitzgerald subsequently agreed to hold off on the indictment.

And what were these concessions?

Our sources provided us with additional detail, saying that Fitzgerald is apparently examining closely Dick Cheney's role in the Valerie Plame matter, and apparently sought information and evidence from Karl Rove that would provide documentation of Cheney's involvement. Rove apparently was reluctant to cooperate and Fitzgerald, it appears, was pressuring him to do so, our sources told us.

Truthout claims that their sources for this information are "career federal law enforcement and federal government officials." Truthout also claims that their senior editors have confirmed all this with their sources. They're not just relying on Jason Leopold.

Is this true? I don't have a clue, but I figure I should pass along the latest scuttlebutt regardless. And for what it's worth, there is one thing that makes me wonder if Rove is really in the clear: the fact that he refuses to make public the letter from Fitzgerald saying that he "does not anticipate seeking charges" against Rove at this time. Rove's spokesman says they won't release the letter because they have an agreement with Fitzgerald that they "wouldn't disclose direct communications or any documents between his office and ours." This is a pretty laughable excuse, and it's hard not to wonder just what's in that letter that they don't want anyone to see.

Kevin Drum 11:31 PM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (107)

Bookmark and Share
 
Comments

I don't believe Rove has any 'principles', but it's pretty hard to imagine him selling out Cheney.

Maybe he thought if he muddied the waters further they could both get off; that's a pretty high-risk move, but then Rover is a gamblin' man.

Posted by: Trent Lott's Hair on June 19, 2006 at 11:38 PM | PERMALINK

Get over it. Democrats lie, Democrats cheat, Democrats cover up. Republicans lie, Republicans cheat, Republicans cover up. All this does is promote the ever tightening spiral of revenge, tit for tat, Vendetta! America will die over thiese political divisions if someone doesn't stand up and point out that both conservatives and liberals are two halves of the same coin. We need the whole coin, not just one half of it, to move on. Get over your political infighting, partisans, and stand up for Unity in America!

Posted by: Chris on June 19, 2006 at 11:39 PM | PERMALINK

Man oh man, youse guys just won't give up!

I had no idea Rove was this good.

Posted by: Steve White on June 19, 2006 at 11:44 PM | PERMALINK

This clearly violates Occam's Razor. The simplest explanation that explains all the facts is that Leopold, someone with a record of fabrication, is also being a fabricator this time. If Truthout wants to overcome that they'll have to produce some actual verifiable evidence that supports their claims.

Posted by: scalefree on June 19, 2006 at 11:48 PM | PERMALINK

I thnk the way it works is that if it doesn't make the Drudge Report it doesn't get serious treatment by the NYT or the WP.


Truthout doesn't have the 'gravitas' of Drudge so no one from the MSM will bother to investigate the charges.

Posted by: ken on June 19, 2006 at 11:50 PM | PERMALINK

Rove doesn't need an excuse for not releasing the letter from Fitzgerald. He has no need to release it. The media have all reported that he won't be prosecuted. The issue is dead.

Posted by: ex-liberal on June 19, 2006 at 11:51 PM | PERMALINK

Leopold has a a record of fabrication?

Posted by: Pierre Asciutto on June 19, 2006 at 11:51 PM | PERMALINK

I hope the unreleased letter from Fitzgerald says that if, for any reason, Scooter Libby is pardoned (as is getting set up and legitimized in the press now) the Rove indictment is unsealed and moves forward.

Posted by: Karen Taylor on June 19, 2006 at 11:53 PM | PERMALINK

I'm with scalefree on this one. Old Karl has been exposed as a liar and a cheat. Pretty soon his political obituary will be written. As soon as the republicans lose the house and senate, whether it happens in 06, 08, or 10, the conversative movement will decide that it was his dirty dealings that brought the party down. We've already won. It's time to move on to figuring out how to fix the mess he put us in.

Posted by: enozinho on June 19, 2006 at 11:54 PM | PERMALINK

Karen Taylor-- Why should Rove's indictment hinge on whether or not Libby gets pardoned, since Rove has no control over it? Perhaps Fitzgerald should indict him based on whether or not the average daily temparature in July reaches a certain level!

Further, Rove is under no obligation to release the letter. He is innocent until proven guilty. Not only was he proven innocent, he was given a letter by the ederal attorney that says, "You're so innocent, it's not even worth trying to bring charges". At what point does Rove get to leave liberal smears behind?

I'd also remind you of your own words Kevin:

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2006_05/008862.php

I, of course, have no way to judge the truth of either side, although it continues to be strange that Leopold claims to have multiple sources on this story and no other media outlet has even one. In any case, there's damn little wiggle room left here. One side or the other is wrong on a truly spectacular scale and is now set up for an implosion of credibility on a galactic scale. Stay tuned.


Now that Leopold is revealed to be a damned liar, you're changing your story. You also failed to link to the washington post article on Leopold's questionable behavior:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/16/AR2006061601754_pf.html

Leopold is a liar. That doesn't neccesarily reflect on truthout, or the people who initially linked to him. It does reflect rather poorly on those who choose to keep defending his smears.

Posted by: American Hawk on June 19, 2006 at 11:59 PM | PERMALINK

Cheney is guilty as sin.
He's a hard-boiled political creep.
He really is no different than the trolls that publish comments here:

He has no scruples.
He will say anything to get a rise.
He will lie large and lie often.
And he will shoot you in the face if he knows he can get away with it.

Regarding Plame, the question has always been:
Did he leave a discernible paper trail of his guilt?

I tend to doubt it.

And even if he did, I suspect he'd be able to twist the idea of "executive privilege" in some way to cover himself.

The main thing is just this:
Americans really don't like Cheney.
In fact they hate him.
That's really what counts here.
Truly, that is a good sign that all is not lost.

The American public retains some sense of decency and fair play.

They reject Cheney.
The realize that Cheney is a rabid dog.
And most of them... want Cheney to be muzzled and put to sleep.

Posted by: koreyel on June 20, 2006 at 12:03 AM | PERMALINK

"The main thing is just this:
Americans really don't like Cheney.
In fact they hate him.
That's really what counts here.
Truly, that is a good sign that all is not lost."

The main thing is that Bush Derangement Syndrome is in full play.

You folks are delusional. You had better get a policy before November or it won't be pretty.

Leopold is right in your mainstream.

Posted by: Mike K on June 20, 2006 at 12:10 AM | PERMALINK

Trent Lott's Hair,

What if they Rove knows that someone is going down and they want to make sure they retain control?

Sacrifice Cheney so he can be replaced with Condi or Jebby to insure continued control after the idiotboys two terms?

Posted by: angryspittle on June 20, 2006 at 12:14 AM | PERMALINK

If I were Rove, I wouldn't be going on any "hunting" trips with the VP.

Posted by: craigie on June 20, 2006 at 12:20 AM | PERMALINK

By the way, I think something remarkable has happend to Political Animal, Kevin. I think we've now reached the point where regular conservaloony posters outnumber regular liberal ones. Has the RNC directed some sort of gang tackle of your blog?

Is this the blog equivalent of the phone jamming scandal? Or is it just that a lot more conservatives spend time in their pajamas, ready to howl at the moon whenever someone questions their worldview?

Film at 11...

Posted by: craigie on June 20, 2006 at 12:24 AM | PERMALINK

Leopold is trying to save his reputation. People who've been following this case closely do suspect that Fitzgerald might be interested in Cheney, after all, Libby works for Cheney and takes his orders from Cheney. So he's come up with a story about how, against all the odds, he might be right anyway, and hopes he'll come out looking good if and when something comes out about Cheney.

Posted by: Joe Buck on June 20, 2006 at 12:25 AM | PERMALINK

Why devine the truth behind shadows on the wall when the HDTV Dolby XXX version will come out sooner or later?

But... Since that's what we're doing: Has anyone else heard of anyone else who's testified 5 or so times without an indictment, of somebody, coming from it?

Posted by: Mark on June 20, 2006 at 12:27 AM | PERMALINK

American Hawk:

"Not only was [Rove] proven innocent, he was given a letter by the ederal [sic] attorney that says, 'You're so innocent it's not even worth trying to bring charges.'"

Do you even know what these words mean? Is there a no-true bill that was disclosed to you and you alone? If not, you should damn well be careful before throwing the word "liar" around so casually.


Chris:

"All this does is promote the ever tightening spiral of revenge, tit for tat, Vendetta!"

This calls to mind Dennis Miller's line: "What's tat? Where can I get it? And how can I exchange it for the other?"


Posted by: John in Nashville on June 20, 2006 at 12:30 AM | PERMALINK

scalefree: "The simplest explanation that explains all the facts is that Leopold, someone with a record of fabrication, is also being a fabricator this time."

Have to disagree. The simplest explanation is that Rove WAS on the brink of being indicted and coughed up some deal that took him off the hot seat for now. Fitz may be after bigger fish.

But I've given up hope of anything good coming from the investigation.

craigie: "By the way, I think something remarkable has happend to Political Animal, Kevin. I think we've now reached the point where regular conservaloony posters outnumber regular liberal ones. Has the RNC directed some sort of gang tackle of your blog?"

yeah, I was startled by the phalanx of trolls on this thread as well. BTW, I love the adjective "conservaloony"--it's totally the right word.

Posted by: PTate in MN on June 20, 2006 at 12:31 AM | PERMALINK

It is reasonable to wonder about the contents of the letter and there is the "at this time" qualifier in the statement, which could either be significan tor totally insignificant normal cautious wordsmithing by Fitzgerald.

But my guess is that it is over. There would be no reason to use Rove to go after Cheney. If there was any crime involved in leaking Plame's name and Cheney was target, I think Fitzgerald would just start indicting lower people until he go to Cheney or someone turned on him.

Posted by: brian on June 20, 2006 at 12:34 AM | PERMALINK

AH,

Leopold has lied.

He is playing T-ball in a game with Babe Ruth.

Posted by: angryspittle on June 20, 2006 at 12:35 AM | PERMALINK

Do to the fact that liars lie this is how Fitzgerald does his job. He's working this group of lying morons perfectly. A sealed indictment-a perfect way to catch rats. It's so good to see someone competent at his job dealing with mental 3rd graders with power issues. All he does is pressure them until one of the rats sings or gains enough knowledge to catch them all in the net. Indict the peons on lesser charges at first and then just move up the ladder until all the rats are caught. It's so easy, unless of course, a moron like Bush was doing it.

Posted by: Where's osama on June 20, 2006 at 12:41 AM | PERMALINK

I think we've now reached the point where regular conservaloony posters outnumber regular liberal ones.

I can totally fix that. Listen wingers, Red Dawn is playing on DirecTV channel 526 at 10pm PT. Hurry along now!

Posted by: enozinho on June 20, 2006 at 12:52 AM | PERMALINK

My money, such as it is, is still on Fitz. There is nothing that has happened over the past five years that has indicated to me that these guys are anything other than amatuers compared to a federal prosecuetor.

Putting shit over on the public means crap when compared to trying to put it over on someone like Fitzgerald.

Anyone who thinks that's not true should try it some time.

Posted by: Chaz on June 20, 2006 at 12:56 AM | PERMALINK

If that won't work, enozinho, then: look down the hall-Clinton's getting a blow-job.

Posted by: Where's osama on June 20, 2006 at 12:56 AM | PERMALINK

I agree with Chris in general, and also wonder how I could exchange "tat" for some of its counterpart.

Ash is doing a crabwise shuffle and his long explanation today in truthout never mentions the serial chronic Jayson-Blair Leopold by name nor hints at his existence.

The truthout folks are bailing water fast---Rove has magic mojo and has inflicted unintended collateral damage on the lefty blogosphere with truthout's sinking tub.

Posted by: daveinboca on June 20, 2006 at 12:58 AM | PERMALINK

BTW, I love the adjective "conservaloony"--it's totally the right word.

Thank you. If I start seeing it in Wikipedia, I want royalties.

Posted by: craigie on June 20, 2006 at 12:59 AM | PERMALINK

Rove has magic mojo and has inflicted unintended collateral damage on the lefty blogosphere

Hahahahaha! Wooo, watch out everybody!

Meanwhile, Rove did actually lie (he was involved in outing Plame, Fitz established that), and Bush did actually promise to fire anyone associated with outing Plame. So he lied too. Man, am I ever surprised.

Posted by: craigie on June 20, 2006 at 1:02 AM | PERMALINK

Oh boy

more drivel about the Fitzgerald/Rove matter by many folks that are deep in clue debtor territory

There are so many holes in Gold Bars Luskin`s spiel(s) that you could more than fill the Albert Hall & anyone that believes either side on this is smokin some really bad stuff

PR spin setup for the election sales campaign; ya never start a new product before September

Remember ?

I`ll wait until the adults finish before drawing any conclusions but I will say that the record shows that Mr. Fitzgerald does have a record in these sorts of matters

"I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use." - Galileo Galilei

Posted by: daCascadian on June 20, 2006 at 1:13 AM | PERMALINK

That's hilarious.

Posted by: aaron on June 20, 2006 at 1:37 AM | PERMALINK

And yet you guys snicker when Bush mangles the old "Fool me once, shame on you," quote.

Keep digging through that manure, Jason Leopold swears there's a pony in there somewhere!

Posted by: Brainster on June 20, 2006 at 2:49 AM | PERMALINK

Like Kevbin I have not enough information to fully comprehend what is going on here. However it is clear that one slanders Oakham and his theroys to conclude the know facts are best explained by the silly notion that Rove is innocent and has told the truth and that his attorney is not misleading us. That defies the the well established principle of universal experience: when a known liars starts lying, the liars keeps lying in a geometric progression.

Posted by: chad on June 20, 2006 at 6:43 AM | PERMALINK

> There is nothing that has happened over
> the past five years that has indicated to
> me that these guys are anything other than
> amatuers compared to a federal prosecuetor.

Whereas I would observe that there is nothing in Fitzgerald's record that indicates he has ever successfully dealt with anyone with the depth of evil and duplicity to be found in Cheney and Rove. The observable fact is that Cheney has something on people, and he uses it to enforce a code of omarta that makes the Sicilian mafia look like preschool teachers.

My guess is that Fitz got a call from Gonzales explaining that if he didn't back off from Rove (1) pre-emptive pardons for everyone (2) prosecution of Fitz over that $1.23 error in his expense account. And, oh yeah, since that expense account was submitted on an al Quida case, Fitz would have the next two years in a Gitmo jail cell to think about it.

Cranky

Posted by: Cranky Observer on June 20, 2006 at 7:24 AM | PERMALINK

So, that light at the end of the tunnel for Rove might still be a train ? I'm still ready to climb up on my roof and do that promised Snoopy dance. Bring it on.
.

Posted by: VJ on June 20, 2006 at 7:45 AM | PERMALINK

I think we've now reached the point where regular conservaloony posters outnumber regular liberal ones.

Actually, the ratio is still around 10 libs to 1 conservative. Go back and count.

I do agree though, liberals are more than overmatched by those kind of numbers.

I can understand how threatened you must feel to have even 1 dissenting point of view in your midst.

Posted by: sportsfan79 on June 20, 2006 at 7:55 AM | PERMALINK

The "Wall Street Journal" has published two entire VOLUMES of collected nonsense about the Whitewater non-investigation of a non-crime, their editorial obsession spilled over into their usually unbiased news division, and 9 years on they still refer to it constantly as if it were an unsolved mystery. And they will no doubt return to beating the Whitewater drum should Hillary run for President.

But we can't discuss the odd circumstances surrounding the non-prosecution of a confirmed act of _treason_ in the White House? Methinks the Radicals protest too much.

Cranky

Posted by: Cranky Observer on June 20, 2006 at 8:21 AM | PERMALINK

Must not keep reporting on this story...the poor trolls will loose their freaking minds! From where I sit Bush continues to have all the cards because even IF this is true and Rove rolled on Cheney to save his despicable hide (OOH, did I hurt his reputation?) our dear leader will just pardon Libby so there NEVER IS A TRIAL! It's the Republican way...the ends justify the means, we're right always...suck it up!!! I WANT MY COUNTRY BACK!

Posted by: Dancer on June 20, 2006 at 8:44 AM | PERMALINK

The "Wall Street Journal" has published two entire VOLUMES of collected nonsense about the Whitewater non-investigation of a non-crime...

Jim and Susan McDougal, former Whitewater partners of President and Mrs. Clinton were convicted of felonies.

Posted by: ex-liberal on June 20, 2006 at 8:59 AM | PERMALINK

Rove and Libby have always been small fish that Fitz has been using to go after bigger fish. Libby refused to cooperate (what, he's going to rat on his boss and friend, Cheney?), so he got indicted. Rove, who works for Bush, has no such loyalty to Cheney. At this point, Bush would probably like Cheney to have to resign so he can appoint Condi as VP.

I repeat: Rove and Libby have never been the true targets of Fitz's investigation.

Posted by: Speed King on June 20, 2006 at 9:04 AM | PERMALINK

Good Lord man, give it up. This is just like Kevin and the rest of you idiots continuing to pound away on the National Guard memos long after everyone with half a brain had concluded with one glance they were obviously fake. "But there were typewriters back then that could do proportional fonts I tell ya!"

Did any of you ever stop to wonder why Leopold seems to be the only one with access to these sources? Maybe they're just imaginary.

Posted by: Homer on June 20, 2006 at 9:10 AM | PERMALINK

From the TruthNot lead on May 13:

Saturday 13 May 2006

Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald spent more than half a day Friday at the offices of Patton Boggs, the law firm representing Karl Rove.

During the course of that meeting, Fitzgerald served attorneys for former Deputy White House Chief of Staff Karl Rove with an indictment charging the embattled White House official with perjury and lying to investigators related to his role in the CIA leak case, and instructed one of the attorneys to tell Rove that he has 24 business hours to get his affairs in order, high level sources with direct knowledge of the meeting said Saturday morning.

Robert Luskin, Rove's attorney, did not return a call for comment. Sources said Fitzgerald was in Washington, DC, Friday and met with Luskin for about 15 hours to go over the charges against Rove...

From the recent TruthNot XX.X (Sorry, I've lost count:

Our sources continue to maintain that a grand jury has in fact returned an indictment. Our sources said that parts of the indictment were read to Karl Rove and his attorney on Friday, May 12, 2006.

How long does it take to read "parts of an indictment", and how could a reliable source be wrong about a fifteen hour meeting?

Surely someone cloase enough to the Fitzgerald side to pass along details like "The electronic communication from Fitzgerald to Luskin... was, our sources told us, negotiated quickly over the phone later that afternoon" is close enough to know whether they did or did not meet for fiftten hours.

Posted by: Tom Maguire on June 20, 2006 at 9:26 AM | PERMALINK

What's lost in this, and what Fitzgerald's investigation has already accomplished, is the revelation that as the result of coordination among White House officials at the highest level, including the VP (see that handwriting?), a covert CIA official working on WMD was outed for solely political reasons.

I wouldn't expect partisan Republicans or loser blog lurkers to accept this as a big deal, at least not when Republicans are the ones doing it, but nonetheless it is.

The lesson: there is no one, no one on this earth our leaders care about more than themselves.

Posted by: clb72 on June 20, 2006 at 9:38 AM | PERMALINK

I don't believe Rove has any 'principles', but it's pretty hard to imagine him selling out Cheney.

It's been reported that Cheney and Rove don't see eye-to-eye, so I wouldn't put it past him to rat out Cheney. Also, getting Cheney to resign would allow rightards to get a presidential candidate into the White House prior to the 2008 election.

This is a pretty laughable excuse...

I'm not so sure that's true. Maybe some experienced prosecutors can provide some analysis, but if this investigation is still open, and if Cheney is a subject of interest, it would seem to me that Fitzgerald may not wat the details of his letter to Rove made public.

Posted by: MeLoseBrain? on June 20, 2006 at 9:47 AM | PERMALINK

It doesn't really matter.

As long as Rove stays in the public's eye and remains a constant reminder of conservative corruption and criminality and as long as they keep shooting themselves in the foot by proclaiming innocent but refusing to divulge available proof, making them look all the guiltier, all is good.

GOP: 27% approval rating. 61% disapproval rating.

I LOVE IT!

Thank you Karl Rove!

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 20, 2006 at 10:05 AM | PERMALINK


Get over it. Democrats lie, Democrats cheat, Democrats cover up. Republicans lie, Republicans cheat, Republicans cover up.

True enough, but I'm hard pressed to think of a Democrat who has commited treason.

Posted by: G.Kerby on June 20, 2006 at 10:07 AM | PERMALINK

The biggest thing to keep in mind: Fitz's Plame investigation is obviously not finished, or we would have had some public annoucement by now. The silence is deafening.

Posted by: Red on June 20, 2006 at 10:29 AM | PERMALINK


cheney: don't you think it's funny how Fitzgerald is not charging anyone with outing any "covert CIA official" then?

Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald, Friday, October 28, 2005

Let me then ask your next question: Well, why is this a leak investigation that doesn't result in a charge? I've been trying to think about how to explain this, so let me try. I know baseball analogies are the fad these days. Let me try something.

If you saw a baseball game and you saw a pitcher wind up and throw a fastball and hit a batter right smack in the head, and it really, really hurt them, you'd want to know why the pitcher did that. And you'd wonder whether or not the person just reared back and decided, "I've got bad blood with this batter. He hit two home runs off me. I'm just going to hit him in the head as hard as I can."

You also might wonder whether or not the pitcher just let go of the ball or his foot slipped, and he had no idea to throw the ball anywhere near the batter's head. And there's lots of shades of gray in between.

You might learn that you wanted to hit the batter in the back and it hit him in the head because he moved. You might want to throw it under his chin, but it ended up hitting him on the head.

FITZGERALD: And what you'd want to do is have as much information as you could. You'd want to know: What happened in the dugout? Was this guy complaining about the person he threw at? Did he talk to anyone else? What was he thinking? How does he react? All those things you'd want to know.

And then you'd make a decision as to whether this person should be banned from baseball, whether they should be suspended, whether you should do nothing at all and just say, "Hey, the person threw a bad pitch. Get over it."

In this case, it's a lot more serious than baseball. And the damage wasn't to one person. It wasn't just Valerie Wilson. It was done to all of us.

Posted by: thisspaceavailable on June 20, 2006 at 10:48 AM | PERMALINK
True enough, but I'm hard pressed to think of a Democrat who has commited treason.

To be fair, there were a whole bunch...in the 1860s.

Posted by: cmdicely on June 20, 2006 at 10:49 AM | PERMALINK

Cheney: What do you think Karl Rove's name recognition is amoung non-blog readers?

Much higher than yours, but in any event something that is irrelevant.

No one cares who Karl Rove is.

What they will care about is another Bush administration figure wrapped up in controversy involving unethical or criminal conduct.

Which, again, is why over 60% of Americans believe the country is headed in the wrong direction.

Since the GOP controls all aspects of the country and is therefore 100% responsible for it's direction, LOL.

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 20, 2006 at 10:54 AM | PERMALINK

Kevin why do you torment yourself and us so? I'm resigned to the fact I'll never see a fruitful Fitzmas and moved on. Why can't you? Sometimes justice won't prevail - especially amongst the powerful.

Posted by: ckelly on June 20, 2006 at 10:55 AM | PERMALINK

sigh...you know, you give Truthout credibility by posting this crap.

btw, its more than plausible that they have such an agreement with Fitzgerald's office. pretty standard stuff actually. might not want to opine on legal matters without asking around first.

Posted by: Nathan on June 20, 2006 at 11:00 AM | PERMALINK

> You mean "treason" SINCE Gore and Clinton
> sold missile technology

No, I was thinking more of Donald Rumsfeld selling poison gas technology and targeting information to Saddam Hussein.

Cranky

Posted by: Cranky Observer on June 20, 2006 at 11:00 AM | PERMALINK

I think we've now reached the point where regular conservaloony posters outnumber regular liberal ones.

Sure on 'red meat' posts like this one. But when it comes to memos about Iraq anarchy or clear-cut Bush incompetence - the trolls are nowhere to be found - they've got nothing.

Do like "conservaloony". If it's in the dictionary, it's gotta have Al, American Hawk, Sportsfan's pictures beside it.

Posted by: ckelly on June 20, 2006 at 11:04 AM | PERMALINK

oh, and indictments are sealed to keep them secret from the person indicted until they can be apprehended (this is done when the subject is considered a flight risk). there is no such thing as a secret indictment per se.

Posted by: Nathan on June 20, 2006 at 11:05 AM | PERMALINK

A jury found former Bush administration official David Safavian guilty Tuesday of covering up his dealings with Republican influence-peddler Jack Abramoff.

The GOP continues to give, even if Rove is off the hook for now.

Rove staying in the news and refusing to release the letter that would prove he's off the hook just reinforces the pattern of secretiveness, lack of ethics, lack of morals, corruption, and criminality that infests the GOP.

A 27% approval rating is the result.

I LOVE IT!

Cranky: No, I was thinking more of Donald Rumsfeld selling poison gas technology and targeting information to Saddam Hussein.

Or Reagan and Bush 41 giving the Taliban anti-aircraft weapons that were or could be used against US forces or funneled to terrorists to use against commercial aircraft.

Funny how Cheney forgets that it has been conservative administrations that have consistently armed, aided, and abetted the world's most dangerous, vile, and ruthless terrorists and dictators, literally as gifts with nothing even promised in return.

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 20, 2006 at 11:08 AM | PERMALINK

Safavian was convicted on four of five felony counts of lying and obstruction. He resigned from his White House post last year as the federal government's chief procurement officer. No date was immediately set for sentencing.

The Bush administration keeps going down in flames, piece by pathetic piece.

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 20, 2006 at 11:09 AM | PERMALINK

Cheney: . . . we could discuss Rep. Murtha too, if you'd prefer.

We could, but since you aren't man enough to even carry his jockstrap any input you'd have would be less than useless and will in any event likely be dafamatory, dishonest, and vile, like most of your posts.

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 20, 2006 at 11:15 AM | PERMALINK

What's lost in this, and what Fitzgerald's investigation has already accomplished, is the revelation that as the result of coordination among White House officials at the highest level, including the VP (see that handwriting?), a covert CIA official working on WMD was outed for solely political reasons.

Also lost - Richard Armitage, then Deputy Secretary of State and and not a neocon supporter, almost surely leaked about Ms. Plame to Woodward in June and Novak in July.

He also did not disclose the Woodward leak until after the Libby indictment came down. Yet he has not been indicted for treason, leaking about a covert agent, or for obstructing the investigation. Why not?

As to obstruction, my only guess is that Fitzgerald has decided that there are leakers whose hearts were pure, and then there was Libby.

For the covert agent part, it is pretty clear that Fitzgerald can't show that anyone in the White House (or State) was aware of her classified status.

Posted by: Tom Maguire on June 20, 2006 at 11:16 AM | PERMALINK

as usual, Advocate for God's grasp of events is weak to say the least:

"Or Reagan and Bush 41 giving the Taliban anti-aircraft weapons that were or could be used against US forces or funneled to terrorists to use against commercial aircraft."

Funny, the Taliban didn't exist in the 1980's. as for the Stingers that were given to the Mujihadin in the 1980's (none were given under Bush 41), they were effective in bogging the Soviets down in Afghanistan...

as for the ostensible "blowback" that some were concerned about (i.e. the Taliban inheriting the missiles)...the reason why there was no real concern is very simple....the batteries had a shelf life of only a few years. none were in working order by 2001.

Posted by: Nathan on June 20, 2006 at 11:23 AM | PERMALINK

The speculation that Rove cut a deal to implicate Cheney is laughable. Two of the biggest, most visable and most reviled people in American politics (and probably global politics) are involved here. It strains credulity to say that this story is true and that Truthout & Jason Leopold are the only ones who could get ahold of it. That would mean that all other media outlets in the entire country--including the NYTimes, CNN, WaPo, AP, the broadcast networks, the cable networks, etc.--have been beaten by a small internet operation for what would be the biggest story of the year. And not just that, but they've had weeks to investigate the story since Truthout reported it, but not one of those media outlets has found a single piece of paper or a single reliable source that confirms Truthout's story. That's just too much to swallow.

Posted by: T-Web on June 20, 2006 at 11:39 AM | PERMALINK

At this point, Leopold and truthout have been discredited. They can rehabilitate their credibility by either outing their sources or providing credible evidence of the accuracy of their reporting on this issue. So far, all they have done is dig their own hole deeper.

Posted by: Pocket Rocket on June 20, 2006 at 11:41 AM | PERMALINK

I WANT MY COUNTRY BACK!
Posted by: Dancer on June 20, 2006 at 8:44 AM

Sorry pal, your country died on
December 12, 2000
and NOTHING will bring it back.
Get over it.

Posted by: someOtherClown on June 20, 2006 at 12:00 PM | PERMALINK

Okay, by my count, with 66 comments posted, the score is:

Trolls: 19
Neutral or Libs: 47

The ratio is 1:3.

Here are examples of the trollspew:
"Youse guys won't give up!"
"The issue is dead"
"Leopold is a liar"
"Leopold is your mainstream"
"Bush Derangement Syndrome is in full play."
"You folks are delusional."
"This is just like Kevin and the rest of you idiots continuing to pound away on the National Guard memos long after everyone with half a brain"...
"Get over it."

Notice the simple sentence structure and hostile name-calling. Classic troll-spew. What isn't captured is the droning reiteration of beliefs ungrounded in reality, such as "What "clear-cut Bush incompetence?""

These are partisans who are happy the bus is going over the cliff. Their driver is at the wheel, and no one has been able to stop him. The bottom of the cliff is the best possible world.

Posted by: PTate in MN on June 20, 2006 at 12:13 PM | PERMALINK

I thought this Bush quote was interesting: "If you want your taxes low, keep Denny Hastert and Bill Frist as leaders of the House and the Senate."

They may give lip service to national defense or gay marriage or other things, but the only unifying principle in the Republican party is low taxes. Bush can sell out our CIA agents or get us into a disastrous war or sell the government to the highest bidder, but as long as he vows to keep taxes low, the GOP base will love him. Nothing else matters.

Posted by: Boots Day on June 20, 2006 at 12:50 PM | PERMALINK

Nathan: Funny, the Taliban didn't exist in the 1980's. as for the Stingers that were given to the Mujihadin in the 1980's (none were given under Bush 41), they were effective in bogging the Soviets down in Afghanistan...

The Taliban by any other name is still the Taliban.

That they got their weapons from the US before they actually formed "the Taliban" doesn't mean that Reagan and Bush didn't arm them by arming the people that became part of the Taliban.

And as usual, conservatives pretend that Bush being VP during Reagan's term and participating in foreign policy means he wasn't involved in arming the Taliban and that bogging the Soviets down in Afghanistan was a good trade off for arming our future enemies and putting our own troops at risk, not to mention American civilians.

. . . none were in working order by 2001.

Yeah, that's the ticket, dazzle them with unadulterated bullsh*t.

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 20, 2006 at 12:53 PM | PERMALINK

ptate,

Wishful thinking is not analysis. The adults are still in charge and Rove is at the top of his game. He speaks of 'cut and run' at an obscure dinner in New England and within a week Dems are falling over themselves offering resolutions on Iraq.

As Bill Bennett would say, either you are plying oddense or you are playing defense and it's much better playing offense. Karl Rove is the QB and his team is on the field. John Kerry is a puppet on a string.

Posted by: rdw on June 20, 2006 at 12:55 PM | PERMALINK

Advocate for God:

um, you're wrong. Period. The leadership of the Taliban was primarily hanging out in madrassas in Pakistan during the 80's. Much of the Mujihadin ended up in the Northern Alliance (the anti-Taliban guys).

and I'm not making up the bit about the Stinger batteries. want to find one instance where a Stinger was fired against the U.S. or civilian aircraft (post the 80's anyway)? hint: you can't.

I can't help it that I live in the reality based community.

Posted by: Nathan on June 20, 2006 at 1:24 PM | PERMALINK

As Bill Bennett would say, either you are plying oddense or you are playing defense and it's much better playing offense. Karl Rove is the QB and his team is on the field.

This really encapsulates the state of modern politics. Since all Republicans really care about is low taxes, they have no interest in governing beyond that. So politics to them becomes like the NFL, where all they care about is if their team is winning. The Bush Administration is much more like the New York Yankees than it is like any other governing regime in our nation's history.

Posted by: Boots Day on June 20, 2006 at 1:38 PM | PERMALINK

Well MODO did tell David Letterman that "all we had to know about Patrick's investigation was that Dick Cheney is guilty."

Whom else motivated Libby other then his boss? It wasn't Karl Rove telling Libby to lie. Libby was Cheney's assistant and things just keep getting worse and worse for poor little Libbo, and has Libby been spilling the beans about Cheney lately too?

Posted by: Cheryl on June 20, 2006 at 2:04 PM | PERMALINK

When the CIA launched a scheme to buy back unused missiles after the Soviet withdrawal in 1989, the Mujahideen were reluctant sellers.

Yeah, sure, Bush 41 tried to buy back those useless stingers.

Well, either evidence of his complete incompetence or Nathan's dishonesty.

um, you're wrong. Period. The leadership of the Taliban was primarily hanging out in madrassas in Pakistan during the 80's.

Um, you're lying. The Taliban incorporated into their ranks numerous Afghanistan warlords funded and armed by the US, including those armed by the US with stingers.

BTW, the leadership of a group is not the whole group.

I know you know that, so your deliberate dissembling retort that focuses only on the leadership shows just how dishonest you are willing to be to "prove" the Taliban never were given access to US weapons.

Reagan and Bush 41 arming them may have been indirect, but they nevertheless did so.

You can lie all day about that, but it won't change history.

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 20, 2006 at 2:10 PM | PERMALINK

Nathan: I can't help it that I live in the reality based community.

You live in the mendacity-based and rationalization-based communities, hip-hopping back and forth.

want to find one instance where a Stinger was fired against the U.S. or civilian aircraft (post the 80's anyway)

Riiiiight, because the only Americans that count are the ones living post 80's - it was fine and dandy to provide arms to people who would use them against us, as long as the use would end up pre-1990.

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 20, 2006 at 2:13 PM | PERMALINK

ohh wow - check PBS Frontline tonight

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/television/2003072094_cheney20.html

Posted by: cheryl on June 20, 2006 at 2:14 PM | PERMALINK

Advocate for God:

don't be a dumbass...the fact that the Stingers were still operational in 1992 doesn't mean that there batteries were operative in 2001...9 YEARS LATER

for fuck's sake, go read globalsecurity.org or Janes or something...

yes, some former Mujihadeen joined the Taliban, just like some joined the Northern Alliance (actually most of the Muj leadership was anti-Taliban but anyway....)...and your point is?

Posted by: Nathan on June 20, 2006 at 2:15 PM | PERMALINK

ohh wow - check PBS Frontline tonight

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/television/2003072094_cheney20.html

Posted by: cheryl on June 20, 2006 at 2:16 PM | PERMALINK

And gee, Nathan, the black market has absolutely no stinger batteries available - everything else but!

And those terrorists have the resources to cook up nuclear, chemical, and biological threats to the US so great that we must live in constant fear, but they just wouldn't be able to get their hands on replacement batteries for US stingers because, you know, those things are as rare as unicorns or statements of truth from Bush.

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 20, 2006 at 2:18 PM | PERMALINK

Advocate for God:

Stingers weren't fired against the U.S. in the 80's either (but that would still be within their battery life anyway) so that's why its irrelevant to my point)...I was simply trying to avoid your prevaricating over whether some of the Soviet helicopters and planes shot down in the 80's counted as civilian or not...

Posted by: Nathan on June 20, 2006 at 2:18 PM | PERMALINK

"You had better get a policy before November ..."

Funny how it's the Republican'ts who have screwed up government and foreign affairs but the Democrats who need policy.

"Policy? Policy? We don't need no stinkin' policy." GWB

Posted by: Cal Gal on June 20, 2006 at 2:20 PM | PERMALINK

Advocate for God:

if they can get their hands on Stinger batteries they can get their hands on new Stingers (far better ones)...and don't need crappy 80's castoffs now do they?

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

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm . . .

American and Nato forces are following up reports that the Taliban have received vital components for shoulder-fired Stinger missiles from Pakistani officials enabling them to be used against helicopters in Afghanistan.

It is claimed that the missiles have been fitted with new battery packs allegedly provided by the Pakistani intelligence service, ISI, in the past four months.

Western sources say they are not sure whether the supplies, needed to make the US-made missiles operational, were provided by rogue elements within the Pakistani secret service, or approved at a high level.

However, the effect of re-arming the Stingers could be to make Nato aircraft vulnerable while Britain is deployingalmost 6,000 soldiers in southern Afghanistan.

It is believed that the battery packs had been fitted in between 18 and 20 heat-seeking Stingers which can hit targets at around 12,000 feet. They are reported to have been handed over in the Quetta region in Pakistan known to be used by the Taliban to launch attacks in southern Afghanistan.

US and Nato forces have carried out a series of searches along the border areas in the hunt for the missiles, with a large-scale operation a month ago. No British forces were involved. It is not known if Stingers have been recovered.

The Pakistan government yesterday denied the accusation as "baseless". An official spokesman said: "Pakistan has lost more security personnel in the fight against terror than any other country. We make no distinction in this fight between al-Qa'ida and the Taliban. No evidence to the contrary has ever been provided; these are just rumours, unsubstantiated allegations and innuendo."

The Pakistan government also rejected suggestions of involvement by ISI rogue elements. "Our military and security services are disciplined forces," the spokesman said.

Reports that the batteries had been fitted to the missiles surfaced at the end of last year along the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan. It followed efforts by Afghan officials to buy Stingers which had been supplied to the Afghan Mujahedin by the US during the war against the Russians.

Taliban fighters have yet to successfully use anti-aircraft missiles against US and Nato forces. However, both US and British pilots, who fly Tornados from a base in Kandahar, report that ground-to-air missiles have been fired at them.

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 20, 2006 at 2:23 PM | PERMALINK

"I can understand how threatened you must feel to have even 1 dissenting point of view in your midst."

Funny how you rarely see dissenting points of view on righty blogs, tho. I guess they want to make SURE they don't feel threatened.

Posted by: Cal Gal on June 20, 2006 at 2:24 PM | PERMALINK

Hmmmmmmm........

Kabul: US and Nato forces are following up reports that the Taliban has received vital component parts for American shoulder-fired Stinger missiles from Pakistani officials enabling them to be used against helicopters in Afghanistan.

It is claimed that the missiles - originally supplied to the Afghan Mujaheddin by the US during the war against the Russians - have been fitted with new battery packs allegedly provided by the Pakistani intelligence service, ISI, in the last four months.

Western sources say they are not sure whether the supplies, needed to make the American-made missiles operational, were provided by rogue elements within the Pakistani secret service or approved at a high level.

However, the effect of rearming the Stingers could be to make Nato aircraft vulnerable at a time when Britain is carrying out the deployment of a force of almost 6,000 in southern Afghanistan.

It is believed that the battery packs had been fitted to between 18 and 20 heat-seeking Stingers which can hit targets at around 12,000 feet.

-----------------

Nathan: don't be a dumbass

Hey, Jay, I thought conservatives didn't stoop to name-calling against people who pose differing viewpoints.


Posted by: Advocate for God on June 20, 2006 at 2:29 PM | PERMALINK

" plying oddense ..."

The Republican'ts in a nutshell.

Posted by: Cal Gal on June 20, 2006 at 2:31 PM | PERMALINK

Cal Gal: Funny how you rarely see dissenting points of view on righty blogs, tho.

Several of them censor and remove liberal comments, even those which are polite.

Most others just simply don't allow comments or only allow comments from non-anonymous participants.

Not surprising.

Conservatives just love and defend anonymity when it comes to the so-called "free speech" of campaign contributions or when it comes to defamatory remarks against people they hate, like the Clintons, but hate it when it is liberals being anonymous.

Small wonder people want to remain anonymous in this era, considering the vicious, vituperative, and defamatory attacks conservatives have used against people who cross them, even those within their own party and even against war heroes, seeking to destroy their lives in every possible way.

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 20, 2006 at 2:34 PM | PERMALINK

this is really amusing:

Advocate for God now concedes that I was right about the batteries.

his retort is some thinly sourced account of Pakistan providing the Taliban with new batteries. it's possible, of course what makes more sense is that they would give them new and more capable ManPads....but...its not impossible.

either way, my point stands.
thanks for conceding advocate.

Posted by: Nathan on June 20, 2006 at 2:37 PM | PERMALINK

The Republican'ts

I like it!

:-)

GOP = Goobers on Parade

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 20, 2006 at 2:38 PM | PERMALINK

Boots Day:"Bush can sell out our CIA agents or get us into a disastrous war or sell the government to the highest bidder, but as long as he vows to keep taxes low, the GOP base will love him"

Too true, too true.

Boots Day: "The Bush Administration is much more like the New York Yankees than it is like any other governing regime in our nation's history."

A nice insight--Bushco is NOT about governing well, for sure! A difference is that the Yankees played decent ball. The Bushco club cheats, can't hit, can't run, cries foul when they miss the ball and still blames the other team for everything that goes wrong.

Posted by: PTate in MN on June 20, 2006 at 2:42 PM | PERMALINK

Nathan: Advocate for God now concedes that I was right about the batteries.

More amusing still, Nathan lies about what I've conceded, while simultaneously falsely implying that I challenged his assertion about the batteries.

his retort is some thinly sourced account

As opposed to Nathan's retorts which aren't sourced at all.

. . . of course what makes more sense is that they would give them new and more capable ManPads . . .

Yeah, much easier to transport entire weapons systems through the rough terrain of Afghanistan or through border security (where it exists) than to transport replacement batteries.

And much cheaper.

My bad.

You really got me on that one, Nathan!

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 20, 2006 at 2:43 PM | PERMALINK

Advocate for God:

its not just the batteries that would be degraded by now. its the seeker heads as well (unless they knew how to service them...highly unlikely)...

obviously I didn't need any source on the batteries since even your googling managed to confirm that I knew what I was talking about.

btw, want to give me the date and source for that article?

Posted by: Nathan on June 20, 2006 at 3:04 PM | PERMALINK

but as long as he vows to keep taxes low, the GOP base will love him"

That's not completely true. He also has to continue to appoint conservative judges and justices. Roberts and Alito were each grand slams.

The Bushco club cheats, can't hit, can't run,
cries foul when they miss the ball and still blames the other team for everything that goes wrong.

The most amazing thing here is you've known this from day one and Bush/Rove STILL kick your ass in every election. Isn't it ironic the one thing they do well is win elecitons?

Posted by: rdw on June 20, 2006 at 3:17 PM | PERMALINK

I assure you, I am real, and I know the details of the case. Don't give up hope! There will be a Fitzmas!

Posted by: Leopold's Source on June 20, 2006 at 3:21 PM | PERMALINK

Nathan:

its the seeker heads as well

Oops. Got caught on the batteries, got caught on getting new weapons being a simpler solution, so now you've got to spin, spin, spin and come up with another rationalization for why giving arms to our enemies (it wasn't just the Taliban or warlords or whoever you want to pin it on specifically, but also Saddam Hussein) is no big deal.

btw, want to give me the date and source for that article?

As soon as you provide date and source for each and every one of the claims you've made, including "you can't":

want to find one instance where a Stinger was fired against the U.S. or civilian aircraft (post the 80's anyway)? hint: you can't.

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 20, 2006 at 3:23 PM | PERMALINK

rdw: The most amazing thing here is you've known this from day one and Bush/Rove STILL kick your ass in every election. Isn't it ironic the one thing they do well is win elecitons?

Every bit as ironic as the mafia doing well at murder.

Winning through criminality and corruption is nothing to crow about, except for moral deficients like rdw.

He also has to continue to appoint conservative judges and justices. Roberts and Alito were each grand slams.

That is something that only appeals to you, Charlie, and a small group of religious fanatics whose methods track those of the Iranian ayatollahs.

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 20, 2006 at 3:29 PM | PERMALINK

Gee, no poll bounce for Bush from his "heroic" trip to Iraq.

I guess the American people recognize a lame and cowardly political ploy when they see one.

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 20, 2006 at 3:32 PM | PERMALINK

That is something that only appeals to you, Charlie, and a small group of religious fanatics whose methods track those of the Iranian ayatollahs.

That's not true. There's those other 62M voters making you a loser, again!

Posted by: rdw on June 20, 2006 at 3:39 PM | PERMALINK

rdw: There's those other 62M voters making you a loser, again!

Lying again, rdw, just like with DeWine and Strickland.

I guess you just can't help yourself.


Posted by: Advocate for God on June 20, 2006 at 3:55 PM | PERMALINK

Isn't it ironic the one thing they do well is win elecitons?

It's the only thing they do well, but they do it quite well indeed. It helps that they never let themselves get distracted by little things like running the country.

Posted by: Boots Day on June 20, 2006 at 3:59 PM | PERMALINK

It helps that they never let themselves get distracted by little things like running the country.

Not true!!! He did an outstanding job with his supreme court nominees and that guy at the UN.

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

the juvenile advocate for god writes:

"Got caught on the batteries"

wtf!???, um, your own source corroborated that.
for frick's sake, you're beyond hopeless.

oh, and I found your source:
that "news" article was from "India Defense"...a highly reliable and unbiased source on Pakistani affairs.
no wonder you didn't want to reveal your link.

again, I dare you to find one incident in which a Western aircraft was shot down by a Stinger supplied to the Mujihadeen in the 1980's. just one.

I'm done. there's a reason why even the regular liberal posters here don't take you seriously.
go back to reading Wayne Madsen.

Posted by: Nathan on June 20, 2006 at 4:25 PM | PERMALINK

Nathan: no wonder you didn't want to reveal your link.

And yet you've revealed absolutely no links for any of your claims, nor even provided quotes.

No wonder.

wtf!???, um, your own source corroborated that.

You got caught by the fact that the batteries issue was a red herring that had no relevance to whether the weapons were or could be used or not.

But run away and hide.

It's what Bush and you do best.

I dare you to find one incident in which a Western aircraft was shot down by a Stinger supplied to the Mujihadeen in the 1980's.

First it was simply "fired against" but now you are moving the goal posts and demanding "shot down."

Now you know why no one takes you seriously.

So run away and hide from your logical miscalculations, your inability to stay on point, and your failure to understand exactly what about your posting I've criticized and keep pretending I questioned your claim about the batteries running down at any point.

Another of Menchaca's uncles, Ken MacKenzie, lashed out at the government Tuesday on NBC's "Today Show," saying it didn't do enough to bring the men home safe, The Associated Press reported.

How long before Ann Coulter, Queen of Conservatives, calls Menchaca's uncle a traitor?

When are you going to speak out against her, Nathan?

As you know, failure to forcefully speak out against someone is the same as supporting and agreeing with that someone - at least, that's the standard that conservatives insist on applying to liberals who don't spend each and every minute of each and every day preaching to the choir about how bad the terrorists are.

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 20, 2006 at 4:59 PM | PERMALINK

um, your own link corroborates that the batteries are necessary.

fine, one instance of Western aircraft being shot at by Stingers given to the Mujihadeen...you won't find any. you will find references to "shot at" and "missile launches" (hint: the Taliban SAM network used Soviet-made missiles, not Stingers).

oh, and another thing, the U.S. didn't supply Hussein with military hardware (he did purchase some unarmed helicopters). intel, yes. his hardware was from the Soviet Union and France.
go to globalsecurity.org.

and one more thing. Ann Coulter doesn't speak for mainstream conservatives. heck, the National Review dropped her column a long time ago. I can't help it if she sells books..so does Noam Chomsky.

Posted by: Nathan on June 20, 2006 at 5:06 PM | PERMALINK

Nathan,

How foolish of you to think Advocate of God would ever stoop so low as to allow you the last word.

Posted by: Karl Rove on June 20, 2006 at 5:32 PM | PERMALINK

Nathan: um, your own link corroborates that the batteries are necessary.

Relevance to the issue and necessity to operation are two different things.

Try to get your head around the issue.

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 20, 2006 at 6:03 PM | PERMALINK
Rove's spokesman says they won't release the letter because they have an agreement with Fitzgerald that they "wouldn't disclose direct communications or any documents between his office and ours." This is a pretty laughable excuse, and it's hard not to wonder just what's in that letter that they don't want anyone to see.

Its not a laughable excuse if Leopold's story is only a little bit wrong -- if, say, there was a sealed indictment of someone, Rove's cooperation and the decision not to seek an indictment of Rove is intimately connected to that sealed indictment, and the communication between Fitzgerald and Rove's counsel would reveal that.

Posted by: cmdicely on June 20, 2006 at 7:32 PM | PERMALINK

Its not a laughable excuse if Leopold's story is only a little bit wrong

But we know there's much wrong. At a minimum the criminal indictment specified by leopold could not have been issued when he said it was issued. The entire story of Luskin meeting with Fitzpatrick has been strongly refuted by both sides and the report of it being a 15-hr meeting was bizarre to begin with.

It also makes perfect sense for Rove not to release the letter if only to drive the moonbats crazy and keep the pressure on the reporters who've been supoened by Libby. Rove has zero incentive to release it. To satisfy the MSM? Please!!!

At this point the press are the only ones in jeopardy of landing in Libby's position. They will be testifying under oath in this criminal case and do not want to contradict Rove. Remember, both Fitzpatrick and Libby's lawyers have records of Rove's testimony as well as their own. Libby will obviously work to destroy their credibility. If he catches them in a lie Fitzpatrick will have little choice but to charge them. Andrea Mitchell claimed Plames status was common knowledge on MSNBC. Some time later after realizing that helped the WH she retracted her statement. She's in danger and if she names names so are others. Bob Woodward at a minimum will testify Fitzpatricks original timeline was all wrong and neither Rove nor Libby were the original leakers.

There's a lot to come in this case. Libby has a very well financed and experienced defense team with motivation.

Leopold's story is nonsensical and his current position untenable. Fitzmas is so over.

Posted by: rdw on June 20, 2006 at 11:22 PM | PERMALINK

Ptate in MN wrote:

Okay, by my count, with 66 comments posted, the score is:

Trolls: 19
Neutral or Libs: 47

To PTate,
"trolls" = Someone who doesn't hate America enough.

Sounds like a typical urban Minnesotan: clueless.

It's funny though, to live in Minneapolis and watch this state going red. The state will be completely Republican controlled by 2008.

Better put the house up for sale, PTate.

Posted by: sportsfan79 on June 21, 2006 at 7:47 AM | PERMALINK


sports...too funny

dead enders think

bush = america...

party over country is not american..dont you know that?

Posted by: thisspaceavailable on June 21, 2006 at 12:23 PM | PERMALINK

I know this makes me an old fart, but seeing ``senior editors'' for ``Truthout'' doesn't add up to much of anything for me. Fitzgerald seems to be running a very tight-lipped investigation and case, and I have to wonder who these ``career federal law-enforcement officials'' et al are. How do they connect with Fitzgerald's crew?

Posted by: secularhuman on June 22, 2006 at 3:10 AM | 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