OFFICIAL TRUTHOUT/LEOPOLD/ROVE INDICTMENT THREAD 6

[Moloch]

Sorry if I'm overstepping my bounds by making this thread, I didn't want to have something posted in the last one and not be able to get a response to it.

Here is thread 5:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1227513

[NMDemDist2]

1. you should post a link back the thread 5

:hi:

[Moloch]

4. Thank ya.

It's done. :7

[oldtime dfl_er]

56. 6 threads?? for what?

I've been away from computers all morning and now I find six threads on -- what? Can someone easily direct me to thread one or just tell me if something is going down?

http://www.cafepress.com/scarebaby/1446062

[SpiralHawk]

2. z-z-z-z-z-z

can you guys keep it down.

I'm trying to get some rest until the indictments are handed down...

[smb]

15. OK

I'm trying to get some rest until the indictments are handed down

[Chomp]

3. There was a young man from Nantuckett...

[JuniperLea]

7. who kept all his cash in a bucket...

[lonestarnot]

95. and didn't spend it on a mucket!

[JuniperLea]

5. oh.my.god

so weary. so very weary.


:boring:


can someone enlighten me as to why all the fervor on this matter? this whole discussion is getting far too freeper-esque for my taste.

[Connie_Corleone]

6. I guess I'll say it...Any News??

Please continue...

[Moloch]

8. Nope....

This sure has been a long business day...

[Chomp]

10. lol

[sabra]

9. What number thread will we be on when the indictment is announced?

[Connie_Corleone]

12. At this pace probably thread number 1500. nt

[hang a left]

22. Hopefully #8

Given that it slows down around here in the evening, and tomorrow is Friday.

[stop the bleeding]

11. reply for DU'er Karmakaze from thread 5 at post # 132

not an insult, it is an honest question, if you were following the threads from yesterday you would have seen that I was commenting to someone else minding my own biznezz and the he/she chimes in with their mean remarks. Once I knocked everyone of their remarks down he/she did not seem to want to play anymore after starting the whole deal no less. Now we goto to day 2 and the meanness continues.

Anyone who goes back and looks at what she/he said will see what I am talking about no more no less.

I have had several DU'er pm me asking the same thing, ones that have been staying away from this subject.

edit: I may have put the wrong post# up.

[AnarchoFreeThinker]

14. got your back on this.

[Karmakaze]

25. You don't think....

calling someone mean and bitter is an insult?

Can you point me to an example of the meanness you are talking about?

[Sydnie]

32. Calling someone mean and bitter is an observation

If the shoe fits ...

I think the point is, when drilled down, there is no constructive conversations happening. Hubris from the "gang" of posters is way beyond that. They moved from the safety of satire to the realm of intimidation long ago. Mean and bitter sums it up in a nice neat package, IMHO.

[Karmakaze]

39. Initimidation? Are you serious?

Saying "Why are you so mean and bitter?" is as far as I can tell no different from saying "Why are you so stupid?" and constitutes nothing less than a personal attack.

But intimidation? I seriously have a hard time believeing OldLeftyLawyer or Arwalden are engaging in intimidation. It certainly doesnt seem that way to me. I have seen them accused of practically being freepers, which, being a bannable offense here on DU, is far more like what I would consider to be intimidation.

Can you link me to an example where anyone has been intimidating Leopold suppporters?

[Sydnie]

69. I was speaking to the "gang/group" mentality

Of the type that appear like circling wolves if you as a question or question their position. Here's an example of how a poster felt and expressed it themselves. Read the whole subtread.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=1217985&mesg_id=1218411

Where is there anything constructive in that? I don't see it. I just see bullying.

[Karmakaze]

86. I see someone being...

criticised refusing to continue a conversation.

As for circling wolves: on that subthread I count three people whose opinion differs from yours. I also count four people whose opinion agrees with yours, including you. Now I dunno about you, but I always thought of "ganging up" or "circling wolves" as being the larger number in the equation.

I certainly don't see any intimidation.

[Sydnie]

26. I have noticed that too

I have no fear that he/she will see my reply. He/she placed me on ignore weeks ago ... for the use of a word that "offended" them.

There must be no mirrors where they are.

[Marie26]

13. OK

Together, I'm sure we can reach another 300+ posts. I was going to post this important question in thread #5, but it's going to have to go here.

What movie is this quote from?

MICHEAL: "You know what you are man, you know what you remind me of. Y-you're like th-th-th-th-that guy, with the, you know, with the, with the hat, and the bells, and the little, you know..."

"The court jester."

"Yeah, right, where everything is so easy to laugh at, from a safe distance back in clever-clever land."

[Spangle]

18. 100 post limit

Which means that if we are on thread 6, we have all ready passed 500 posts on the 'offical thread'.

[Marie26]

20. Incredible

All w/no news, developments, or changes at all. I am starting to wonder how far this can go. Will people give up, move on, keep fighting? Oh, and do you have a guess?

[Spangle]

30. It's on their mind

So I don't see a problem with them chatting and hanging out togother over a thread. So long as they are not making hundreds of 'no news' threads. or starting a thread that is actualy a reply that they want to make sure is 'heard' over hundreds of others.

[Marie26]

31. Oh, me either

I think it was a good idea to put it all into one thread.

[magpie]

19. Fish Without a Bicycle. n/t

[Marie26]

23. Nope. sorry.

Think 90's angsty romantic movie.

[Nederland]

54. Reality Bites? (nt)

[Marie26]

119. DING DING DING!

Congratulations! :toast: You've won, well, nothing - but here's some cute smilies. :bounce: :applause: :hi:

[Snivi Yllom]

16. HOLD YOUR HORSES. It's not Rove who is the target, but Dick Armitage!

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Senior_Powell_aide_focus_of_CIA_0518.html

Senior Powell aide focus of CIA leak investigation, former spymaster says

John Byrne
Published: Thursday May 18, 2006


The former director of the National Security Agency has said a former deputy to Secretary of State Colin Powell is a focus in the CIA leak investigation, RAW STORY can report.

Steve Clemons, editor of the popular foreign relations blog "The Washington Note," revealed Thursday that former NSA chief Bobby Ray Inman has repeatedly said former Undersecretary of State Richard Armitage is a target of the investigation into the outing covert CIA officer Valerie Plame Wilson. While saying he has no knowledge of the veracity of Inman's claim, Clemons notes that the nation's top spy chief might be privy to insider information.

"What Inman shared with some of us," Clemons writes, "is that the person in Patrick Fitzgerald's bull's eye is Richard Armitage."

Armitage International, where Armitage currently employed, declined to comment.

"We've had no comment until the investigation is over," a man who answered the phone at Armitage's firm said. "And that still stands."


more here:

http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/001398.php

the source is Bobby Inman, former NSA director.

[Cooley Hurd]

27. Rove could still be a target, re: perjury, conspiracy...

[Snivi Yllom]

29. could be

But this report is far more credible than anything Leopold has written.

[mdmc]

17. anything new?

[Snivi Yllom]

33. this: Dick Armitage focus of CIA leak investigation

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Senior_Powell_aide_focus_of_CIA_0518.html

[mdmc]

38. thanks for the update

peace

[Spazito]

60. Clemens makes it VERY clear that this is a RUMOR

"I have written about Armatige many times in the past and hope that this rumor is incorrect."

One of Clemens earlier writings speculated that Armatige could be Fitzgerald's source in the Libby/Rove matter, here is the link:

Who is Patrick Fitzgerald's "Deep Throat" Source? Is there a Counter-Leaker on Plame Case Working for the Side of Good?

http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/001099.php

[hang a left]

75. I have always thought that the Armitage rumor

(tis not the first time it has been thrown against the wall) was a deflection away from Bolton.

[Spazito]

84. The Armitage aspect has, indeed, been interesting

On the one hand, he is an administration loyalist but to what extent is a question. On the other hand, he was very loyal to Colin Powell and would likely, given the DOD attacks on State (Powell), not be thrilled with the WHIG group.

Seeing as Armitage resigned right after Powell left, it sure leaves a question mark as to what side he would fall on, if any at all.

[Justice Is Comin]

21. Well, it just

goes to show ya, ya can't depend on that Fitzgerald for nothin'. :spank:

[dogday]

24. I found this

Jason is right, especially regarding Rove’s spokesman, Mark Corallo.

"There has been no talk of resignation. The Republican Conference is solidly behind the Louisiana Republican (Bob Livingstone)." That’s Mark Corallo on December 17, 1998.

Two days later on December 19, 1998…

Bob Livingstone bows out of the speakership making an announcement on House floor. Corallo must have known well in advance.

When push comes to shove, it is Jason's and Truthout's word against the lying sacks of shit hiding out on Pennsylvania Ave.


http://www.conspiracyplanet.com/channel.cfm?channelid=39&contentid=3518&page=2


(hope this source is acceptable).....

[Avalux]

28. I may have missed it, but is sick cat story true?

I remember reading that someone was going to look into whether or not Rove's atty really did have a sick cat last Friday (day of alleged indictment). They were going to call local vet offices and check out his story.

[Catherine Vincent]

34. What the heck is that on that sticky?

I've been staring at it for a while. I can't make out what it is.

[Marie26]

Hippos?

[Spangle]

Not sure I want to know

Some things really are left to mystery.

[Alamom]

55. I'm just glad it's gone.

:rofl:

and glad I was not the only one wondering.

[Langis]

35. So....

Anything big going down today?

[Taxloss]

36. I would be interested in hearing from Will Pitt.

We need clarification from the sauce.

I mean source.

[arwalden]

37. Ack!!

:rofl: You nut! :rofl:

[Karmakaze]

41. hey did you know....

That you and OldLeftyLawyer have been intimidating people?

You really should cut that out, it's not nice :)

[arwalden]

46. Well...

If by "intimidating", you mean "calling out the shit", then I suppose you might have heard correctly.

Who told you that anyway? PM me so you don't have to embarrass your confidential sources.

~Allen

[Karmakaze]

53. Look up the thread...

Post #32.

I mean, seriously :)

[arwalden]

61. One Of Those "Delicate" Types Has Put Me On Ignore...

:cry: :cry: :cry:

Thanks for the kind words and the support. Some people are difficult to figure out, aren't they?

[Karmakaze]

64. It may not look like it -

but I have sources that say I have been around here a lot longer than it appears. Suffice it to say that I have read many, many of your posts for a long, long time (hmm does that make us sound old?) and the thought of you "intimidating" someone on DU strikes me as hilarious. :)

[arwalden]

71. Well... I Did Warn Someone...

... that he was "skating on thin ice" and that he needed to "cut the shit" and that he should "proceed with caution"... particularly when it came to how free and loose he was being with the DU rules (specifically the one about making personal attacks and insults).

As it turns out, I was correct and my warnings were justified... his little subthread of nastiness was deleted (just as I had predicted), yet... still... he (or she) managed to construe that as my making threats.

Go figure! :shrug:

I guess some folks aren't happy unless they are being victimized. They bully others, then when someone fights back and calls them on their shit... the bully pretends to be the victim.

As predictable as clockwork.

[Karmakaze]

62. Hmm...

I hope I haven't just pulled a Leopold!

Let me clarify what was said "the 'gang' of posters" has moved "to the realm of intimidation". Which is kind of like saying you and OldLeftyLawyer are intimidating people - isn't it? :shrug:

[arwalden]

65. Granted... It Was A Bit Vague

... but anyone who's had the stamina to endure the previous FIVE threads (with over 100 posts each) certainly won't have a difficult time in spotting the regular "players", "teams", "alliances", etc...

Those who choose to portray themselves as "victims" really need to take some acting lessons. They aren't very convincing, especially when it comes to making accusations that someone has made "threats" against them.

What an absurd little gaggle of groupies.

[Karmakaze]

68. Oops...

Now Ive gone and started two sub threads with one person :)

But I guess that is no more absurd than something I have seen on this Mini-Series (that is threatening to become a full series) thread :)

[Catherine Vincent]

49. Intimidating?

Oh please!

[Moloch]

40. hahahahahahaha

ROTFL

[DancingBear]

43. OK, I don't care what side of the aisle you're on,

this is just damn funny. :)

[Snivi Yllom]

50. jusss aliiiiillllllllllll muuurrrrrrrr suuuusssssss

[OldLeftieLawyer]

52. Take a bow

That was good.

Everybody's talkin' about it:

[theboss]

126. The one on the far right/front looks like Rush Limbaugh

Seriously.

[kpete]

42. for what its worth...

Posted by fireback
May 18, 2006 02:50 PM

For what its worth, I just got off the phone with the receptionist for Randall Samborn, the spokesman for Fitzgerald. I asked if Mr. Fitzgerald was in Chicago or Washington.

She said he was in Chicago.

Here's to a late afternoon/night or early morning flight to DC.

http://talkleft.com/new_archives/014875.html#comments

[Moloch]

44. Maybe...

but I think we can all agree now that if Rove is charged now, it is purely independent of anything which took place in Leopold's article.

[Spangle]

70. I wouldn't say that

The media don't always get things 100% correct, but they don't get skined this bad.

To me, it's all about the point. Is it in the works/coming down the lane right now, or not. IF the problem is the claiming that the GJ has decided to indict him, but the paperwork hasn't been filed yet.. That would be a technocality error. For some, when they HEARD the GJ had finaly 'done it',

Considering that my sources are also talking indictment, I'm guessing that this 'rumor' is comeing pretty far up. And the actual 'technocalitys' were not considered a major issue when first 'discussed'. Hence, improper reporting.

The DC reporters really have been 'chatting' about this since Friday. ANd, as a 'done deal' type of thing.

[Spangle]

45. Ok, color me stupid

Cause I haven't been following closely. But whats the deal with Chicago?

[greatauntoftriplets]

51. Fitzgerald is the federal prosecutor in Chicago...

He covers the Northern District of Illinois. It was his office, for example, that indicted and got a conviction against former governor George Ryan recently.

Fitz also lives in Chicago now, and was chosen for the job because of his independent ways. He previously lived in New York City.

He is a special prosecutor investigating Plamegate.

[Spangle]

78. Thanks!

I've had to take a mental break for awhile. LOL! So names, dates, details.. Nada!

[Snivi Yllom]

57. it's not DC

An indictment would be announed in DC.

[greatauntoftriplets]

59. Also, the meeting at Rove's attorneys' offices....

supposedly was attended by Fitzgerald in DC. As good as Fitz is, he doesn't have the ability to be in two places at once.

[Catherine Vincent]

47. Wha.?

That receptionist would be in big trouble for revealing Fitz's whereabouts. Hmm...

[Karmakaze]

48. I wonder what Fitzgerald thinks about all this...

I mean he has to know right? Roves lawyer has commented, and his office is bound to have had phonecalls seeking a statement as the the facts, so I wonder what HE thinks about this huge fuss that has developed?

[_testify_]

58. regular Chicago or 'business Chicago'?

I wonder.

[Snivi Yllom]

63. WashPost: "Grand Jury Hears Summary of Case On CIA Leak Probe"

What we should have seen by now. This was reported the day before Scooter Libby was indicted.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/26/AR2005102600532.html#

Grand Jury Hears Summary of Case On CIA Leak Probe
Decision on Charges May Come Friday

By Carol D. Leonnig and Jim VandeHei
Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, October 27, 2005; Page A01

The prosecutor in the CIA leak investigation presented a summary of his case to a federal grand jury yesterday and is expected to announce a final decision on charges in the two-year-long probe tomorrow, according to people familiar with the case.

Even as Special Counsel Patrick J. Fitzgerald wrapped up his case, the legal team of White House Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove has been engaged in a furious effort to convince the prosecutor that Rove did not commit perjury during the course of the investigation, according to people close to the aide. The sources, who indicated that the effort intensified in recent weeks, said Rove still did not know last night whether he would be indicted.

Fitzgerald is completing his probe of whether senior administration officials broke the law by disclosing the identity of CIA operative Valerie Plame to the media in the summer of 2003 to discredit her husband, former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, an administration critic. The grand jury's term will expire Friday.

[Taxloss]

66. All this has already happened, but it has been kept secret.

Mark my words, when the second coming comes, the dates on the documents will be 1.1.1000.

[arwalden]

74. You Slay Me!! -- Stop! This is TOO MUCH!!

<< All this has already happened, but it has been kept secret. >>

[Taxloss]

83. And on post #66 too ...

Anyway, bedtime here on the less interesting side of the Atlantic. I look forward to catching up with things tomorrow.

[DancingBear]

76. Oh yeah - what about this??????

If you take the number "24" and convert it to binary, you get 1 1 0 0 0.

Coincidence? I don't think so.

[Catherine Vincent]

67. Yes but this time the focus is on Rove.

All orders were for the media to halt reporting about Rove. And they obeyed.

[Snivi Yllom]

72. The KARLSPIRACY strikes again

all powerful Karl, able to control space and time

and the NY Times.

:eyes:

[Maddy McCall]

80. And the Christian Science Monitor and The Nation.

Awesome powers that Karl has!

[Maddy McCall]

77. You truly believe that?

Who gave these orders?

[greatauntoftriplets]

73. Is it safe? Rove is coming to Chicago tomorrow!!!!

Haul out the :tinfoilhat:

http://www.dailyherald.com/news/lakestory.asp?id=190131&cc=l&tc=&t=

[Maddy McCall]

79. He's coming to Chicago because his 24 Harvest Moon Hours are up.

He's handing himself over into Fitzgerald's custody. It was prearranged last Friday.

[greatauntoftriplets]

81. Is that before or after....

he attends Republican fundraisers?

[Maddy McCall]

85. Didn't you know?

Fitz will attend those fundraisers with him, just to keep a close eye on him. Rove will be wearing an electronic ankle bracelet and a shock collar.

[DancingBear]

82. It took 15 hours to make the plane reservations

The damn Secret Service took all the window seats.

[Maddy McCall]

87. I wonder if...

the drunk pilot from Sunday night is flying the plane?

:scared:

[DancingBear]

90. Sadly, no

He thought it took off on May 12th.

[Maddy McCall]

91. Is he going to out the air traffic control guy who told him that?

:shrug:

[DancingBear]

100. Only if it turns out the plane never takes off

If another plane at some point eventually flies to Chicago then it's all good.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

102. What plane?

I heard he's taking a land route:

[DancingBear]

107. I heard he was taking a Land Rove-er

18 doughnuts to the gallon.

[theboss]

104. If Rove ever visits Chicago in his life, the story is true

But only if he flies "business class."

[Snivi Yllom]

103. no no no, it's the secret United 93 pilot

you know, the one from the real United 93.....


the one that landed in Cleveland.....

[OldLeftieLawyer]

97. And it's on a stealth bomber

Don't want people noticing who's on board, ya know.

Yeah, people are routinely told of Fitzgerald's travel plans.

Right.

Someone's gullible, methinks.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

88. Oh, yeah?

Well, I just found out that The Rapture will take place tomorrow, so all bets are off.

[Maddy McCall]

89. Karl pulled that one out of his ass.

That guy truly is the all powerful!

[OldLeftieLawyer]

92. If only they understood

If only.

Look at how he's managed to manipulate the whole judicial system, not to mention the good DUers.

You do know, don't you, that we were always his intended targets?

Yes, we were. Karl Rove's only reason for living recently has been to flummox DU.

I'll be wearing my water wings tomorrow. Think about it.

[Karmakaze]

96. Now, is this the Biblical "Tomorrow"?

If so, I shall pass the warning down to my great, great, great, great, great grandchildren. Im sure they will give you proper credit for your scoop :)

[Snivi Yllom]

94. it does not sound like he is going to be indicted Friday

if he has time for a fundraiser Friday.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

101. No, he doesn't have to be there

Indictments - they're such impersonal things - pieces of paper.

It doesn't matter where Rove is on Friday.

Except, he's going up with The Rapture, too, because, you know, he planned it this way.

[Spangle]

105. And he has to be there?

I don't think he has to be present when he is indict. Just a matter of filing the paperwork. Which means that Fitz would have to be there, I would think.

But for republicans, it's always business as usual. Him planning on going to a fundraiser doesn't mean anything at this point. THey don't hid their head in shame when they are 'caught'.
Besides, indicted doesn't mean convicted. So he would STILL want to be showing he is 'innocent' of all charges, etc, etc... No worrys.

Not saying he IS going to be indicted tomarrow. LOL! Just saying that him planning on going to a fundraiser doesn't mean he isn't. In fact, he might want to be out of DC when it comes down.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

108. No, Fitzgerald doesn't have to be anywhere

An indictment gets filed. It's a clerical thing. No big deal. Then it's announced. That can take place anywhere.

He IS innocent. Hate him or not, I can't give up my belief that Constitutional rights extend to everyone, even Karl Rove. This is America, don't forget.

He's not indicted.

He very well may not be indicted.

What will you do then?

[Spangle]

115. What do you mean?

What will I do? What kind of question is THAT?

[OldLeftieLawyer]

127. A simple one

A more complex question might have been something like, "I'm thinking that all these bookshelves in this study would really look better if they were stained darker, but that would involve so much work, I'm not sure that it's worth it, but they really would look nice, so what do you think?"

[dogday]

93. I am leary when I see articles like these

Rove shows calm amid storm

Can Rove weather the political, legal storm?

Friends say Rove unfazed by threat of indictment

Karl Rove unfazed by possibility of indictment in CIA leak case

Rove Said Unfazed by Chance of Charges

Rove Plays Down Precarious Legal Situation

Colleagues say Rove unfazed by legal woes

Indictment or not, Rove won't be kept down

I could go on and on but I am tired of copying and pasting... Is it me but when the media is all saying how happy Karl is, I put my tinfoil hat on:tinfoilhat:


http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=us&ie=UTF-8&ncl=http://www.progressiveu.org/094318-holy-smokes-is-it-real-this-time-karl-rove-was-indicted

[lonestarnot]

98. This lyin' theif has done this to so many people in his lifetime

that it is second nature for him until the reality soaks in...arrogant bastard!

[theboss]

99. At what point do we end the Rove watch and get on with our lives?

Nothing is going to happen this week apparently since I really doubt "get your affairs in order" means "fly to Chicago next week."

[OldLeftieLawyer]

106. Well, see, no one ever said

'get your affairs in order.'

See, that's what the judge traditionally tells the defendant at sentencing, and, as you know, there's been no indictment, no trial, no conviction, and no sentencing.

That line, though, is the sort of thing someone who doesn't have a clue about how the law works would come up with, thereby demonstrating his or her total ignorance of reality.

So, Rove, who is not indicted and may well never be indicted, is just working. It's his job. He can go wherever he wants.

And his affairs are not relevant.

That line in that article was hilarious. A real winner.

[theboss]

109. Do judges even say that?

I've never really worked in criminal law, outside of a brief law clerk experience on the most important trial in the state that year in which we badly lost by putting a clearly delusional man on the stand despite our better judgment.

I always thought this was something said by doctors on soap operas when diagnosing good-looking people with a terminal illness that will in no way impact their good looks.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

111. Yeah, they say it, after setting the date for turning in

I once had a client who arrived stoned for his sentencing. It was cool - he was gonna get probation - all was settled.

The client, red eyes and all, stood when sentence was about to be pronounced. I had told him, natch, to keep his fucking mouth shut.

The judge asked him if he had anything to say.

"Beam me the fuck up, Scottie!" my brilliant client boomed.

Two years.

He got twenty-four hours to "get his affairs in order."

One of my true high points as defense counsel.

[Karmakaze]

112. LOL!

Some people just don't know when to keep their mouths shut. They just keep digging themselves in deeper and deeper. They really are their own worst enemy.

Disclaimer: Any similarity of these sentiments to any person or event is purely coincidental.

[theboss]

121. I have two great stories from my three month crim law "career"

One involves Charles Manson.

The other involves a client getting on the stand and basically undercutting our entire defense of "He was manipulated" by declaring "I WAS IN CHARGE THE WHOLE TIME!!!!!"

My mom has a great story of being on a jury. The defendant was on trial for drug charges. They had a video of the transaction.

The freaking guy was wearing the same jacket in the court room that he had on in the video.

[onenote]

110. as soon as something new happens in the Duke rape case or Tony Snow

uses the phrase "call a spade a spade" or something equally earthshattering occurs.

[theboss]

123. This is why I could never be in politics

I would use the word "niggardly" at every possibly occasion. Just to watch the blogs explode.

[5X]

128. tony snow said "call a spade a spade"?

I knew it. {rumor started}

[lonestarnot]

118. Not until I see him hippity hoppn' down the frog trail!

[arwalden]

113. Any Breaking Updates On Raw Story??

:shrug: If anyone can clear up the confusion... I know that the crack team of Raw Story reporters can do the job!

[Snivi Yllom]

116. National Review has an update -responds to Madsen

comments on the Madsen story

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ODExMzllMjViM2M3NmI1NmJhYmJhY2FkM2QxMjE5NTE=

Madsen's report has raised the hopes of Rove indictment fans who have become somewhat dispirited after Leopold's "24 business hours" passed without action against Rove. But it appears that they might again be destined for disappointment, because the details of Madsen's account are, if anything, even more farfetched than Leopold's.

First, a Justice Department source, speaking on background, says that Alberto Gonzales did not go to the courthouse on Friday, May 12.

Second, Gonzales, like his predecessor John Ashcroft, has recused himself from the CIA leak investigation. Gonzales, as White House counsel, had taken part in the White House's response to the Justice Department in the early days of the probe. When he became attorney general, there was no doubt that he would have to recuse himself from the matter. He was asked about it during a press conference in October 2005, when there was great anticipation that indictments were coming in the CIA leak affair, and this is what he had to say:



QUESTION: And does Patrick Fitzgerald — will he notify you if he's about to indict anyone? And lastly, is he under any obligation a public report?

ATTY GEN. GONZALES: I am recused from this investigation. I have been since coming to the Department of Justice. That means that not only am I recused from making decisions or participating in decisions regarding this investigation, I am recused from receiving information about the investigation. Quite frankly, you probably know more about this case than I do. I do not receive briefings. I do not receive any information about this particular case.

And in terms of what will happen going forward, you — you have as much information about that as I do. That's — that'll be a decision made by Pat Fitzgerald.


Finally, it simply defies common sense to think that Fitzgerald and the grand jury would give the attorney general a preview of an indictment in the CIA leak matter. "Gonzales would not be given that kind of information," says one insider. "The reason one is recused from the case is so that one cannot make decisions that would affect the case — like he might tell the White House."

And one more note. Madsen also reported that Fitzgerald told Rove lawyer Robert Luskin that he, Luskin, is now a "subject" in the probe because Fitzgerald is investigating whether Luskin "may have violated laws on obstruction of justice." I asked Rove spokesman Mark Corallo whether Fitzgerald has informed Luskin that he, Luskin, is a subject of the investigation. "No," was Corallo's answer. And Corallo repeated his earlier denials about the purported meeting last Friday at Patton Boggs. It simply did not happen, Corallo said.

[arwalden]

122. I Just Don't Know What To Make Of All That.

Thanks! :hi:

[Snivi Yllom]

124. it's 6:20 EST, still nothing coming from any MSM sources

.

[arwalden]

125. They Are Still Busy At Their Weekly MSM Meeting...

... deciding which stories to report and which ones to bury.

[Maddy McCall]

117. ...

:spank:

[shadowlight]

114. OK, here's my theory.

Feel free to shoot it down.
Fitzgerald meets Rove and attorneys on Fri.
Fitzgerald offers to make a deal with Rove. If Rove doesn't accept the deal Fitzgerald
says he'll bring more charges,
Rove doesn't accept, so Fitzgerald goes back to the GJ on Wed. in order to bring more charges against Rove.

[HereSince1628]

120. Well, here is what I think.

There is no evidence Rove met with Fitzgerald on Fri.
There is no evidence that Fitzgerald offered Rove a deal that Rove didn't accept.
There is no evidence that Fitzgerald went back to the GJ yesterday to bring additional charges.

A theory accomodates available evidence. How can you have a theory sans evidence?
What you are doing is rationalizing, creating a story that is going to fit a different story. It's a technique used by creationists.

[Name removed]

129. Deleted message

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

[The empressof all]

130. Locking

Please go to #7 here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1229549