Karl Rove met with his lawyer and special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald this morning, according to CNN…
UPDATE: Rove is going in front of the grand jury for the fifth time.
» Breaking News
RNC Spent Almost $30,000 More In Clothes For Palin
Mumbai Terrorist Ajmal Amir Kasab Promised $1,250 For Attack
Economy Kills Broadway’s Latest Version Of “Grease”
Katie Price: Dwight Yorke Ignores Disabled Son Harvey
Obama Campaign Manager David Plouffe Writing Book
I know, I know. It is a gratuitous slap.
But I could not resist doing my part to destroy national security
and derail the war on terror. My BushHate compelled me to do it.
Or maybe Fitzgerald wanted to apoligize for lying again.
I am hoping that Fitzgerald was checking to see if they made orange jump suits in Rove’s size.
Isn’t it kind of early in the game to be plea bargaining?
Maybe Fitzgerald wanted to apologize?
Maybe he’s consulting Rove on the amount of damage done to national security by leaker and Democratic party operative Mary McCarthy. Perhaps, since the lie detector suggests she lied and Fitxgerald’s questioning suggests Libby lied, the punishment could be similar.
Oh wait a minute. She’s a progressive so its compeltely OK for her to leak anything.
Dugger
Or maybe Rove wanted to beg.
There once was a lawyer named Scooter,
Who spied a spook’s spouse as a looter
He got caught in a trap
Agreed he would yap
And fingered his boss as the shooter.
Yeah, Dugger, that’s it. Damnably clever of you.
“Maybe he s consulting Rove on the amount of damage done to national security by leaker and Democratic party operative Mary McCarthy.”
Who it turns out may not have been fired for actually leaking any information but for simply knowing the reporter who wrote the story. Naturally, of course, the former Republican Congressperson who now runs the CIA would never act in a blatantly partisan manner, such as manufacturing a scapegoat in order to chill criticism of Bush administration policies, no matter how flagrantly in violation of international law they are. I mean secret gulags? What could be better for American national security than secret gulags?
Gulags, that according to the EU, never existed. Gee, I wonder why a Kerry Operative would lie to a reporter about non-existent gulags…
OOOH NOOOEZZ!!! HE’Z GOIGN TO INDICT JOE WILSON!!! OMGZZZ!!111
Phew,
I’m seriously laughing at Dugger and SF’s Republicon cream dreams. Too Priceless.
Suppose Rove was shuffled to the other end of the WH because it was assumed he was soon to be indicted? Nah.
“Yeah, Dugger, that s it. Damnably clever of you. ”
Well put, Jamey. Like that ‘damnably”.
Dugger, suitable for damnation
A “Kerry operative”?
Whatchoo smokin’, boy?
Gulags, that according to the EU…
Since when did you start caring what the EU had to say about anything?
Gee, I wonder why a Kerry Operative would lie to a reporter about non-existent gulags&
But she didn’t. and they do.
Here Quaker, let ME learn to parse words like a leftist…!
WMDs , that according to the UN, for which there isn t enough evidence to prove their existance beyond a reasonable doubt&
You know Quaker, you’re right! Its got a nice ring to it….
LOL
Sorry Quaker, but the burden of proof is on the Puliter Prize winner. You don’t report something and say “Hey, you can’t totally disprove it… Vindication!!!”
I’m sure that in the liberal worldview, the more often a Republican goes to a Grand Jury, the guiltier he gets.
Others might say, “Fitzgeral is continuing to throw crap against the wall, to see what sticks,” thus proving that all special prosecutors are, or turn into, publicity - hungry tenacious seekers of self - aggrandizement.
Well, sort of. If you wrote that accurately, it would say: “:Gulags , that according to the EU, for which there isn’t enough evidence to prove their existance beyond a reasonable doubt…”
But that doesn’t quite startle the herd as nicely, does it?
But Bush is incorruptible!!!! In no way are his decisions to leak informed by any desire other than to defend our national security! INCORRUPTIBLE!!!
“Gulags, that according to the EU, never existed.”
Um, does this mean that McCarthy was fired for “leaking” information about prisons that never existed? You know Dugger is convinced that McCarthy betrayed national security. How exactly is that possible if the prisons don’t exist? You guys really should get your talking points straight.
Um, does this mean that McCarthy was fired for leaking information about prisons that never existed?
OooHHH!! Snap!
You boys got served!
If it looks like a turd and smells like a turd…
Are you kidding? You and frameone really demonstrated a serious lack of intelligence if you think someone shouldn’t be fired for leaking information in a sting operation. I doubt it was a sting, but how do you think there is a problem with firing someone for leaking information they believe is real?
I mean “turd blossom.”
First you say that she should get fired to telling secrets. Then you say those secrets don’t exist.
Wha…?
You’re confused.
The Pulitzer Prize winner has presented the facts and stands by the story.
YOU, on the other hand, asserted that “according to the EU, they never existed” when that’s NOT what the EU investigation says or has shown.
You’re MSU.
Peedro, is as usual, just jabbering nonsense.
Can we fire Bush for mishandling information he thought was real?
JWG –
I’ve got a comment awaiting moderation but in the meantime, the EU has claimed that its investigation turned up no evidence of secret prisons in Europe but the investigation then shifted from secret prisons to secret flights from Europe to countries that do allow torture, which would be a violation of EU laws. I believe the official report will be released this week.
http://www.canada.com/topics/news/world/story.html?id=01341a04-7c4b-4672-81d1-068f17ccaa95&k=18336
Still, McCarthy says she never leaked any information about illegal prisons while the right wing nuts believe she was fired for exposing VITAL INTELLIGENCE. AGHHHHH!
McCarthy was fired for leaking “fake” information? Come on. The whole thing wreaks of scapegoating, red meat for Bush zombies.
JWG,
Too fucking funny. Would someone please tell Rush Limbuagh that McCarthy was caught peddling “fictional” intelligence in a sting operation?:
“El Rushbo”:
“Here again, this is the war on terror. This is black prisons where we’re attempting to learn information from Al-Qaeda. I’m telling you, folks. I don’t care who you listen to on the left, be it the drive-by media or politicians. It’s scary. It’s frightening. This is why they cannot be trusted with this nation’s national security or defense. They are doing everything they can to sabotage the defeat of this particular enemy. They are invested in the defeat of this country. Make no mistake that’s what this is about. They’re not worried about America’s image. They’re not worried about all this torture and prisons. They’re not worried about this at all. This is simply about getting their power back, and they’ll destroy and kill whoever they have to or get killed whoever they have to in order to do it. They will engage in treasonous activity, and they’ll circle the wagons, and they’ll call themselves great heroines, great heroes, great patriots, whistleblowers, and what have you. This is patently obvious where the battle lines are drawn here and try as hard as they might to identify with most Americans on this, the Democrats and the drive-by media are identifying themselves as people who cannot be trusted to secure victory on the part of the United States in the war on terror against Al-Qaeda, the Taliban, and other related terrorist groups.”
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_042406/content/stop_the_tape.guest.html
Because if it isn’t real, why would they be fired?
I’m sure a bunch of military experts here on this blog would be the first to tell you that these so-called Gulags are “black sites” and therefore do not “officially” exist. If the EU say they don’t exist, then they must be doing a pretty good job, right?
shouldn t be fired for leaking information in a sting operation. I doubt it was a sting, but…
So, first it’s a sting and then it isn’t? Slow down, you’re gonna hurt yourself.
Words cannot express what a great day for our democracy it will be when the United States reestablishes oversight of the executive branch.
Karl is toast.
He’s singing to the GJ in hopes of a plea bargain.
hehehe….Keep it up Jade.
We have been hearing about the Rove “perp walk” and “frog-march” for years now.
Eventually you will all be vindicated and Rove WILL leave the WH, then you can all slap yourselves on the back and crow about how smart you are!
Try this, tell everyone the sun will rise in the east tomorrow morning!
Are you up for a little wager, “Dr”P?
Tell you what, I’ll even let you see some of my hand: I’ll bet there are several indictments coming down–including Karl’s.
‘ We have been hearing about the Rove “perp walk” and “frog-march” for years now.’
I seem to recall similar statements from right-wing trolls just before Scooter was indicted. Your powers of prognostication aren’t very impressive, DrP.
I don’t think the information was fake. I think the prisons are real. However, if they are fake, she should still be convicted of leaking classified information (if she leaked). Would you try to argue that someone caught soliciting a police officer pretending to be a 14 year old on the internet shouldn’t be prosecuted because the child was fake? Yet you claim you scored a “gotcha” by throwing out:
As far as McCarthy being guilty…I have no idea. She must have lied about something in her polygraph to be fired. Why doesn’t her friend, Dana Priest, simply say that McCarthy was not her source?
BTW, does everyone remember Richard Clark’s claim in his book about extraordinary rendition and Al Gore? Gore for president! Liberals want to continue torturing prisoners overseas!
However, if they are fake, she should still be convicted of leaking classified information (if she leaked).
I would agree with this: if it turns out that there is credible evidence that she knowingly leaked classified information or otherwise betrayed her oath, she should be prosecuted. A jury can decide whether she is guilty and, if so, whether she had compelling reasons for circumventing the established whistle-blowing channels.
I would simply observe that you righties established the standard by which some poeple are calling this into question: by insisting that Libby’s (and possibly Rove’s) leaking didn’t matter if a) some people on the outside already knew the classified information, b) the purpose of the leak was to discredit someone who - supposedly - deserved to be discredited (Wilson), and c) if no obvious harm came from the leak.
Leaking classified information is a crime. It may be justified or mitigated in certain circumstances — that’s what we have judges and juries to decide — but t’s still a crime, and those of you desperate to absolve Libby and Rove are responsible for blurring that simple fact.
suckers bet Jade.
Indictments are a dime a dozen in washington….it is the CONVICTION that is always problematic.
“I don t think the information was fake. I think the prisons are real. However, if they are fake, she should still be convicted of leaking classified information (if she leaked).”
Either way you cut it secret prisons would be a violation of the EUs treaty obligations:
“Clandestine detention centres, secret flights via or from Europe to countries where suspects could face torture, or extraordinary renditions would all breach the continent’s human rights treaties.”
Not to mention the USs supposed commitment to human rights and due process. McCarthy would be a classic whistleblower who sought to reveal illegal activity by a government agency. But then again, she says she never even knew about the prisons and was not in a position to know about the prisons. The story her lawyer tells is that she fudged her relationship with Priest and another reporter during a polygraph test and so was let go for having an “unauthorized relationship” with a reporter. What’s so ironic about this whole story is that the source for the information that McCarthy was fired for leaking information about prisons was itself an anonymous leak. From Newsweek:
“The sources spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the firing.”
So based on the information provided by an unauthorized leaker and without any other actual facts, the right wing has branded McCarthy a traitor and begun constructing a vast liberal conspiracy to bring down America from within. The whole thing stinks to high heaven. But does anyone even bother to ask if Porter Goss, a lifelong republican, has a partisan agenda in leaking false information about McCarthy as a warning to other CIA officers? Nope.
Nope. She should’ve gone to the proper Congressional oversight committee. Or don’t you trust any Democrats in Congress to protect human rights when they learn about violations?
Maybe the selected countries are not yet in the EU?
A full investigation of McCarthy just may reveal some more dirt on the WH. So do you feel lucky, conservo-punks?
“She should ve gone to the proper Congressional oversight committee. ”
Ya, right because the Republican-dominated Congress has done such a bang up job when it comes to its oversight responsbilities. And as to this: “Maybe the selected countries are not yet in the EU?” Congratulations. You’ve once again lowered the bar for ethical behavior in the field of foreign of policy. Yups, we’re all for liberty, human rights and spreading freedom around the world unless of course we aren’t obligated to by international law. Fan-fucking-tastic.
Then why did YOU bring up the legal point in the first place? Either it’s relevent or it’s not. If it is (since you brought it up), then if Romania is not part of the EU, no treaties are broken according to your criteria. If the EU treaty obligations are not important to the argument, then don’t bring them up. I made a logical argument and you decided to back away from your point. Congratulations back at ya.
Wow. I didn’t realize the Democrats were so helpless when it comes to human rights. Thanks for the lesson.
“Then why did YOU bring up the legal point in the first place? Either it s relevent
or it s not.”
um … the legal question involving the EU and where the prisons were supposedly located are a separate issue from our own country’s stated claims to respecting human rights and due process. You know, that whole freedom and democracy thing. But hey, if you don’t really give a shit about the ideals this country is supposed to stand for when some people suddenly find them “inconvenient” fine. The second point, as noted above, is that it isn’t just a matter of prisons. Secret rendition flights are also inviolation of the EU treaty obligations and there is evidence that they took place all over Europe.
As to your other point, ya, its totally sad that people who want to stand up for what’s right in this country can’t turn to congress for the oversight required. But it ain’t for Demsn alck of trying:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/17/AR2005121700992.html
Idiot.
Well, I must be…because now I’m really confused. First you claim “secret prisons would be a violation of the EUs treaty obligations” but when I offer the point that the prisons may not be in the EU you argue that legalisms don’t matter because we should be concerned with morality. Then you’re telling me that McCarthy (or whoever leaked) couldn’t go to Congressional Democrats as a whistleblower and was forced to break the law by going to the press because the Democrats are helpless no matter how hard they try.
No wonder those on the left are so angry.