rumor that rove has been indicted

[zimv20]

truthout (http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/051306W.shtml), but i've seen no confirmation.


Karl Rove Indicted on Charges of Perjury, Lying to Investigators

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 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, which include perjury and lying to investigators about how and when Rove discovered that Valerie Plame Wilson was a covert CIA operative and whether he shared that information with reporters, sources with direct knowledge of the meeting said.

It was still unknown Saturday whether Fitzgerald charged Rove with a more serious obstruction of justice charge. Sources close to the case said Friday that it appeared very likely that an obstruction charge against Rove would be included with charges of perjury and lying to investigators.

An announcement by Fitzgerald is expected to come this week, sources close to the case said. However, the day and time is unknown. Randall Samborn, a spokesman for the special prosecutor was unavailable for comment. In the past, Samborn said he could not comment on the case.

The grand jury hearing evidence in the Plame Wilson case met Friday on other matters while Fitzgerald spent the entire day at Luskin's office. The meeting was a closely guarded secret and seems to have taken place without the knowledge of the media.

(more)

[mactastic]

Interesting. We'll have to see what transpires next week...

[Ugg]

Can't wait to see how bush handles this one. He'll have no choice but to fire him and the republican party can kiss the November elections goodbye.

[Thomas Veil]

Wow. Bush's and Cheney's aides indicted.

And are we to believe they were acting on their own volition? Or can Fitzgerald show that the criminal activity goes even higher?

And wouldn't it be ironic if this was what ended up getting Bush and/or Cheney impeached, not the self-admitted lawbreaking involving the circumvention of FISA?

[Thomas Veil]

Why did I even bother to ask? :rolleyes:

This just in:

WASHINGTON (AP) -- In a new court filing, the prosecutor in the CIA leak case revealed that Vice President Dick Cheney made handwritten references to CIA officer Valerie Plame -- albeit not by name -- before her identity was publicly exposed.

The new court filing is the second in little more than a month by Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald mentioning Cheney as being closely focused with his then-chief of staff, I. Lewis Libby, on Bush administration critic Joseph Wilson, who is married to Plame.

With the two court filings, Fitzgerald has pointed to an important role for the vice president in the weeks leading up to the leaking of Plame's identity.

In the latest court filing late Friday, Fitzgerald said he intends to introduce at Libby's trial in January a copy of Wilson's op-ed article in The New York Times "bearing handwritten notations by the vice president." The article was published on July 6, 2003, eight days before Plame's identity was exposed by conservative columnist Bob Novak.

The notations "support the proposition that publication of the Wilson Op Ed acutely focused the attention of the vice president and the defendant -- his chief of staff -- on Mr. Wilson, on the assertions made in the article and on responding to those assertions."CNN link (http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/05/13/cheney.probe.ap/index.html)

Still no smoking gun for Cheney...but it's getting awfully uncomfortable for him and his boss.

And that's not even considering all the other people who are being investigated, such as outgoing CIA executive director Kyle Foggo and Housing and Urban Development Secretary Alphonso Jackson.

The Bush White House -- a cornucopia of corruption.

[zimv20]

what are the odds that cheney et. al. used the NSA secret wiretapping program to spy on wilson and plame? i'm thinking just about 100%.

[solvs]

what are the odds that cheney et. al. used the NSA secret wiretapping program to spy on wilson and plame? i'm thinking just about 100%.
I don't know, but I wouldn't bet against it. Other political opponents as well. Even with a smoking gun though, is anyone actually going to do anything about it? I knows Fitzy is trying, and the Dems are making a big stink, but are we waiting for after Nov or what?

[Thomas Veil]

I don't know if I'd be in a big hurry to indict and/or impeach Bush & Cheney, if that's the wait you're referring to. Drawing it out right now may actually be beneficial. If Bush or Cheney were to actually be formally charged with any crimes, it would allow them to spend the time between now and November hollering about partisan prosecution/persecution. This way, the threat just hangs in the air, with a lot of investigations/indictments going on around them. Makes them look really bad without formally targeting the two Big Cheeses themselves.

And, of course, there's the possibility that after November, we'll have a Democratic-controlled House and/or Senate, which would make impeachment that much easier.

BTW, on the subject of impeachment, Nancy Pelosi said on Meet the Press a week or two ago that the Dems were not planning on instituting proceedings, should they take control of any part of Congress in November. Pelosi said the party's platform would be focused on ending the war, and on domestic needs such as health care and the economy.

Much as I'd like to see Bush & Cheney hung up by their thumbs, it's probably a smart position for the Dems to take. It keeps them on the moral high ground, so they don't look like the only reason they want to take power is so they can get their revenge on Bush. And they can always change their minds about impeachment once they're elected, particularly if (as is happening now) worse and worse things keep coming out about this administration. Gives them the ability to say, "Well, we weren't planning on an impeachment, but the more that comes out, the more we realize we can't ignore it."

[FFTT]

It frightens me to think of who would take charge of leadership if this goes down the way I think it will eventually.


If this were a game of chess, I'd have to say Fitzgerald is going for all the Kings Horses and all the King's Men, then it's Check Mate for our Humpty Dumpty President.

[Dont Hurt Me]

If any of these guys get indicted they will be out of Prison before Bush is out of the Whitehouse. The best thing would be to draw this out and throw these bums in Jail when Bush is no longer around with his team of draft dodging scumbags.

[solvs]

"Well, we weren't planning on an impeachment, but the more that comes out, the more we realize we can't ignore it."
That's what I was thinking of too, but sadly I don't see them doing anything more than talking even if they took back both houses. I don't even see them doing that. Despite the fact that the other side is already accusing them of trying it. Which is stupid because that's what a lot of people want now, so it's actually kinda helping them even though they aren't doing anything and are only planning on it as a last ditch effort if it comes to that. I wonder if things get bad enough if the Republicans might try something in an attempt to distance themselves from Bush. If things get bad enough. Think it would help?

[leekohler]

Still no word? Anybody hear anything yet?

[mactastic]

Still no word? Anybody hear anything yet?
Don't worry... if it happens, it'll show up here.

[leekohler]

Don't worry... if it happens, it'll show up here.

I know- but I've got a nice bottle of Veuve chilling just for the occasion. ;)

[zimv20]

Don't worry... if it happens, it'll show up here.
and if it doesn't, the NSA will remind me by making clicking noises on my phone.

[pseudobrit]

Don't worry... if it happens, it'll show up here.

Next Tuesday?

[IJ Reilly]

Next Tuesday?

Right. Steve is going to announce it along with the new MacBooks.

[leekohler]

Right. Steve is going to announce it along with the new MacBooks.

Then it'll never happen! :D

[zimv20]

Right. Steve is going to announce it along with the new MacBooks.
"one more thing..."

[Lyle]

Robert Luskin, Karl Rove's lawyer, says he spent most of the day on May 12 taking his cat to the veterinarian and having a technician fix his computer at home.

He was stunned, therefore, when journalists started calling to ask about an online report that he had spent half the day at his law office, negotiating with Patrick Fitzgerald -- and that the special prosecutor had secretly obtained an indictment of Rove.

The cat's medical tests, Luskin says, found that "the stools were free of harmful parasites, which is more than I can say for this case."

The claim that President Bush's top political strategist had been indicted in the CIA leak investigation was written by a journalist who has battled drug addiction and mental illness and been convicted of grand larceny. That didn't stop more than 35 reporters -- from all the major newspapers, networks and newsmagazines -- from calling Luskin or Rove's spokesman, Mark Corallo, to check it out.I think this is the part where someone is supposed to say that even if the story is a hoax, it sounds like it could be true and that's what's so troubling.

Link (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/linkset/2005/04/11/LI2005041100587.html)

[FFTT]

truthout has published a partial retraction.

http://forum.truthout.org/blog/story/2006/5/19/162339/178

The Rove Indictment Story as of Right Now
By Marc Ash,

Fri May 19th, 2006 at 04:23:39 PM EDT :: Fitzgerald Investigation

On Saturday afternoon, May 13, 2006, TruthOut ran a story titled, "Karl Rove Indicted on Charges of Perjury, Lying to Investigators." The story stated in part that top Bush aide Karl Rove had earlier that day been indicted on the charges set forth in the story's title.

The time has now come, however, to issue a partial apology to our readership for this story. While we paid very careful attention to the sourcing on this story, we erred in getting too far out in front of the news-cycle. In moving as quickly as we did, we caused more confusion than clarity. And that was a disservice to our readership and we regret it.

As such, we will be taking the wait-and-see approach for the time being. We will keep you posted.

Marc Ash, Executive Director - t r u t h o u t
mailto:director@truthout.org

[Lyle]

While we paid very careful attention to the sourcing on this story, we erred in getting too far out in front of the news-cycle.That doesn't sound like a retraction to me. On the contrary, it sounds as though they are sticking by the original story that Fitzgerald indicted Rove on May 12, and the only reason this hasn't been reported on by any legitimate news sources is that truthout is "too far out in front of the news cycle."

[aquajet]

truthout has published a partial retraction...

What the hell is a partial apology? Sounds like BS to me.

[FFTT]

It tells me they know something is in the works, but they jumped the gun

that's why they're taking the wait and see approach without admitting they
were wrong.