KipWellsFan Posted May 14, 2006 Share Posted May 14, 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 hours to get his affairs in order, high level sources with direct knowledge of the meeting said Saturday morning. http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/051306W.shtml Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregory Pratt Posted May 14, 2006 Share Posted May 14, 2006 How reliable is TruthOut? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LowerCaseRepublican Posted May 14, 2006 Share Posted May 14, 2006 Pretty good factually on events, etc. Truthout.org is a community website devoted to alternative politics and news. Primarily American, it provides what is liberal or left-leaning reporting and commentary on current events. As well as hosting original reporting and multimedia content, it collects articles from other places, particularly those that cover topics which the community consider to be under-represented in the mainstream media. The site was founded by Marc Ash, currently the Executive Director, in an attempt to create a grassroots movement for alternative media, reporting and commenting upon issues ignored by the mainstream press. The site has particularly focused upon the various aspects of the American-lead war in Iraq, the "war on terror" in general, and reporting other abuses of power associated with the Bush administration and multinational corporations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlaSoxxJim Posted May 14, 2006 Share Posted May 14, 2006 Here's hoping this is true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlaSoxxJim Posted May 14, 2006 Share Posted May 14, 2006 One other thought. GWB has an evening televised appearance scheduled for Monday. Either they knew this was comong down the pike and that's what the conference is all about - an attempt at damage control, or else it was completely unrelated but will now no doubt be what the appearance has to be about. If the latter is the case, I bet they sure want to cancel that appearance. Here comes that 20% approval rating. . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted May 14, 2006 Share Posted May 14, 2006 WOOHOOOO! ONE STEP CLOSER TO IMPEACHMENT! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlaSoxxJim Posted May 14, 2006 Share Posted May 14, 2006 QUOTE(kapkomet @ May 13, 2006 -> 10:55 PM) WOOHOOOO! ONE STEP CLOSER TO IMPEACHMENT! Not without the Dems taking at least one house in Congress, but be happy for the little things. And as the little things go, this is pretty big. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted May 14, 2006 Share Posted May 14, 2006 QUOTE(kapkomet @ May 13, 2006 -> 09:55 PM) WOOHOOOO! ONE STEP CLOSER TO IMPEACHMENT! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KipWellsFan Posted May 14, 2006 Author Share Posted May 14, 2006 QUOTE(kapkomet @ May 13, 2006 -> 09:55 PM) WOOHOOOO! ONE STEP CLOSER TO IMPEACHMENT! Well if he gets any lower it's time to resign. I love George W. Bush. With Clinton in and an actual strong economy the Canadian dollar was at about 62cents, but a f***up like Bush comes in and we hit a 28 year high of 92 cents. PLEASE DON'T PUT IN ANOTHER CLINTON! Canada wil be f***ed again! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NUKE_CLEVELAND Posted May 14, 2006 Share Posted May 14, 2006 QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ May 13, 2006 -> 09:50 PM) One other thought. GWB has an evening televised appearance scheduled for Monday. Either they knew this was comong down the pike and that's what the conference is all about - an attempt at damage control, or else it was completely unrelated but will now no doubt be what the appearance has to be about. If the latter is the case, I bet they sure want to cancel that appearance. Here comes that 20% approval rating. . . Uhhh. His Monday night address is supposed to be about immigration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlaSoxxJim Posted May 14, 2006 Share Posted May 14, 2006 QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ May 14, 2006 -> 11:33 AM) Uhhh. His Monday night address is supposed to be about immigration. I hadn't heard the subject, only that an address was scheduled. It will be interesting to see him stay on task with an immigration talk if indictments are handed down tomorrow morning. But is anyone can do it, the President in a bubble can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilMonkey Posted May 14, 2006 Share Posted May 14, 2006 All that time andmoney and all he can find is perjury? What a collosal waste of time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted May 14, 2006 Share Posted May 14, 2006 Yeah, because perjury isn't important anymore. It's not like we recently impeached a president on perjury charges or anything.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted May 14, 2006 Share Posted May 14, 2006 Sad day, really. Rove is slimy so I hold no sympathy for him, but I don't think this ends up helping anyone. The Bush presidency has had its own wheels for far too long, and it won't change direction much with Rove out the door. If this had been early on in his administration, it might have made a big difference. Today? Nearly irrelevant, in terms of going forward. The only positive I see here is sending a message to future candidates about handing over their operations to guys like Rove. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted May 14, 2006 Share Posted May 14, 2006 I'll still withhold judgement until the actual indictments come down. Truthout's cute, but anonymous sources at random left-leaning web pages with no documentation to back things up just don't do it for me. Even if he turns out to be right, there's no great reason to trust this source. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlaSoxxJim Posted May 14, 2006 Share Posted May 14, 2006 QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ May 14, 2006 -> 05:32 PM) Sad day, really. Rove is slimy so I hold no sympathy for him, but I don't think this ends up helping anyone. The Bush presidency has had its own wheels for far too long, and it won't change direction much with Rove out the door. If this had been early on in his administration, it might have made a big difference. Today? Nearly irrelevant, in terms of going forward. The only positive I see here is sending a message to future candidates about handing over their operations to guys like Rove. If true, I don't think it will be nearly irrelevant by any means. Rove had been reassigned to work pretty much exclusively on politics, i.e., positioning the GOP to hold onto as many seats in Congress as possible. Rove is a really shrewd strategist, pretty much the guy that even made same-sex marriage a campaign issue in '04. Without somebody like him trying to unify the currently disshevelled GOP around a couple of key issues, I think they will be limping into '06. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilMonkey Posted May 14, 2006 Share Posted May 14, 2006 QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ May 14, 2006 -> 09:19 PM) Yeah, because perjury isn't important anymore. It's not like we recently impeached a president on perjury charges or anything.... Sad becuase when you testify in fron of a grand jury several times, your stories are bound to be slightly different, truthful or not. All it take sis one time getting tired of answering the same damn question over and over for you to give an answer that is slightly different, though cold be the same in essense. Oops! You just changed your stiry! You must be lying to us! How many times did he testify? And this is all they found? I stand by what I said, a waste of time on a political whichhunt that yielded almost nothing. This was just payback for Ken Starr. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted May 14, 2006 Share Posted May 14, 2006 QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ May 14, 2006 -> 05:40 PM) If true, I don't think it will be nearly irrelevant by any means. Rove had been reassigned to work pretty much exclusively on politics, i.e., positioning the GOP to hold onto as many seats in Congress as possible. Rove is a really shrewd strategist, pretty much the guy that even made same-sex marriage a campaign issue in '04. Without somebody like him trying to unify the currently disshevelled GOP around a couple of key issues, I think they will be limping into '06. He was shrewd and very savvy, and a key piece for the GOP machine. But the point I was trying to make here is that he is no longer terribly relevant in that arena. Let's look at this for a second. For Bush's administration, he doesn't serve much more of a purpose. Their direction is set, and barring a complete reversal of character, it ain't changin'. As for the GOP generally, given the utter failure of this administration which he led, and the piss-poor polling data, I don't think they want him leading things right now. They'd avoid him. So, in short, he has very little upside for the GOP for '06 or '08. Therefore, despite his obvious importance up to now, he's just not that important anymore. And don't think he, and Bush, don't know that - he may very well be served up here like so much chaff for the press to hone in on. Rove knows he is set for life after this, and may even come back later. But its his turn to fall, and so he will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted May 14, 2006 Share Posted May 14, 2006 QUOTE(EvilMonkey @ May 14, 2006 -> 07:36 PM) Sad becuase when you testify in fron of a grand jury several times, your stories are bound to be slightly different, truthful or not. All it take sis one time getting tired of answering the same damn question over and over for you to give an answer that is slightly different, though cold be the same in essense. Oops! You just changed your stiry! You must be lying to us! How many times did he testify? And this is all they found? I stand by what I said, a waste of time on a political whichhunt that yielded almost nothing. This was just payback for Ken Starr. Slight differences rarely get perjury charges. Fitzgerald, in his indictment of Scooter, basically went so far as to say that the degree to which they discovered Libby's testimony to be perjured has practically forced the investigation to start over on who leaked a CIA operative's name to the press and whether or not it was flagrant enough to justify it being a violation of the law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KipWellsFan Posted May 15, 2006 Author Share Posted May 15, 2006 QUOTE(EvilMonkey @ May 14, 2006 -> 06:36 PM) Sad becuase when you testify in fron of a grand jury several times, your stories are bound to be slightly different, truthful or not. All it take sis one time getting tired of answering the same damn question over and over for you to give an answer that is slightly different, though cold be the same in essense. Oops! You just changed your stiry! You must be lying to us! How many times did he testify? And this is all they found? I stand by what I said, a waste of time on a political whichhunt that yielded almost nothing. This was just payback for Ken Starr. Well we're just going on some random blog report but for debates sake... I don't think they charge one of the most powerful men in the World if he just made a mistake in testifying. The Ken Starr argument? Maybe I've missed some things but from what I've heard this Fitzgerald guy is as classy as they come. Also the blog report says its not just perjury, but that he'll also be charged with lying to investigators and apparently he still may be charged with obstruction of justice. If the blog report is true the media will go bonkers for this. I mean this is the guy that's supposed to be Bush's Brain, and he's constantly named one of the most fascinating people in America. It'll be huge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NUKE_CLEVELAND Posted May 15, 2006 Share Posted May 15, 2006 QUOTE(KipWellsFan @ May 14, 2006 -> 11:17 PM) Well we're just going on some random blog report but for debates sake... I don't think they charge one of the most powerful men in the World if he just made a mistake in testifying. The Ken Starr argument? Maybe I've missed some things but from what I've heard this Fitzgerald guy is as classy as they come. Also the blog report says its not just perjury, but that he'll also be charged with lying to investigators and apparently he still may be charged with obstruction of justice. If the blog report is true the media will go bonkers for this. I mean this is the guy that's supposed to be Bush's Brain, and he's constantly named one of the most fascinating people in America. It'll be huge. I still need something more concrete than rumors from a leftist blog to make a big deal of this. Wake me up when something really happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilMonkey Posted May 15, 2006 Share Posted May 15, 2006 QUOTE(KipWellsFan @ May 15, 2006 -> 04:17 AM) Maybe I've missed some things but from what I've heard this Fitzgerald guy is as classy as they come. Supposedly he has a reputation for convictions, and for not giving up until he gets one. If he were to spend this amount of time and money on a case, and NOT get ANYONE, there goes his reputation. Doesn't matter if they were 100% innocent, and he found that out, it would just kill the 'aura' he has baout him in these matters. I am not saying he made anything up, but he very well could be stretching things a bit. And as someone else brought up, grand juries can indite for anything. or not. Didn't it take him 3 juries before he got an inditement? Guess he didn't like the results of the first two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted May 15, 2006 Share Posted May 15, 2006 Actually juries expired before he could get the records he needed to complete his investigation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted May 16, 2006 Share Posted May 16, 2006 So is this going to happen or not? July 6, 2005 October 12, 2005 Cheney indictment in France 2004 Cheney indictment during the election cycle Or Dick Cheney has already been secretly indicted I'll believe it when I see it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NUKE_CLEVELAND Posted May 16, 2006 Share Posted May 16, 2006 QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ May 16, 2006 -> 01:58 PM) So is this going to happen or not? July 6, 2005 October 12, 2005 Cheney indictment in France 2004 Cheney indictment during the election cycle Or Dick Cheney has already been secretly indicted I'll believe it when I see it. LOL! Dont hold your breath. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts