Fitzgerald Investigation of Leak of Identity of CIA Agent

0 Replies

Statement from Christopher Wolf, attorney for outed CIA officer Valerie Plame Wilson

RAW STORY
Published: Tuesday June 13, 2006

Statement of Christopher Wolf, Proskauer Rose LLP, Counsel for Ambassador Joseph Wilson and Valerie Plame Wilson

"We have become aware of the communication between Mr. Fitzgerald and Mr. Luskin concerning Karl. Rove's status in the criminal investigation. We have no first-hand knowledge of the reason for the communication or what further developments in the criminal investigation it may signal. While it appears that Mr. Rove will not be called to answer in criminal court for his participation in the wrongful disclosure of Valerie Wilson's classified employment status at the CIA in retaliation against Joe Wilson for questioning the rationale for war in Iraq, that obviously does not end the matter. The day still may come when Mr. Rove and others are called to account in a court of law for their attacks on the Wilsons."

0 Replies

The day may still come when the left wing haters will be convinced that Mr.Rove will not be tarnished. The left wing haters are so venemous that they would feel happy if Mr. Rove is indicted. Alas, that will not happen even after FOUR HUNDRED AND SIXTY TWO BOGUS POSTS HAVE BEEN MADE SHOUTING

ROVE TO BE INDICTED??????????????????????

Now, we will watch as the left wing picks up more manure and tries to splatter the Bush Administration with it. Alas , the "Rove will be indicted" Manure, simply evaporated in mid air,leaving the only ones who really smell---the left wing-- who throw any manure they can find.

It is sad since they are not only running out of manure, they are running out of credibility--First, it was Vice President Cheney, then it was Mr. Rove.

The left wing must be getting desperate!

0 Replies

Whether anybody gets indicted or not don't change the facts that have been confirmed that the WH engaged in unethical practices and then denied it for two years all in an attempt to discredit a dissenter of their Iraq war.

0 Replies

revel wrote:

Whether anybody gets indicted or not don't change the facts that have been confirmed that the WH engaged in unethical practices and then denied it for two years all in an attempt to discredit a dissenter of their Iraq war.

Unethical? Try treasonous!

0 Replies

"I've never seen, frankly, someone involved in an investigation of this kind given so many chances to continually correct and amend prior testimony. There are many prosecutors who would have indicted Rove on his first statement," George Washington University Law Professor Jonathan Turley told CBS. "He was given a great deal of deference and quite frankly, assistance, by the prosecutor."

0 Replies

The "mourning process" consists of several phases, first "shock," followed by "denial," and then "emotional confusion" ....

0 Replies

Ticomaya wrote:

The "mourning process" consists of several phases, first "shock," followed by "denial," and then "emotional confusion" ....

I wondered what Coulter's problem was...

Thanks Tico for letting us know.

0 Replies

Who is confused, who has denied, and who has been shocked? Can you cite examples and explain why that someone was any of those things? I doubt it.

I would have been pleasantly shocked if Karl Rove actually was indicted, nevertheless, enough evidence (on past news articles) has been shown good enough for me to believe (I am not a court or grand jury so it don't have to absolute) that Karl Rove was guilty of outing Plame to reporters and then denying it.

0 Replies

revel wrote:

Who is confused, who has denied, and who has been shocked? Can you cite examples and explain why that someone was any of those things? I doubt it.

I would have been pleasantly shocked if Karl Rove actually was indicted, nevertheless, enough evidence (on past news articles) has been shown good enough for me to believe (I am not a court or grand jury so it don't have to absolute) that Karl Rove was guilty of outing Plame to reporters and then denying it.

That's probably why he was indicited. Oh, wait, he WASN'T indicted, so that must mean you are wrong.

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

revel wrote:
Who is confused, who has denied, and who has been shocked? Can you cite examples and explain why that someone was any of those things? I doubt it.

I would have been pleasantly shocked if Karl Rove actually was indicted, nevertheless, enough evidence (on past news articles) has been shown good enough for me to believe (I am not a court or grand jury so it don't have to absolute) that Karl Rove was guilty of outing Plame to reporters and then denying it.

That's probably why he was indicited. Oh, wait, he WASN'T indicted, so that must mean you are wrong.

Yea, and OJ Simpson is innocent because he was found not guilty.

0 Replies

revel wrote:

Yea, and OJ Simpson is innocent because he was found not guilty.

OJ was found not guilty because the idiot LA County DA decided, for the sake of media's convenience, to move the trial from Santa Monica, which was the municipal jurisdiction in which the crime occurred and where it should have been tried, to LA proper - where the media access was better, though unfortunately for the Da and for the credibility of the US Judicial System, where the defense was able to take advantage of its jury selection options among candidates from within a pool far better equipped with minority predisposed, celebrity-worshiping semi-literate underemployeds than would have been available in Santa Monica. The result of the subsequent civil trial makes that abundantly clear.

0 Replies

timberlandko wrote:

revel wrote:
Yea, and OJ Simpson is innocent because he was found not guilty.

OJ was found not guilty because the idiot LA County DA decided, for the sake of media's convenience, to move the trial from Santa Monica, which was the municipal jurisdiction in which the crime occurred and where it should have been tried, to LA proper - where the media access was better, though unfortunately for the Da and for the credibility of the US Judicial System, where the defense was able to take advantage of its jury selection options among candidates from within a pool far better equipped with minority predisposed, celebrity-worshiping semi-literate underemployeds than would have been available in Santa Monica.

We know this after the fact because we followed two trials. We know that Rove was not truthful in his testimony to the Grand Jury. A civil jury found OJ culpable. This could very well be the way the Plame case plays out. We just don't know yet. There is very little known at this point.

0 Replies

timberlandko wrote:

revel wrote:
Yea, and OJ Simpson is innocent because he was found not guilty.

OJ was found not guilty because the idiot LA County DA decided, for the sake of media's convenience, to move the trial from Santa Monica, which was the municipal jurisdiction in which the crime occurred and where it should have been tried, to LA proper - where the media access was better, though unfortunately for the Da and for the credibility of the US Judicial System, where the defense was able to take advantage of its jury selection options among candidates from within a pool far better equipped with minority predisposed, celebrity-worshiping semi-literate underemployeds than would have been available in Santa Monica. The result of the subsequent civil trial makes that abundantly clear.

Just curious. On what do you base your characterization of them as semi-literate and underemployed?

0 Replies

blueflame1 wrote:

What remains to be seen is who did Rove sell out to save his own skin.

And, what remains to be seen is if you will admit you got suckered.
You,Roxxanne,Magginkat,and Anon ALL were positive that Rove would be indicted.

You all believed the truthout article that claimed he had already been indicted.
Truthout apparently LIED.

Are you going to admit you got fooled,or are you going to try and say you never believed the article?

0 Replies

snood wrote:

Just curious. On what do you base your characterization of them as semi-literate and underemployed?

Quote:

Final Jury Composition

The Jury By Race: 9 Blacks, 1 Hispanics, 2 Whites

The Jury By Sex: 10 Women, 2 Men

The Jury By Education: 2 College Graduates, 9 High School Graduates, 1 Without Diploma

Some other facts about the final jury: (1) None regularly read a newspaper, but eight regularly watch tabloid TV shows, (2) five thought it was sometimes appropriate to use force on a family member, (3) all were Democrats, (4) five reported that they or another family member had had a negative experience with the police, (5) nine thought that Simpson was less likely to be a murderer because he was a professional athlete.

The racial composition of the initial jury pool differed considerably from the racial compostion of the final jury. The pool was 40% white, 28% black, 17% Hispanic, and 15% Asian.

Enjoy

0 Replies

timberlandko wrote:

snood wrote:

Just curious. On what do you base your characterization of them as semi-literate and underemployed?

Quote:
Final Jury Composition

The Jury By Race: 9 Blacks, 1 Hispanics, 2 Whites

The Jury By Sex: 10 Women, 2 Men

The Jury By Education: 2 College Graduates, 9 High School Graduates, 1 Without Diploma

Some other facts about the final jury: (1) None regularly read a newspaper, but eight regularly watch tabloid TV shows, (2) five thought it was sometimes appropriate to use force on a family member, (3) all were Democrats, (4) five reported that they or another family member had had a negative experience with the police, (5) nine thought that Simpson was less likely to be a murderer because he was a professional athlete.

The racial composition of the initial jury pool differed considerably from the racial compostion of the final jury. The pool was 40% white, 28% black, 17% Hispanic, and 15% Asian.

Enjoy

If they had convicted him, would you think more highly of them?

0 Replies

Perhaps, though to be honest, when the trial arrangements had been completed and announced, I fully expected the result to be as it turned out to be. The verdict came as no surprise to me whatsoever.

0 Replies

That makes you much different from the millions of white people who were shocked and aghast that the justice system had delivered an injustice to them similar to the injustices that blacks have suffered for hundreds of years from the selfsame system.

I saw 'em on TV - jaws hanging slack, glazed look in their eyes...

Yup, timber - you are a paragon of control, you are....

0 Replies

No paragon at all, snood, just a pragmatic realist. The Reginald Denny riots came as no surprise to me either; I'd have been astonished had things not happened as they did.

0 Replies

Fitzgerald Investigation of Leak of Identity of CIA Agent

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know