0
   

Countdown to Rove Indictments...

 
 
blueflame1
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 May, 2006 04:44 pm
"A Fresh Focus on Cheney" Hand-written notes by the Vice President surface in the Fitzgerald probe.

Web Exclusive
By Michael Isikoff
Newsweek
Updated: 6:21 p.m. ET May 13, 2006
May 13, 2006 - The role of Vice President Dick Cheney in the criminal case stemming from the outing of White House critic Joseph Wilson's CIA wife is likely to get fresh attention as a result of newly disclosed notes showing that Cheney personally asked whether Wilson had been sent by his wife on a "junket" to Africa.

Cheney's notes, written on the margins of a July 6, 2003 New York Times op-ed column by former ambassador Joseph Wilson, were included as part of a filing Friday night by prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald in the perjury and obstruction case against ex-Cheney chief of staff I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby.

The notes, Fitzgerald said in his filing, show that Cheney and Libby were "acutely focused" on the Wilson column and on rebutting his criticisms of the White House's handling of pre-Iraq war intelligence. In the column, which created a firestorm after its publication, Wilson wrote that he had been dispatched by the CIA without pay to Niger in February, 2002 to investigate an intelligence report that Iraq was seeking uranium from the African country for a nuclear bomb. Wilson said he was told Cheney had asked about the intelligence,but the White House subsequently ignored his findings debunking the Niger claims.
0 Replies
 
blueflame1
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 May, 2006 05:04 pm
Fitzgerald Collecting Cheney's Smoking Guns
by emptywheel

There has been a lot of speculation this week about whether, and when, Karl Rove will be indicted. While everyone has been distracted with that excitement, Patrick Fitzgerald has laid a few more of his cards on the table, making it increasingly clear that he is closing in on Cheney. In this post, I'm going to pull together some points from three recent posts to show the evidence--and the suggestion of further evidence--including:
http://thenexthurrah.typepad.com/the_next_hurrah/2006/05/fitzgerald_coll.html#more
0 Replies
 
Roxxxanne
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 May, 2006 07:32 pm
mysteryman wrote:
blueflame1 wrote:
mysteryman, it's a great honor being called names by you. I suspect the names will become harsher the further Bushie falls. It's tough being a piece of Bushie's 29% aint it? It's gonna go lower than that. And Jason Leopold is an impeccable source.


I dont question Jason Leopold.
Its you I doubt.


Wow! Can you try to be any more of a little putz?
0 Replies
 
squinney
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 May, 2006 07:33 pm
Karl Rove Indicted on Charges of Perjury, Lying to Investigators

Quote:
By Jason Leopold
t r u t h o u t | Report

Saturday 13 May 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.

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.

As TruthOut reported Friday evening, Rove told President Bush and Chief of Staff Joshua Bolten, as well as a few other high level administration officials, that he will be indicted in the CIA leak case and will
immediately resign his White House job when the special counsel publicly announces the charges against him, according to sources.

Details of Rove's discussions with the president and Bolten have spread through the corridors of the White House, where low-level staffers and senior officials were trying to determine how the indictment would impact an administration that has been mired in a number of high-profile political scandals for nearly a year, said a half-dozen White House aides and two senior officials who work at the Republican National Committee.

Speaking on condition of anonymity Friday night, sources confirmed Rove's indictment was imminent. These individuals requested anonymity saying they were not authorized to speak publicly about Rove's situation. A spokesman in the White House press office said they would not comment on "wildly speculative rumors."


Posting more from Leopold, just in case he's right.
0 Replies
 
Roxxxanne
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 May, 2006 07:54 pm
mysteryman wrote:
astromouse wrote:
Quote:
when a REPUTABLE news service posts this story...


I doubt CNN , Jason Leopold or *shudder* FOX news is going to bother registering here to post it for you to believe what blueflame1 posted MM...although maybe Morley Safer will (it's iffy right now, he's quite busy) Laughing


Your right,I should have said...When a reputable news service REPORTS this story.
My mistake...sorry.


So why don't you go out on a limb and tell the a2k community that, in your opinion, Rove will not be indicted. Of course you won't, you are just blowing hot air, BTW you are libeling Jason Leopold when you call him disreputable. Would you kindly post something to prove yout contention that Leopold is disreputable. It really gets me how any schmuck with a keyboard and a modem can attempt to libel a well-respected professional with impunity.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 May, 2006 08:18 pm
Roxxxanne wrote:
mysteryman wrote:
astromouse wrote:
Quote:
when a REPUTABLE news service posts this story...


I doubt CNN , Jason Leopold or *shudder* FOX news is going to bother registering here to post it for you to believe what blueflame1 posted MM...although maybe Morley Safer will (it's iffy right now, he's quite busy) Laughing


Your right,I should have said...When a reputable news service REPORTS this story.
My mistake...sorry.


So why don't you go out on a limb and tell the a2k community that, in your opinion, Rove will not be indicted. Of course you won't, you are just blowing hot air, BTW you are libeling Jason Leopold when you call him disreputable. Would you kindly post something to prove yout contention that Leopold is disreputable. It really gets me how any schmuck with a keyboard and a modem can attempt to libel a well-respected professional with impunity.


I dont know if he will be indicted,I havent seen the evidence.
And again,if you were honest,you dont know either.
You have not seen the evidence either.

I am not saying that Leopold is disreputable,I am saying that truthout is.

BTW,if Rove was indicted yesterday,like blue claims,why hasnt ANY news organization,except truthout,reported it?
0 Replies
 
Roxxxanne
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 May, 2006 08:27 pm
Stop evading the issue. What evidence can you cite that truthout is disereputable. Unless you can back up your claims, my charge of libel stands.
0 Replies
 
Roxxxanne
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 May, 2006 08:30 pm
I can't believe a know nothing putz would accuse someone of being dishonest for posting an opinion. What a schmuck No, he doesn't even qualify to be a schmuck, maybe a little putz but he's got a long way to go to be a schmuck.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 14 May, 2006 05:24 am
Quote:
I can't believe a know nothing putz would accuse someone of being dishonest for posting an opinion. What a schmuck No, he doesn't even qualify to be a schmuck, maybe a little putz but he's got a long way to go to be a schmuck.


According to you,it wasnt your pinion.
You claimed it was a fact.

Remember this...


Quote:
Posted: Sat Apr 29, 2006 19:17 Post: 2009736 -

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Latest I have been hearing is that Rove will likely be indicted within a week to 10 days.


And as for me evading the issue,I havent seen the evidence,so I dont know if he will be indicted.
You,on the other hand,seem to think he will be indicted,and you have not seen the evidence either.

Is it so difficult to admit that you dont know,because you have not been involved in the investigation,you havent seen the evidence?
At least be honest enough to admit that.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 14 May, 2006 05:37 am
squinney wrote:
Karl Rove Indicted on Charges of Perjury, Lying to Investigators

Quote:
By Jason Leopold
t r u t h o u t | Report

Saturday 13 May 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.

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.

As TruthOut reported Friday evening, Rove told President Bush and Chief of Staff Joshua Bolten, as well as a few other high level administration officials, that he will be indicted in the CIA leak case and will
immediately resign his White House job when the special counsel publicly announces the charges against him, according to sources.

Details of Rove's discussions with the president and Bolten have spread through the corridors of the White House, where low-level staffers and senior officials were trying to determine how the indictment would impact an administration that has been mired in a number of high-profile political scandals for nearly a year, said a half-dozen White House aides and two senior officials who work at the Republican National Committee.

Speaking on condition of anonymity Friday night, sources confirmed Rove's indictment was imminent. These individuals requested anonymity saying they were not authorized to speak publicly about Rove's situation. A spokesman in the White House press office said they would not comment on "wildly speculative rumors."


Posting more from Leopold, just in case he's right.


And again,this is not being reported by ABC,NBC,CBS,CNN,Fox,Reuters,the AP or any other news organization.
So,until it is,I will continue to believe its a lie.
0 Replies
 
Roxxxanne
 
  1  
Reply Sun 14 May, 2006 07:06 am
When are you going to back up your libelous claim that Truthout is disreputable? You libel respected news gatherers and then claim others are dishonest when a rumor doesn't play out excatly as it is reported.

BTW if Rove has already been indicted, it turns out that the rumors I related were true after all.
0 Replies
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 May, 2006 07:28 am
Rove Indicted; Charges of Perjury, Lying to Investigation
Karl Rove Indicted on Charges of Perjury, Lying to Investigators
By Jason Leopold
t r u t h o u t | Report
Saturday 13 May 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 business 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.

As TruthOut reported Friday evening, Rove told President Bush and Chief of Staff Joshua Bolten, as well as a few other high level administration officials, that he will be indicted in the CIA leak case and will immediately resign his White House job when the special counsel publicly announces the charges against him, according to sources.

Details of Rove's discussions with the president and Bolten have spread through the corridors of the White House, where low-level staffers and senior officials were trying to determine how the indictment would impact an administration that has been mired in a number of high-profile political scandals for nearly a year, said a half-dozen White House aides and two senior officials who work at the Republican National Committee.

Speaking on condition of anonymity Friday night, sources confirmed Rove's indictment was imminent. These individuals requested anonymity saying they were not authorized to speak publicly about Rove's situation. A spokesman in the White House press office said they would not comment on "wildly speculative rumors."

Rove's announcement to President Bush and Bolten comes more than a month after he alerted the new chief of staff to a meeting his attorney had with Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald in which Fitzgerald told Luskin that his case against Rove would soon be coming to a close and that he was leaning toward charging Rove with perjury, obstruction of justice and lying to investigators, according to sources close to the investigation.

A few weeks after he spoke with Fitzgerald, Luskin arranged for Rove to return to the grand jury for a fifth time to testify in hopes of fending off an indictment related to Rove's role in the CIA leak, sources said.

That meeting was followed almost immediately by an announcement by newly-appointed White House Chief of Staff Joshua Bolten of changes in the responsibilities of some White House officials, including Rove, who was stripped of his policy duties and would no longer hold the title of deputy White House chief of staff.

The White House said Rove would focus on the November elections and his change in status in no way reflected his fifth appearance before the grand jury or the possibility of an indictment.

But since Rove testified two weeks ago, the White House has been coordinating a response to what is sure to be the biggest political scandal it has faced thus far: the loss of a key political operative who has been instrumental in shaping White House policy on a wide range of domestic issues.

Rove testified that he first found out about Plame Wilson from reading a newspaper report in July 2003 and only after the story was published did he share damaging information about her CIA status with other reporters.

However, evidence has surfaced during the course of the two-year-old investigation that shows Rove spoke with at least two reporters about Plame Wilson prior to the publication of the column.

The explanation Rove provided to the grand jury - that he was dealing with more urgent White House matters and therefore forgot - has not convinced Fitzgerald that Rove has been entirely truthful in his testimony and resulted in the indictment.

Some White House staffers said it's the uncertainty of Rove's status in the leak case that has made it difficult for the administration's domestic policy agenda and that the announcement of an indictment and Rove's subsequent resignation, while serious, would allow the administration to move forward on a wide range of issues.

"We need to start fresh and we can't do that with the uncertainty of Karl's case hanging over our heads," said one White House aide. "There's no doubt that it will be front page news if and when (an indictment) happens. But eventually it will become old news quickly. The key issue here is that the president or Mr. Bolten respond to the charges immediately, make a statement and then move on to other important policy issues and keep that as the main focus going forward."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jason Leopold spent two years covering California's electricity crisis as Los Angeles bureau chief of Dow Jones Newswires. Jason has spent the last year cultivating sources close to the CIA leak investigation, and is a regular contributor to t r u t h o u t. He is the author of the new book NEWS JUNKIE. Visit www.newsjunkiebook.com for a preview.
0 Replies
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 May, 2006 07:31 am
BBB
BBB's prediction: Look for Rove to resign his White House job today. But he won't stop helping Bush. He will set up an office in D.C. or in Texas. The Republican National Committee will hire Rove as an election campaign consultant and pay him more than his White House salary.

BBB
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 May, 2006 04:04 pm
Re: Rove Indicted; Charges of Perjury, Lying to Investigatio
BumbleBeeBoogie wrote:
Karl Rove Indicted on Charges of Perjury, Lying to Investigators
By Jason Leopold
t r u t h o u t | Report
Saturday 13 May 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 business 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.

As TruthOut reported Friday evening, Rove told President Bush and Chief of Staff Joshua Bolten, as well as a few other high level administration officials, that he will be indicted in the CIA leak case and will immediately resign his White House job when the special counsel publicly announces the charges against him, according to sources.

Details of Rove's discussions with the president and Bolten have spread through the corridors of the White House, where low-level staffers and senior officials were trying to determine how the indictment would impact an administration that has been mired in a number of high-profile political scandals for nearly a year, said a half-dozen White House aides and two senior officials who work at the Republican National Committee.

Speaking on condition of anonymity Friday night, sources confirmed Rove's indictment was imminent. These individuals requested anonymity saying they were not authorized to speak publicly about Rove's situation. A spokesman in the White House press office said they would not comment on "wildly speculative rumors."

Rove's announcement to President Bush and Bolten comes more than a month after he alerted the new chief of staff to a meeting his attorney had with Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald in which Fitzgerald told Luskin that his case against Rove would soon be coming to a close and that he was leaning toward charging Rove with perjury, obstruction of justice and lying to investigators, according to sources close to the investigation.

A few weeks after he spoke with Fitzgerald, Luskin arranged for Rove to return to the grand jury for a fifth time to testify in hopes of fending off an indictment related to Rove's role in the CIA leak, sources said.

That meeting was followed almost immediately by an announcement by newly-appointed White House Chief of Staff Joshua Bolten of changes in the responsibilities of some White House officials, including Rove, who was stripped of his policy duties and would no longer hold the title of deputy White House chief of staff.

The White House said Rove would focus on the November elections and his change in status in no way reflected his fifth appearance before the grand jury or the possibility of an indictment.

But since Rove testified two weeks ago, the White House has been coordinating a response to what is sure to be the biggest political scandal it has faced thus far: the loss of a key political operative who has been instrumental in shaping White House policy on a wide range of domestic issues.

Rove testified that he first found out about Plame Wilson from reading a newspaper report in July 2003 and only after the story was published did he share damaging information about her CIA status with other reporters.

However, evidence has surfaced during the course of the two-year-old investigation that shows Rove spoke with at least two reporters about Plame Wilson prior to the publication of the column.

The explanation Rove provided to the grand jury - that he was dealing with more urgent White House matters and therefore forgot - has not convinced Fitzgerald that Rove has been entirely truthful in his testimony and resulted in the indictment.

Some White House staffers said it's the uncertainty of Rove's status in the leak case that has made it difficult for the administration's domestic policy agenda and that the announcement of an indictment and Rove's subsequent resignation, while serious, would allow the administration to move forward on a wide range of issues.

"We need to start fresh and we can't do that with the uncertainty of Karl's case hanging over our heads," said one White House aide. "There's no doubt that it will be front page news if and when (an indictment) happens. But eventually it will become old news quickly. The key issue here is that the president or Mr. Bolten respond to the charges immediately, make a statement and then move on to other important policy issues and keep that as the main focus going forward."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jason Leopold spent two years covering California's electricity crisis as Los Angeles bureau chief of Dow Jones Newswires. Jason has spent the last year cultivating sources close to the CIA leak investigation, and is a regular contributor to t r u t h o u t. He is the author of the new book NEWS JUNKIE. Visit www.newsjunkiebook.com for a preview.


Then why isnt Reuters,CNN,Fox,ABC,NBC,CBS,the NY Times,the LA Times,the SAn Diego Tribune,or any other news agency reporting this?
IF Rove had been indicted,the news would be all over the place,but its not.
That leads me to suspect that this is a bogus story.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 May, 2006 04:07 pm
Quote:
Posted: Sat Apr 29, 2006 19:17 Post: 2009736 -

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Latest I have been hearing is that Rove will likely be indicted within a week to 10 days.


We are still waiting.
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 May, 2006 04:12 pm
mysteryman wrote:
Quote:
Posted: Sat Apr 29, 2006 19:17 Post: 2009736 -

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Latest I have been hearing is that Rove will likely be indicted within a week to 10 days.


We are still waiting.



Are you thinking that he won't be indicted, or is your big point that it hasn't been reported yet?
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 May, 2006 04:25 pm
snood wrote:
mysteryman wrote:
Quote:
Posted: Sat Apr 29, 2006 19:17 Post: 2009736 -

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Latest I have been hearing is that Rove will likely be indicted within a week to 10 days.


We are still waiting.



Are you thinking that he won't be indicted, or is your big point that it hasn't been reported yet?


I dont know if he will be indicted or not.
I havent seen the evidence the prosecutor does or does not have.
It seems to me that many on here are jumping the gun,assuming he will be indicted.
I wonder if any of them will be honest enough to admit they were wrong if he isnt indicted.

As to the story,look at the date on it...last Saturday.
If Rove had been indicted,it would have been all over the news by now,but it isnt.
Nobody,except the Bush haters on here,and truthout,is claiming or reporting that Rove was indicted.
Why is that?
0 Replies
 
Roxxxanne
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 May, 2006 06:42 pm
There is plenty of evidence availalbe to the general public to have an opinion on whether or not Rove will be indicted. Of course, MM is hoping against hope that Rove gets cleared.

With every day that passes in which Rove is not told he has been cleared, the greater the likliehood that he will be indicted. But try explaing that to an illiterate ignoramus. It's a waste of time.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 May, 2006 03:59 am
Roxxxanne wrote:
There is plenty of evidence availalbe to the general public to have an opinion on whether or not Rove will be indicted. Of course, MM is hoping against hope that Rove gets cleared.

With every day that passes in which Rove is not told he has been cleared, the greater the likliehood that he will be indicted. But try explaing that to an illiterate ignoramus. It's a waste of time.


The evidence "available to the general public" is evidence that has been sanitized,leaked,distorted by both sides,and generally made useless.
No prosecutor is going to release all of their evidence to the media,nor are they going to say what other evidence they might have.

Also,what evidence does the defense have to counter the prosecution?
They havent released any of their evidence.

So,unless you have seen ALL the evidence,that both sides have,you nor I can say with any honesty that Rove will or will not be indicted.
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 May, 2006 05:53 am
MM- If he's found out to have done something illegal, would you want Rove indicted and convicted?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.11 seconds on 05/20/2024 at 12:28:02