Karl Rove headed to Prison???

[exlrrp]

This topic is about to go into a tail spin nationally as Bushco does damage control. Lets face it--they dodged the bullet once again but it aint over untill its over--and it aint over.
The spinback is: "perjury is a technicality" (but not when Clinton did it.) Libby "misremembered"(Bush does it all the time)
So Scooter is the only one to fall so far but Rove's not off the hook. the investigation about him is still ongoing. Fitzgerald stated that the investigation into who outted Plame was still ongoing but stymied by the falsehoods of Libby. There may be more--we shall see.
What we know now is that, whether it was a crime or not, Rove and Libby DID leak Plames name although they and the B ush Administration denied it. we know that Bush lied when he said that anyone involved in the leak will be let go. When he found out Rove had been involved he changed that story. We know that Mclellan lied when he said that absolutely Rove nor Libby was involved in the leak
Well we knew they were liars to start with so thats no surprise.
But now even more of their bull has been exposed and will be in the trial of Libby to come. But I don't think it will be the downfall of Bush
I expect Libby to cop a plea and Bush to pardon him. The only thing that will crack this is if Scooter gets a long sentence and flips back but I seriously doubt it. He'll go down like a good soldier.
Stay good
James

[Gimpy]

Originally posted by BLUEHAWK Well... looks like the Prosecutor found no treason, or much of anything else as it turned out.

That's what your 'comment' above is Blue!

Some Republicans (and evidently YOU to Sir Blue) have accused Fitzgerald of being overzealous or ending up with something "that's no big deal" by pursuing "legal technicalities" instead of the underlying crime. Or that this is somehow not 'serious' enough to warrant public outrage and contempt.

Take a look at this from the Washington Post:

"I'll be blunt ," Fitzgerald said in response. "That talking point won't fly ."


Breaking his long public silence, Fitzgerald gave a 66-minute news conference yesterday explaining his case against Scooter Libby, the vice president's chief of staff. But his appearance was as much about answering the charge that will inevitably be lodged against Fitzgerald himself: that he exceeded his charter and brought charges on "technicalities" rather than major crimes.

The prosecutor had prepared his defense well. "That talking point won't fly," he said when a questioner raised the anticipated criticism. "If it is proven that the chief of staff to the vice president went before a federal grand jury and lied under oath repeatedly and fabricated a story . . . that is a very, very serious matter," said Fitzgerald, 44, licking his lips frequently and moving his eyes back and forth across the line of eight cameras. "The truth is the engine of our judicial system, and if you compromise the truth, the whole process is lost."

Fitzgerald's deft performance made it clear that the administration's defenders will have a difficult time presenting him as anything but clean and independent. The weight of his presentation could give pause to opponents who would say he brought charges only to justify the investigation.


Sixteen times , he found it necessary to use the word "serious" as he described the charges.

At his conference, special counsel Patrick Fitzgerald said the inquiry was substantially complete, though he added ominously, ?It?s not over.? He declined to comment about Rove?s involvement. Asked about Cheney, he said: ?I?m not making allegations about anyone not charged in the indictment.?

Karl Rove, Bush?s closest adviser, escaped indictment Friday but remained under investigation, his legal status casting a dark cloud over a White House already in trouble.

Friday's indictment says "Official A" is a "senior official in the White House who advised Libby on July 10 or 11 of 2003" about a chat with Novak about his upcoming column in which Plame would be identified as a CIA employee.

Late Friday, three people close to the investigation, each asking to remain unidentified because of grand jury secrecy, identified Rove as Official A.

Libby?s indictment is a political embarrassment for the president, paving the way for a possible trial renewing the focus on the administration?s faulty rationale for going to war against Iraq ? which was the erroneous assertion that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction.

Erwin Chemerinsky, a Duke Law School professor, said it is not unusual for criminal probes to change their focus.

?What brought down the Nixon administration wasn?t the burglary itself, but the cover-up of it ,? Chemerinsky said, adding that what caused Clinton?s impeachment ?wasn?t that he had an affair with Monica Lewinsky but he lied about it.?

FITZGERALD during his press conference: "Valerie Wilson was a CIA officer. In July 2003, the fact that Valerie Wilson was a CIA officer was classified . Not only was it classified, but it was not widely known outside the intelligence community.

Valerie Wilson's friends, neighbors, college classmates had no idea she had another life.

The fact that she was a CIA officer was not well- known, for her protection or for the benefit of all us. It's important that a CIA officer's identity be protected, that it be protected not just for the officer, but for the nation's security.

Valerie Wilson's cover was blown in July 2003. The first sign of that cover being blown was when Mr. Novak published a column on July 14th, 2003.

But Mr. Novak was not the first reporter to be told that Wilson's wife, Valerie Wilson, Ambassador Wilson's wife Valerie, worked at the CIA. Several other reporters were told.

In fact, Mr. Libby was the first official known to have told a reporter when he talked to Judith Miller in June of 2003 about Valerie Wilson.

Now, something needs to be borne in mind about a criminal investigation.

This is the way this investigation was conducted. It was known that a CIA officer's identity was blown, it was known that there was a leak. We needed to figure out how that happened, who did it, why, whether a crime was committed, whether we could prove it, whether we should prove it.

And given that national security was at stake , it was especially important that we find out accurate facts.

There's another thing about a grand jury investigation. One of the obligations of the prosecutors and the grand juries is to keep the information obtained in the investigation secret, not to share it with the public.

It's especially important in the national security area. The laws involving disclosure of classified information in some places are very clear, in some places they're not so clear."

He went on to say; "We are now going from a grand jury investigation to an indictment, a public charge and a public trial. The rules will be different.

But I think what we see here today, when a vice president's chief of staff is charged with perjury and obstruction of justice, it does show the world that this is a country that takes its law seriously; that all citizens are bound by the law.

But what we need to also show the world is that we can also apply the same safeguards to all our citizens, including high officials. Much as they must be bound by the law, they must follow the same rules."

"I also want to take away from the notion that somehow we should take an obstruction charge less seriously than a leak charge.

This is a very serious matter and compromising national security information is a very serious matter. But the need to get to the bottom of what happened and whether national security was compromised by inadvertence, by recklessness, by maliciousness is extremely important. We need to know the truth. And anyone who would go into a grand jury and lie, obstruct and impede the investigation has committed a serious crime."


QUESTION from a reporter : "Mr. Fitzgerald, the Republicans previewed some talking points in anticipation of your indictment and they said that if you didn't indict on the underlying crimes and you indicted on things exactly like you did indict -- false statements, perjury, obstruction -- these were, quote/unquote, "technicalities," and that it really was over reaching and excessive.

And since, when and if they make those claims, now that you have indicted, you won't respond, I want to give you an opportunity now to respond to that allegation which they may make. It seems like that's the road they're going down."

FITZGERALD: "I'll be blunt.

That talking point won't fly. If you're doing a national security investigation, if you're trying to find out who compromised the identity of a CIA officer and you go before a grand jury and if the charges are proven -- because remember there's a presumption of innocence -- but if it is proven that the chief of staff to the vice president went before a federal grand jury and lied under oath repeatedly and fabricated a story about how he learned this information, how he passed it on, and we prove obstruction of justice, perjury and false statements to the FBI, that is a very, very serious matter."


************

And....................it Ain't OVER YET!

[BLUEHAWK]

As I've suggested many a time in this thread, we'll all need to wait and see what actually happens.

But, I do believe that if a charge of Treason, as has been repeatedly suggested here by some, were warranted, then it would have been brought.

[Gimpy]

Originally posted by BLUEHAWK As I've suggested many a time in this thread, we'll all need to wait and see what actually happens.

But, I do believe that if a charge of Treason, as has been repeatedly suggested here by some, were warranted, then it would have been brought.

You , my friend......................need to go back and read the ENTIRE wording of the 'indictment' and Pat Fitsgeralds entire transcript of his press conference if need you further 'convincing'!

[BLUEHAWK]

a, I don't recall asking to be convinced of anything.

b. An indictment is not a conviction.

c. Karl Rove (back to the topic of this thread) does not appear to be anywhere close to "going to prison."

d. Robert Novak "outed" Mrs. Wilson.

e. etc.

[SuperScout]

f. Neither treason nor any related crime was alleged or charged in the indictments.

g. Item "f" does cause continual panty wadding in liberals.

[Gimpy]

there's ANY "panty wadding" going on right now it's in the ranks of folks like you and others of the radical right-wing elements of the republican party ignoring or denying the facts of this matter.

Seems the overwhelming majority of Americans DISagree with your perverted and narrowminded assesment of this despicable act committed by the Bush administration.

Look at Fitz's words after the indictment:

FITZGERALD : That's the way this investigation was conducted. It was known that a CIA officer's identity was blown, it was known that there was a leak. We needed to figure out how that happened, who did it, why, whether a crime was committed, whether we could prove it, whether we should prove it.


And given that national security was at stake , it was especially important that we find out accurate facts.


What we have when someone charges obstruction of justice, the umpire gets sand thrown in his eyes. He's trying to figure what happened and somebody blocked their view.



So what you were saying is the harm in an obstruction investigation is it prevents us from making the fine judgments we want to make.


I also want to take away from the notion that somehow we should take an obstruction charge less seriously than a leak charge.

This is a very serious matter and compromising national security information is a very serious matter . But the need to get to the bottom of what happened and whether national security was compromised by inadvertence, by recklessness, by maliciousness is extremely important. We need to know the truth. And anyone who would go into a grand jury and lie, obstruct and impede the investigation has committed a serious crime.


######

[Gimpy]

Like it ain't over till the 'fat lady sings', huh?

###START###

Woodward testifies in CIA leak probe

Wednesday November 15, 2005

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Washington Post journalist Bob Woodward testified this week in an investigation into the leak of a CIA operative's identity and said a senior Bush administration official told him of the woman a month before she was publicly identified.

Woodward, who made his name covering the Watergate scandal, wrote in the newspaper on Wednesday that he testified, under oath, for two hours in a deposition on Monday about interviews with three current or former administration officials that related to the CIA leak probe.

Special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald is investigating who leaked the identity of CIA operative Valerie Plame, whose diplomat husband, Joseph Wilson, was a public critic of the administration's Iraq policy.

"I was first contacted by Fitzgerald's office on November 3 after one of these (three) officials went to Fitzgerald to discuss an interview with me in mid-June 2003 during which the person told me Wilson's wife worked for the CIA on weapons of mass destruction as a WMD analyst," Woodward wrote.

He characterized the mention as "casual and offhand," and said it did not appear to be classified or sensitive. The interviews occurred while Woodward was researching a book about the leadup to the Iraq war.

Plame's identity was published in a column by journalist Robert Novak in July 2003.

This was shortly after Wilson published a newspaper opinion piece that accused the administration of twisting intelligence on Iraq, by ignoring doubts he had uncovered on a CIA-funded mission to investigate a claim that Saddam Hussein tried to buy "yellowcake" nuclear material in Africa.

Woodward said he had obtained confidentiality waivers from all three sources. The three included Lewis "Scooter" Libby, who resigned in October as Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff upon being indicted on perjury and other charges in the probe.

Woodward did not identify the other two sources.

He said that during his conversation with Libby, he told the aide he was sending an 18-page list of questions he wanted to ask of Cheney which included a reference to "yellowcake." He did not say whether he interviewed Cheney.

Woodward also said he had a separate list of questions, prepared for a June 20 interview with another senior official that included a reference to "Joe Wilson's wife," but that a tape recording of the interview indicated the subject did not arise.

Woodward is one of the two Post reporters who led the newspaper's coverage of the 1970s Watergate scandal that brought down President Richard Nixon.

###END###

[Gimpy]

off the presses!

Looks like Pat Fitzgerald is getting closer and closer to bringing another 'indictment' in this case. I'll bet Karl Rove is sweating beads bigger than baseballs!................Come on Pat, hurry up and give us another X-mas present, will ya!.....

###START###

Time Reporter Called to testify In Leak Probe


By Jim VandeHei
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, November 29, 2005; A01


The reporter for Time magazine who recently agreed to testify in the CIA leak case is central to White House senior adviser Karl Rove's effort to fend off an indictment in the two-year-old investigation, according to two people familiar with the situation.

Viveca Novak, who has written intermittently about the leak case for Time, has been asked to provide sworn testimony to Special Counsel Patrick J. Fitzgerald in the next few weeks after Rove attorney Robert Luskin told Fitzgerald about a conversation he had with her, the two sources said.

It's not clear why Luskin believes Novak's deposition could help Rove, President Bush's deputy chief of staff, who remains under investigation into whether he provided false statements in the case. But a person familiar with the matter said Luskin cited his conversations with Novak in persuading Fitzgerald not to indict Rove in late October, when the prosecutor brought perjury and obstruction-of-justice charges against Vice President Cheney's former chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby.

"This is what caused [Fitzgerald] to hold off on charging" Rove, the source said. But another person familiar with the conversations said they did not appear to significantly alter the case.

Luskin presented evidence, including details of his own conversations with Novak, to Fitzgerald at a secret meeting at a downtown law office shortly before Libby was indicted on Oct. 28, according to a source familiar with the case.

Novak is not related to Robert D. Novak, the columnist who first disclosed Plame's identity in July 2003. Viveca Novak is expected to write a firsthand account after she is deposed.

The disclosure of Novak's impending testimony is the latest indication that Fitzgerald is still considering charges against Rove and that the investigation of Bush's top aide continues, even as the prosecutor prepares for Libby's trial. It also shows that Rove, who, like Libby, was dragged into the case for talking to reporters, is now hoping that a reporter will help pull him out.

Washington Post Assistant Managing Editor Bob Woodward told Fitzgerald earlier this month that he had discussed Plame with a senior administration official -- and that the official was someone other than Libby -- before Libby's first conversation with another reporter about Plame. Libby's legal team plans to rely on testimony from Woodward and other reporters to show that the former Cheney aide is not guilty of lying, providing misleading statements and obstructing justice in the course of the investigation, a person familiar with the legal strategy said.

Luskin, Viveca Novak and Fitzgerald spokesman Randall Samborn declined to comment. The two sources, both of whom are familiar with the Luskin-Novak conversations, spoke on the condition of anonymity because the prosecutor has warned everyone involved in the case not to discuss it publicly.

Fitzgerald has spent the past two years investigating whether any Bush administration officials disclosed Plame's name and employment at the CIA as part of an effort to discredit allegations by her husband, former diplomat Joseph C. Wilson IV, that President Bush had twisted intelligence to justify the Iraq war. Fitzgerald has not charged anyone (yet) with the crime he originally set out to prove: the illegal disclosure of a covert CIA operative's identity. Instead, he has focused on alleged wrongdoing in the course of the investigation.

Fitzgerald recently disclosed that he plans to present new evidence to a second grand jury . People close to the case said the first area Fitzgerald wants to address is Woodward's testimony and his source, who has not been publicly identified.

Woodward's source could face legal troubles because the source testified earlier in the case and apparently did not mention a conversation with Woodward about Plame, according to lawyers in the case. If the source provided inaccurate or incomplete information, Fitzgerald could seek to bring charges, they said.

Rove's fate remains uncertain. He has testified that he talked to columnist Robert D. Novak and Time magazine's Matthew Cooper about Plame's CIA employment. But in his initial conversations with federal investigators and testimony, Rove did not mention the conversation with Cooper, later telling the grand jury he forgot about it and did not intend to mislead anyone, according to lawyers in the case. Luskin has worked behind the scenes to convince Fitzgerald that Rove is guilty of nothing more than a faulty memory.

Time has not disclosed what information Viveca Novak might have that is relevant to the case and Rove's defense. In a brief article Sunday, the magazine reported that she has been asked to discuss conversations with Luskin starting in May 2004, when she first began to report on the leak case.

Time has not objected to Fitzgerald's questioning Novak. The magazine waged a lengthy legal battle to keep Fitzgerald's grand jury from questioning Cooper before acquiescing earlier this year. Unlike Cooper.

###END##

[Gimpy]

the 'singing' canaries are warbling their little hearts out, huh?

Scooter the pooter done went and dumped on his boss (Cheney) and his bosses boss (Dubya) in this latest bit of unscrupulous and criminal shenanigens!


I tried to tell everyone that it AIN'T OVER TILL THE FAT LADY SINGS!


And..............she's just gettin warmed up!