Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Corallo confirms a letter was sent from Fitz

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
LeftNYC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-13-06 02:29 PM
Original message
Corallo confirms a letter was sent from Fitz
According to Salon:

In a follow-up interview, we asked Corallo if he could provide us a copy of the letter -- and he says there was a letter -- that Luskin says he received from Fitzgerald. He declined to do so, saying it has been the Rove team's long-standing policy not to release written communication from the special prosecutor. He insisted, however, that the letter says nothing at all about Rove's continuing cooperation with Fitzgerald's investigation. "There is nothing, there are no conditions, there were no discussions of any conditions or deals or anything of the sort," Corallo said. He said that Fitzgerald's decision was based solely on "Mr. Fitzgerald's coming to the proper conclusion" about Rove's legal culpability, or lack thereof.

http://salon.com/politics/war_room/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Avalux Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-13-06 02:31 PM
Response to Original message
1. So Luskin has the letter and won't give it up.
Luskin TOLD Corallo there was a letter......hmmmm.......
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Deacon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-13-06 02:36 PM
Response to Original message
2. You know...
...this letter is starting to remind me of something...
Oh, yeah, those Air National Guard documents that would have proved Junior wasn't AWOL. Somebody's seen them, they just can't release them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gratuitous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-13-06 02:39 PM
Response to Original message
3. Sniff, sniff . . .
What is that smell? Bovine offal?

Call me cynical, but somehow I'm not 100% satisfied with taking the unsupported word of Rove's hired mouthpiece as to what Fitzgerald's office has decided or not decided.

Sniff.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DoYouEverWonder Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-13-06 02:44 PM
Response to Original message
4. Then Rove should go in front of the cameras
and state that he has been cleared. Until then I don't believe much from his liar lawyer.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mz Pip Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-13-06 03:08 PM
Response to Original message
5. Luskin has nothing to gain
by lying. He would lose all credibility if Rove got indicted next week.

We had a good fantasy about Rove in an orange jump suit. It was just a fantasy. I will miss it but c'est la vie.

Mz Pip
:dem:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeftNYC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-13-06 03:25 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. I agree. I dont think Luskin is lying
I just want to see the letter in its entirety, but I know we never will
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flpoljunkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-13-06 03:20 PM
Response to Original message
6. Wolfie just said Fitz will not say whether or not the investigation is
continuing. Perhaps this is the way Fitz operates--saying nothing, but it seems strange that he does not confirm that Karl Rove is off the hook.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blackhatjack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-13-06 03:39 PM
Response to Original message
8. All Luskin had to say was "Rove will not be indicted."
However, the statement Luskin made was not so unequivocal in proclaiming Rove has avoided indictment. Plus if that were the case, Fitz would have commented. Rove still has a role to play, and that role is likely to testify at trial to what he told the grand jury --throwing Libby and possibly Cheney under the bus.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 15th 2024, 04:07 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC