Karl Rove: my take

Perjury is really, really hard to prove. And, in this case, Rove's "fuzzy memory" defense was successful. Whether Rove lied about his memory to cover his ass is something we'll never know. But, to tell you the truth, I was beginning to believe he was not central to the scandal and probably not going to be indicted.

Any misdeeds most likely took place in Cheney's office. And, if that's true, then Cheney probably threw Scooter Libby under the bus to protect himself.

It's also possible that the whole outing of Plame had the authorization of the president. That could have made the outing itself technically legal.

But, legal or not, it was very, very sleazy to out a covert CIA operative and blow an operation in Iran just to get back at Joe Wilson. The White House knows that, which is why they, in Fizgerald's words, "threw sand" in his eyes and tried to misdirect the investigation.

In any event, I think Fitzgerald is a straight shooter. And if he does not think he can prove anything about Rove beyond a reasonable doubt, then he is right not to charge him.

But I hope Fitzgerald keeps investigating till the whole stinking affair has been dragged out into the daylight.

I keep thinking that we had another instance where Luskin claimed Rove was free and clear, only to hear that he was being called back in to testify...maybe the 3rd or 4th time? Anyone around here with a better memory? :D

oath swearing that it was Rove and only Rove who told him the name of Valerie Plame.

I think there was also so much pressure on Fitz that he didn't want to end up with egg on his face.

I'm sure there was some last minute NEOCON pushing to save ROVE.

namely, Cheney. One can only hope that one day this corrupt administration is held accountable for their numerous misdeeds. The Bush cabal is guilty of nothing less than treason for the Plame leak, the illegal war and their gross incompetence leading up to and on 9/11.

n/t

We posted this at the exact same time. I wonder if it means something? (please, please, PLEASE!) LOL!

:evilgrin:

things, but the identity of an undercover CIA operative is not one of them. If Booosh authorized this, and it can be proven, he cannot justify his doing so by stating it is within his powers as executive.

In any case, legal or not, the WH would fight tooth and nail to stop people from hearing about it because it's just so sleazy.

if it's true that there is a rift between the Cheney and Bush camps in the WH, if this might not serve to toss a match on that can of gas. Libby went down, but not Rove? That might not sit to well with Cheney -- to have to throw his guy under the train (and that's a train of TRUTH and JUSTICE, BTW) and then have Rove walk. Might cause some interesting back-stabbing in the future. Ah, one can always dream. :)

he could indict. People need to know what a dastardly thing this administration has done and how low they will go to make political points and to punish their opposition.

Rove can get a pardon easier than he can possibly gain anything from cooperating against his inner circle. if he is not the weak link then you have to move on and besides, what evidence is public that he must be indicted? We know the general guilt but not the evidence for solid indictments. As with votes we cannot get to count we are boxing with shadows and speculating around a fortress full of smoking guns.

Nailing Cheney suddenly and in the spotlight would short circuit having a bunch of small fry stepping stones that at the time of Bush's choosing can be folded up and taken away by blanket pardons as his father did and as lately the governor of Kentucky did. But we don't know and depending on one man to save the day with materials we don't know anyone has access to is out of our hands. The wall that has to be taken down would be better taken down by many hands chipping away until it al collapses totally and safely. One man up against a stonewall and total secrecy is not the end all of democracy or democracy has no meaning in his success. The whole thing, not just one scandal, must be taken down brick by brick.

And we must remember that is being done and that looking yup to see how one just man is doing does not determine that the work of all should ever stop. In many scenarios, another huge mountain of harm must be overcome still, should duty reticent or blinded Democrats have their own majority or presidency restored.
The creation of democracy is not automatic by any one person or event, almost by defintion.

Remember, the White House has refused to explain why Rove's security clearance was revoked, and his job duties were changed because of the "ongoing investigation." Now that Rove's attorney has declared the investigation is over, will the White House now explain Karl's demotion? Or will they come up with another excuse to avoid explaining themselves?