WASHINGTON, June 13 — The prosecutor in the C.I.A. leak case on Monday advised Karl Rove, the senior White House adviser, that he would not be charged with any wrongdoing, effectively ending the nearly three-year criminal investigation that had at times focused intensely on Mr. Rove.

 

The decision by the prosecutor, Patrick J. Fitzgerald, announced in a letter to Mr. Rove's lawyer, Robert D. Luskin, lifted a pall that had hung over Mr. Rove who testified on five occasions to a federal grand jury about his involvement in the disclosure of an intelligence officer's identity.

 

In a statement, Mr. Luskin said, "On June 12, 2006, Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald formally advised us that he does not anticipate seeking charges against Karl Rove."

 

.....

What will Matthews, Olbermann, and no cluester Shuster talk about for an hour every day. They had all the facts and Shuster was certain an indictment was forthcoming. this is great!!! MSNBC was all over it and now they are all in it....

What will Matthews, Olbermann, and no cluester Shuster talk about for an hour every day. They had all the facts and Shuster was certain an indictment was forthcoming. this is great!!! MSNBC was all over it and now they are all in it....

 

You won't hear much about it. I'm curious as to what page that NYT story was on.

You won't hear much about it. I'm curious as to what page that NYT story was on.

 

I'm not sure it even made the print deadline, since the online story is only timestamped at 6:30 am.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/13/washingt...artner=homepage

You won't hear much about it. I'm curious as to what page that NYT story was on.

On the website it's right below the Bush in Iraq story.

 

On a side note, how sad is it that we have to have a news story saying that government members WON'T be indicted?

So does this mean we should cancel the Dick Cheney Indictment Watch?

 

On the website it's right below the Bush in Iraq story.

 

On a side note, how sad is it that we have to have a news story saying that government members WON'T be indicted?

 

Its saids a lot doesn't it :headshake

On the website it's right below the Bush in Iraq story.

 

On a side note, how sad is it that we have to have a news story saying that government members WON'T be indicted?

 

It's certainly legitimate news.

Soxy's right. Our whole government are full of 'turd blossoms'.

It's certainly legitimate news.

I'm not debating that.

So does this mean we should cancel the Dick Cheney Indictment Watch?

Well, not necessarily, because Libby may well have worked closer with Cheney than Rove. But it probably does reduce the odds. At least it seems that the President's office itself wasn't involved, and that appears to be a good thing.

At least it seems that the President's office itself wasn't involved, and that appears to be a good thing.

 

Or, to take an opposing view, it might reaffirm that the people in the President's office are still the best in the business when it comes to hiding bodies.

Or, to take an opposing view, it might reaffirm that the people in the President's office are still the best in the business when it comes to hiding bodies.

 

 

Clinton was better.

 

*cough* Vince Foster *cough*

Nuke, see Iggy for your tin foil hat.

Hey, Rex, shut up.

 

Hillary Clinton is a lesbian. Didn't you know? But despite this, she had an affair with Vince Foster. And then she broke it off, which broke his heart. He was going to go public. So the Clinton's ordered him killed, and called it suicide.

 

(You ever read Rush Limbaugh is a Big Fat Idiot?)

I think I did a few years back.... I hardly remember it.

I just think its hilarious that the leftists were all salivating over the possibility of a Rove indictment and now they all have to eat s***.

 

 

Its all too funny for words and thats why we have a presumption of innocence in this country.

I just think its hilarious that the leftists were all salivating over the possibility of a Rove indictment and now they all have to eat s***.

Its all too funny for words and thats why we have a presumption of innocence in this country.

 

You're just lucky Fitzgerald didn't go after Rove on blowjob charges.

I just think its hilarious that the leftists were all salivating over the possibility of a Rove indictment and now they all have to eat s***.

Its all too funny for words and thats why we have a presumption of innocence in this country.

 

 

Well said Nuke.

Bill Clinton is innocent too, then.

 

And OJ.

 

And Michael Jackson.

. . . and Robert Blake.

Don't worry, leftwing fellows, Dan Rather just printed up some 'official' documents he will use on a big '60 Minutes' expose

 

these documnets will 'prove' once and for all that Rove is guilty and being executed in the near future.

 

And OJ.

 

you better be careful 'Rex Kickass', implying OJ was guilty is now grounds for imprisonment under the new hate crime laws.

Edited June 14, 200619 yr by mr_genius

Well, I'm breaking the law. The dude was guilty as s***, IN MY OPINION. So screw off.

Karl Rove?

. . . and Robert Blake.

 

And Claus Van Bulow.

And Claus Van Bulow.

 

Wow going way back. I had to do a case study on him last year, I looked at all the facts and I am not sure if he committed the crime or not. The Children really f***ed up the investigation and frankly had just as much motive and opportunity as he did. While I think he was guilty I don't believe I could vote guilty in the jury room though.