Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Decision not yet made on whether to indict Karl Rove

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 » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
sabra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-05 02:03 PM
Original message
Decision not yet made on whether to indict Karl Rove

http://www1.whdh.com/news/articles/national/BOS7238/

Decision not yet made on whether to indict Karl Rove

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Karl Rove testified for the fourth and final time Friday before the grand jury investigating whether his conversations with two reporters led to the leaking of a CIA operative's identity.

...

His lawyer, Robert Luskin, said Rove was told by prosecutors they likely would not need further testimony or cooperation from him and that they had no yet decided whether Rove should be charged criminally.

"The special counsel has not advised Mr. Rove that he is a target of the investigation and affirmed that he has made no decision concerning charges," Luskin said.

"The special counsel has indicated that he does not anticipate the need for Mr. Rove's further cooperation," Luskin said, declining to discuss what his client told the grand jury.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
TallahasseeGrannie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-05 02:05 PM
Response to Original message
1. So not today?
I didn't win the pool, then.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grytpype Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-05 02:08 PM
Response to Original message
2. So Rove is a target now.
Don't read too much into the "no decision has been made" statement, a prosecutor is going to say that right up until he asks the GJ to indict. Rove will be indicted, no question about that now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-05 02:09 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. indeed. a 4 1/2 hour session @ the GJ is very telling...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AX10 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-05 02:14 PM
Response to Reply #2
7. Fitzgerald knows whats at stake if he gets anything wrong.
He just must make sure that he has EVERY DETAIL perfect.

The indictment will come soon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
snippy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-05 06:28 PM
Response to Reply #2
19. I agree. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DoYouEverWonder Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-05 02:11 PM
Response to Original message
4. Sounds like Rove's lawyer's blustering
and doesn't have a clue what Fitzgerald is going to do, but whatever it is it won't be good for his client. Fitz probably doesn't need Karl to testify anymore because he's already heard enough lies and is about to wrap up this case and then we'll see what the GJ decides.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DesertRat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-05 02:11 PM
Response to Original message
5. Damn
I was looking forward to a celebration this weekend.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dkofos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-05 02:12 PM
Response to Original message
6. That is because I am not making the decision.
If I was, he would have been indicted years ago.

And his little dog too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dhalgren Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-05 02:29 PM
Response to Original message
8. Who wants to bet that the indictments come out today before
5 o'clock? I think that Fitz would want to drop these just before the weekend. Now, there may be some reason why he can't do that, that I am unaware of, but doing this on the weekend news cycle might just be what he'd do. He isn't a news hound and he isn't looking for headlines, he's looking to drop major bombs on the administration and news cycles would not be his first concern - except as a way to postpone the inevitable explosion for himself as long as possible. Just a thought...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
napi21 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-05 03:40 PM
Response to Reply #8
13. NO! There's an unwritted law that says "When YOU have bad news, you
dump it Friday after 4PM". When you have good news, you release it Mon or Tues. AM.

Remember who's releasing the news!!! This would NOT be BAD news for Fitz! I don't think you're going to see this released on a Fri!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
...of J.Temperance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-05 03:09 PM
Response to Original message
9. I wish Fitzgerald would hurry up, I'm getting very nervous n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tex-wyo-dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-05 03:28 PM
Response to Original message
10. Reuters: Prosecutor to Rove: no decisions yet on charges
Prosecutor to Rove: no decisions yet on charges
Fri Oct 14, 2005 2:57 PM ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Federal prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald on Friday told President George W. Bush's top political adviser, Karl Rove, that he has yet to decide whether he will bring charges over the leak of a covert CIA operative's identity, Rove's lawyer said.

"The special counsel has not advised Mr. Rove that he is a target of the investigation and affirmed that he has made no decision concerning charges," Rove's lawyer, Robert Luskin, said. "The special counsel has indicated that he does not anticipate the need for Mr. Rove's further cooperation."

<end>

http://olympics.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=politicsNews&storyID=2005-10-14T185723Z_01_EIC468224_RTRUKOC_0_US-BUSH-LEAK-ROVE.xml
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Debi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-05 03:28 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. I am getting so dizzy from all this spinning!n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
katty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-05 06:12 PM
Response to Reply #10
16. Suspense theatre..the whole world is watching/waiting
it better be damn good to wait this long!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
deminks Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-05 03:36 PM
Response to Original message
12. The GJ issues the indictments, right?
Didn't we go through this with Delay? Earle and Fitz don't issue the indictments, the grand juries do, right? Fitz wouldn't be making the decision anyway, right? Am I wrong? Am I confused?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
0007 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-05 03:58 PM
Response to Reply #12
15. You're right!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tight_rope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-05 03:57 PM
Response to Original message
14. Damn...Fitz needs to indict already...unless he's going after the chimp!
Edited on Fri Oct-14-05 03:58 PM by Tight_rope
Indict Already....:bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce:
Indict Already....:bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce:
Indict Already....:bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce:

I can't take this anymore. :argh:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
katty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-05 06:12 PM
Response to Reply #14
17. Chimpy: Indicted or UnIndicted co-conspirator?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kablooie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-05 06:24 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. I don't think the president can be Indicted.
He can be impeached and then indicted though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
progressivebydesign Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-05 06:50 PM
Response to Reply #18
23. I'm pretty sure a prez can be indicted. There is no immunity I think,
just cuz you stole an election.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
existentialist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-05 06:54 PM
Response to Reply #23
25. This is an unsettled question of law.
It was much discussed during Watergate. The Watergate grand jury decided it did not have the power to indict Nixon, and therefore named him an "unindicted co-conspirator".

But one Grand juries' decision is hardly definitive law.

One thing you can be pretty sure of: if either Bush or Cheney is indicted the indictment will be appealed, almost certainly eventually reaching the Supreme Court.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Samantha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-05 09:00 PM
Response to Reply #25
33. Is that why Bush* is trying to install his "personal attorney" on the SC
This is what I thought from the first moment I heard he was nominating her. She has pulled him out of many political potholes for a long time. The Supreme Court has always been used for political purposes; and if Bush* should get indicted, I hate to be trite but sometimes it is unavoidable: it pays to have friends in high places.

And if anyone responds to this post by saying Miers would have to recuse herself, I will ask: who is going to make her?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
existentialist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-05 12:10 PM
Response to Reply #33
37. Indeed, who will make her recuse herself.
As recent cases involving Scalia and Cheney et alia have illustrated, with regard to U.S. Supreme Court Justices there is no way to force them to recuse themselves, even when on the public facts, and by reasonable standards applicable to the rest of the judiciary, they clearly should.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Demeter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-05 06:31 PM
Response to Reply #14
21. Oh, I Think He Might
He's just about the only person with the power, the will, and the tools, right now. Let's hope he has the guts for it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dr Fate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-05 06:29 PM
Response to Original message
20. Translation: Fitz ain't leaking jack.
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Giant Robot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-05 06:43 PM
Response to Reply #20
22. Gotta agree with you
Fitzgerald has been so low-key throughout this thing, I don't think he is going to start broadcasting his moves now. I predict we will not hear anything from him until Rove et al have been served their papers/or being frog marched in front of him. Well maybe that last part is wishful thinking.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
brentspeak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-05 06:52 PM
Response to Original message
24. I advise indictment
As soon as possible. And his (and DeLay's) photos posted at every airport, just in case.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thinkingwoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-05 06:55 PM
Response to Original message
26. so says Rove's attorney
what a great source he is. :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tritsofme Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-05 07:25 PM
Response to Original message
27. Top Bush adviser Rove testifies again on CIA leak (Rove is Not Target)
<SNIP>
Rove declined to speak to a crowd of reporters waiting outside.

"The special counsel has not advised Mr. Rove that he is a target of the investigation and affirmed that he has made no decision concerning charges," Rove's attorney Robert Luskin said in a statement.

"The special counsel has indicated that he does not anticipate the need for Mr. Rove's further cooperation," the statement said.

Fitzgerald has tried for two years to find out who in the Bush administration leaked the identity of CIA agent Valerie Plame, and the grand jury will decide whether a federal crime was committed.

<SNIP>
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2005/10/14/051014222030.g16i1gjw.html

Is this the lawyer talking BS or has Fitzgerald backed down?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mshasta Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-05 07:25 PM
Response to Reply #27
28. what??????
Edited on Fri Oct-14-05 07:25 PM by mshasta
:wtf: no wonder the pig look happy today..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Shakespeare Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-05 07:25 PM
Response to Reply #27
29. Not being told IF you're a target in NO way means you aren't one. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rateyes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-05 07:25 PM
Response to Reply #27
30. Is the lawyer talking BS?
He's Rove's advocate isn't he? He's talking BS.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Velveteen Ocelot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-05 07:25 PM
Response to Reply #27
31. Fitzgerald can issue a target letter any time.
Edited on Fri Oct-14-05 07:28 PM by ocelot
The fact that he hasn't yet doesn't mean a thing. Rove could get it the day before the indictments come out, and it wouldn't surprise me if that's exactly how they did it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lancdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-05 07:59 PM
Response to Reply #27
32. Fitz never backs down
Relax.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MellowOne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-05 10:28 PM
Response to Reply #32
34. I sure hope your correct n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gregorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-05 10:43 PM
Response to Original message
35. These headlines make me smile.
How awkward must it be to be one of the grand jurors? Talk about a turn of the tables. I'm guessing some old black lady from Queens sitting across from the sneakiest, meanest man around, and being able to make him squirm.

Oh how I wish I could be a fly on the wall in that room.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-05 08:25 AM
Response to Original message
36. Top Bush adviser Rove testifies again on CIA leak (Wilson comment)



http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20051015/ts_alt_afp/usmediajusticebushpoliticsrove_051015063924;_ylt=AqxsvkJfCid50l_d2MP9TlGs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA3OXIzMDMzBHNlYwM3MDM-
Top Bush adviser Rove testifies again on CIA leak

Sat Oct 15, 2:49 AM ET

.......The opposition Democrats called the leak an act of political revenge and demanded the White House reveal who had divulged the agent's name.

Wilson promptly pointed to Rove as the likely source.

"At the end of the day, it's of keen interest to me to see whether or not we can get Karl Rove frog-marched out of the White House in handcuffs," Wilson said.

"And trust me when I use that name, I measure my words."

Speculation is mounting over whether Rove, known as the mastermind behind Bush's political strategy and election campaigns, will be indicted or emerge unscathed.............
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 Tue Apr 30th 2024, 04:30 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News 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