Testimony from Rove's former assistant may solidify case that he misled...

working! :applause: :applause:

sploosh!

I hope going to jail Sue is worth it!!!

...but she doesn't have deep pockets and a crack legal team, so odds are good she will flip and sing in order to escape charges.

It's getting GOOD...who knows what the days ahead will bring?

it doesn't make her a good witness and it makes her look like she is lying just like Woodruff does!!!

Judy Woodruff has not been much of an apologist for this administration of late. She was ripping Timmy Two Shoes Russert a new one last Sunday...!

Remember, she was the one dining with her husband, Al Hunt, and her small child, when the drunken monkey, working on 'deddy's' campaign, came up to their table and starting calling Al a "fucking sonofabitch, I saw what you wrote, and we won't forget it" (or words to that effect). And it was something rather benign that Al wrote, too, about Jack Kemp in the GHWB election process...nothing horrible at all!

"I'm sorry, I thought you were asking if Mr. Rove had any conversations with Matthew HOOPER, who did my hair down in Texas when I worked for Jack Abramoff...

I'm sorry? You want to ask me about my tenure with Mr. Abramoff now?

Oopsie."

so they could talk about hot sweaty pasty man love

:shrug:

must make them as cynical as we are about republican politicians.

"Rove does not appear to be in jeopardy of being charged with violating a law making it a crime to leak the name of a covert CIA agent because it’s unlikely that he was unaware that Plame was undercover, they added.

Do they mean it's unlikely he was AWARE that Plame was uncercover? Although I think the way it's actually written is probably the truth. I DO think it unlikely he was unaware of her covert status. But the way it's written is a bit confusing.

knowingly leaking her name. I bet that Firztgerald has no way to prove that he did know her status---but---that doesn't mean he won't be charged with lying.

That's not what is written. I think it's a typo.

There is no other reason for the request to keep calls off the record except that he KNEW he was breaking laws.

We know he knew (or at least strongly suspect), however it may still be hard to prove. That being said, is it just me or is that sentence constructed incorrectly? :shrug:

I.e. - write something in a confusing way, so they can tell the truth but people assume it is a mistake. I see these sorts of "mistakes" quite a bit.

They realized they had a double negative.

You may not have seen this in the earlier version, but now if you go to the story on Raw Story, you'll see a correction (in italics) at the bottom of the article. It explains and corrects this mistake.

Sorry :(
Especially about the whole Fitzmas issue.

I would want it to be true, though :toast:

They've been pretty damn good actually on this story. I assume you've got evidence to back that claim up?

Thought you might be interested.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=5229763

I, too, have heard people on here complain that Raw Story is not necessarily trustworthy. But I haven't seen any actual demonstrations of when they have been wrong.

I went to Raw Story hoping to find Plamegate archives of their previous stories on this subject. I was going to go back and see which ones had turned out accurate. But I didn't see any archives.

Can you find some Plamegate story of theirs which turned out to be inaccurate? I'd like to see if there is one. I'm not being sarcastic--I WANT to believe this latest story! I want to reassure myself that this story is accurate!

One thing, though: as we know, in the last week of October, there were numerous stories all over the net predicting who would be indicted, or predicting that no one would be indicted, or predicting that droves of people would be indicted, etc. I think LOTS of media outlets turned out to be wrong. So if Raw Story predicted certain indictments (or lack thereof) and turned out to be wrong on THAT, I would not take that to mean they are not believable. Because I note that many credible, tried-and-true, news outlets were wrong on predictions of what would happen on Oct. 28.

n/t

IOW, Rove would either plead out soon--meaning that Fitz would draw up a bill of information (a substitute for an indictment) so Pigboy could get on with his guilty plea right away, w/o waiting for the grand jury to indict him. Or, Pigboy would hold fast and refuse to plea bargain (at first), meaning that the grand jury would proceed with its work, eventually indicting him (whereupon Pigboy would proceed to trial unless he worked out some last minute plea bargain.)

Suppose one of the above is true. Suppose, for example, that Pigboy is at this moment ready to plead guilty to something. Suppose he does. Suppose Fitz does not make any announcement, Rove doesn't make any announcement, nobody tells us that Rove has done this. And Rove stays on at the WH after his plea!

Can you imagine how angry the whole American public would be when it finally came out (as it inevitably would) that Rove had been continuing to work at the WH while a convicted felon? With a SECURITY CLEARANCE?

I can't see even this stupid WH keeping Pigboy on after any plea he made--even if the plea were hushed up, as Raw Story suggested it might be (b/c Fitz might not want to talk about it b/c to do so would tip off Libby that there was a powerful witness--Rove--gearing up against him.) No--any plea of guilty by Rove would have to be made known to the public, and of course that means Rove would have to resign.

So if there's any truth at all to this story, we ought to know pretty soon.

issued in this case!!!

I say put them all in Guatanamo...

Indict that SOB.

Let's see how it plays out.

happening!!!!



YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
:bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce:

Rove’s lawyer, Robert Luskin, maintains that his client did not intentionally withhold facts from the prosecutor or grand jury but simply forgot about his conversations with Cooper. But sources say Rove’s reasons for not being forthcoming have not convinced Fitzgerald that Rove had a momentary lapse.

Rove 'to be charged or make plea'

Those close to the investigation say Fitzgerald will present evidence to the grand jury later this week obtained from other witnesses who were interviewed by the Special Prosecutor or testified, showing that Rove made misleading statements to Justice Department and FBI investigators in an attempt to cover-up his role in the leak when he was first interviewed about it in October 2003.

The most serious charges Rove appears to face are making false statements to investigators and obstruction of justice, the sources said. Rove does not appear to be in jeopardy of being charged with violating a law making it a crime to leak the name of a covert CIA agent because it’s unlikely that he was unaware that Plame was undercover, they added.

Rove’s conversation with Cooper took place a week or so before Plame’s identity was revealed publicly in a July 14, 2003 column penned by conservative columnist Robert Novak. Cooper wrote his own story about Plame a few days later. In his grand jury testimony, Rove said he first learned of Plame’s name from reporters, and only after her named was published did he discuss her CIA status with other journalists. That sequence of events, however, turned out to be false.

Plame, who is married to former ambassad

House CONSPIRACY to out Plame and destroy the entire CIA WMD counter-proliferation project (20 years in the making), that involves maybe many others (possibly the entire White House Iraq Group) and goes up above Rove, probably at least to Cheney, and may involve also everyone on AF-1 for the Africa trip the week she was outed (mid-July 2003), including Bush.

A good prosecutor often works his way up--and Fitzgerald is a very good prosecutor and this is the way he has worked on past cases. You pressure the lesser lights, and catch them in coverup lies, or indict them on lesser crimes, to get at the masterminds. I don't think Rove is the mastermind of this conspiracy. I think he was used by them to create a cover story of Rovian revenge, all too believable. This doesn't mean he is not guilty of knowingly outing a CIA covert agent. But I think it went like this: X to Rove: Do it! Get her outed NOW! Rove: But isn't that illegal? X: We'll have your back on it. Nothing to worry about.

See what I mean? So it may not be so important to nail Rove with knowingly outing Plame. What's important is who ordered this and WHY. Fitzgerald was big on "why" in his press conference on the Libby indictment. And WHY, in this case, could lead a number of places that are not yet obvious. (Why the crude Niger forgeries that started it all? Why the meeting in Rome of Neo-con Ladeen, Italian rightwing intelligence heads, and Iran-Contra arms dealer Ghorbanifar, where the Niger forgeries were likely concocted? See the related AIPAC case. Why out the entire CIA WMD project, Brewster-Jennings, not just Plame? And many more possible roads, including, I just found out, a connection to Sibel Edmonds--whom the Supreme Court just today denied her day in court: Plame was ALSO working on an investigation of the American Turkish Association, that may be involved in much dirty arms dealing stuff, corruption, and serious breaches of security, and has top Bushites as members. Edmonds has been trying to get this Amer-Turkey scandal, and other even worse information, out to the public since 2002, and has been repeatedly gagged by the Bush Cartel.)

I have no privileged info on what Fitzgerald may be doing, but I can guess, just from news reports, that he is probably working his way up, that he has two top Bushite coverup artists, liars and conspirators by the scruff of the neck--Libby and Rove--the one covering for Cheney, the other possibly for Bush, and has enough on them to put them in jail (for lying). Or he may be working laterally to get Rove to rat on Libby, so he can charge Libby with more than the many counts of lying and obstructing justice, and squeeze him to give up Cheney. I think Fitzgerald has many irons in the fire, and many ways that he can go at this, and is just being patient and biding his time, and letting the implications of a federal indictment sink into many different heads.

Do you remember, in Fitzgerald's press conference on the Libby indictment, some reporter asked him about the White House "talking point" that his charges against Libby were trivial? He snapped back, "That 'talking point' won't fly!"

Fitzgerald is onto them, for sure--and is furthermore exposing the abject lapdogism of the war profiteering corporate news monopolies, who have now had THREE famous and privileged reporters--Miller, Novak and Woodward--caught directly assisting White House crimes, or in Woodward's case, appearing to assist (we don't know the full story there yet). (He's certainly a lapdog, though.) The New York Times, the Chicago Sun-Times, and the Washington Post are in disgrace. And who is most culpable for force-feeding White House "talking points" down the throats of the American public, if not these major papers?

"That 'talking point' won't fly!"

That was a good 'un!

Robert and Luskin.

According to his lawyer? Of course, according to his lawyer. That's what Rove pays him the big bucks for.

Here's the url:

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/112805Z.shtml

"The most serious charges Rove faces are making false statements to investigators and obstruction of justice, the sources said. He does not appear to be in jeopardy of violating the law making it a crime to leak the name of a covert CIA agent, because it's unlikely that Rove was aware that Plame Wilson was undercover, the sources said."

----------------

I just caught up with the fact that Ralson was not just Rove's assistant, but was also "special assistant to President Bush," and that, prior to her employment by those liars and war criminals, she was personal assistant to...get this?...Jack Abramoff, and in that role "communicated with Rove on Abramoff's behalf on tribal affairs." (Truthout, above.)

The plot thickens.

(And guess who brought us electronic voting machines manufactured and controlled by Bushite corporations, with "trade secret," proprietary vote tabulation software? Bob Ney, one of the two main sponsors of the so-called "Help America Vote Act," into which act they wanted Ney to dump tribal favors (the shakedown--but Ney didn't do it).

The plot thickens and grows into a toxic landfill.

And I agree, why is Rove not suspected of knowing that Plame was a covert agent, and that his action was illegal, if he was taking such measures to cover up his action (directing his assistant to not log the call)?

Something we can't see, at this point. Tip of the iceberg?

and grand jury--the gift that keeps on giving!

"Two things are clear, the sources said: either Rove will agree to enter into a plea deal with Fitzgerald or he will be charged with a crime, but he will not be exonerated for the role he played in the leak."

Merry Fitzmas, everyone (Except Rove, Cheney, B***, well, you know...)
:bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce:

Who cares?? Rove would be a convicted felon! I feel like bouncing, too!:bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :toast: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce:

Hopefully this hasn't been posted yet. I didn't see it anywhere.

Testimony from Rove's former assistant may solidify case that he misled leak inquiry, lawyers say
Jason Leopold and Larisa Alexandrovna


Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald will present evidence to a second grand jury this week in his two year-old investigation into the outing of covert CIA agent Valerie Plame Wilson that could lead to a criminal indictment being handed up against Karl Rove, President Bush’s deputy chief of staff, attorneys close to the investigation say.

<snip>

The attorneys say that Rove’s former personal assistant, Susan B. Ralston -- who was also a special assistant to President Bush -- testified in August about why Cooper’s call to Rove was not logged. Ralston said it occurred because Cooper had phoned in through the White House switchboard and was then transferred to Rove’s office as opposed to calling Rove’s office directly. As Rove’s assistant, Ralston screened Rove’s calls.


But those close to the probe tell RAW STORY that Fitzgerald obtained documentary evidence showing that other unrelated calls transferred to Rove’s office by the switchboard were logged. He then called Ralston back to testify.

Earlier this month, attorneys say Fitzgerald received additional testimony from Ralston -- who said that Rove instructed her not to log a phone call Rove had with Cooper about Plame in July 2003.

Ralston also provided Fitzgerald with more information and “clarification” about several telephone calls Rove allegedly made to a few reporters, including syndicated columnist Robert Novak, the lawyers said.

<snip>

Rove 'to be charged or make plea'

Those close to the investigation say Fitzgerald will present evidence to the grand jury later this week obtained from other witnesses who were interviewed by the Special Prosecutor or testified, showing that Rove made misleading statements to Justice Department and FBI investigators in an attempt to cover-up his role in the leak when he was first interviewed about it in October 2003.

The most serious charges Rove appears to face are making false statements to investigators and obstruction of justice, the sources said. Rove does not appear to be in jeopardy of being charged with violating a law making it a crime to leak the name of a covert CIA agent because it’s unlikely that he was aware that Plame was undercover, they added.

<snip>

Ralston previously worked as a personal secretary to Jack Abramoff, the Republican power lobbyist now under investigation for allegedly defrauding Indian tribes who was recently indicted on conspiracy and wire fraud charges. While working with Abramoff, Ralston arranged fundraisers and events at Washington MCI Center skyboxes for members of Congress and their staff. Ralston communicated with Rove on Abramoff’s behalf on tribal affairs, though she does not stand accused of any wrongdoing.

Full story at www.rawstory.com