I want to see the letter - Democratic Underground

Norquist Nemesis

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Jun-13-06 10:01 AM
Original message

I want to see the letter

It's not on Fitzgerald's Special Prosecutor site. http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/iln/osc/index.html

No statement whatsoever. I want to see it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Avalux

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Jun-13-06 10:02 AM
Response to Original message

1. Me too. Show us the damn letter.

What kind of game is Rove playing here?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Norquist Nemesis

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Jun-13-06 10:39 AM
Response to Reply #1

9. Luskin's the player, here. Has been all along.

That's his job, of course. But American taxpayers are subsidizing Karl Rove's PR defense and the "traditional" media are ever so happy to oblige.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

bigtree

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Jun-13-06 10:03 AM
Response to Original message

2. where is the damn letter?

I'll be damned if I'll take cues from Roves lawyer.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Norquist Nemesis

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Jun-13-06 10:39 AM
Response to Reply #2

10. *tapping foot* n/t

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

LeftNYC

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Jun-13-06 10:04 AM
Response to Original message

3. Yup. I emailed the Wash Post, AP, Raw Story...somebody

Edited on Tue Jun-13-06 10:05 AM by LeftNYC

must have asked to see it-right?

The Times doesnt have links to writers email addresses anymore...bastids.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Norquist Nemesis

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Jun-13-06 10:34 AM
Response to Reply #3

7. You'd think "send me a fax copy" would be the first thing

they'd be saying.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

LeftNYC

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Jun-13-06 10:57 AM
Response to Reply #7

17. The post is saying that a letter wasnt mentioned

Edited on Tue Jun-13-06 10:58 AM by LeftNYC

see my post Re: Luskin letter.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2676054&mesg_id=2676054

The Times stated there is a letter, which is it?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

bigtree

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Jun-13-06 10:50 AM
Response to Reply #3

15. try our resource thread

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=106x8816

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

marylanddem

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Jun-13-06 10:04 AM
Response to Original message

4. "does not anticipate" charging Rove doesn't necessarily

mean he's off the hook...cat & mouse game going on here...

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Norquist Nemesis

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Jun-13-06 10:36 AM
Response to Reply #4

8. Yes. The only definitive term would be "will not be indicting"

There isn't any other way to interpret that. But the "does not anticipate" means nothing.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Patsy Stone

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Jun-13-06 10:05 AM
Response to Original message

5. I know

Edited on Tue Jun-13-06 10:06 AM by Patsy Stone

I want to see it too. Why wouldn't Luskin release the whole thing if it totally exonerates Rove? What does he have to lose?

I'm also still working through the word "anticipate". What does that mean? I think it means that as long as Rove is a good boy and cooperates, he's off the hook. Step off the reservation and we've got this stuff to charge you with.

Not saying that I don't believe there was some communication between Fitz and Luskin, just that the very best parts (for Rove) were released -- and there may be a few parts that are not so good PR-wise for old Rover.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

marylanddem

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Jun-13-06 10:09 AM
Response to Reply #5

6. well put - let's let the damn letter out of the bag, Luskin/Fitzgerald

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Catherine Vincent

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Jun-13-06 10:40 AM
Response to Original message

11. I want to see the letter also.

Not that I don't trust Luskin but I'd rather hear it from Fitzgerald.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Patsy Stone

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Jun-13-06 10:42 AM
Response to Reply #11

12. C'mon, admit it...

You want to SEE it from Fitzgerald. :)

:hi:

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Norquist Nemesis

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Jun-13-06 10:43 AM
Response to Reply #12

13. EXACTLY!

Un-edited and word for word. :hi:

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Catherine Vincent

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Jun-13-06 11:05 AM
Response to Reply #12

18. Oh yeah!

In his first press conference, he kept aluding to "the people out there watching the tvs" wanting to know everything, well he should give us a brief press conference on this. ;-)

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Patsy Stone

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Jun-13-06 11:10 AM
Response to Reply #18

22. I would love a chance to look into

that man's eyes again. A white-hat wearing, accordion playin' juggernaut of truth and justice. (Sigh)

The very thought makes me all melty... PF: :loveya:

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

stop the bleeding

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Jun-13-06 10:45 AM
Response to Original message

14. Me as well

If we ever get to see it - it is probably something along the lines of "thanks or cooperating and if Rover continues cooperating then I(Fitz speaking) do not anticipate indicting pigface."

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Norquist Nemesis

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Jun-13-06 10:56 AM
Response to Reply #14

16. Or maybe it is "do not anticipate as of today"

Until we see the letter... :shrug:

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

OzarkDem

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Jun-13-06 11:07 AM
Response to Original message

19. Agree, where's the evidence that Rove isn't being indicted

We only have Rove's attorney's word, right?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Tsiyu

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Jun-13-06 11:08 AM
Response to Original message

20. Thank you

same here.

We are talking about ROVE, people. Would his attorney be any more ethical than KKKarl?

This is just another one of his fucking games. We should ignore it and wait for Fitz to do his job.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

gratuitous

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Jun-13-06 11:10 AM
Response to Original message

21. Why are you all so cynical and distrustful?

Has anyone in the Bush administration ever lied to you? What is the reason for such suspicion? My goodness, Karl Rove's paid mouthpiece said it; isn't that enough? I suppose you don't think there were any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, either! Goodness me!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Norquist Nemesis

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Jun-13-06 11:11 AM
Response to Reply #21

23. LOL!!!

:hi:

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Patsy Stone

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Jun-13-06 11:11 AM
Response to Reply #21

24. Why do you hate America?

:)

Just move along... Nothing to see here...

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DU AdBot (1000+ posts)

Sat May 04th 2024, 06:31 PM
Response to Original message

Advertisements [?]

Top

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.