Rove won't be charged

Discussion in 'Free Speech Alley' started by Sourdoughman, Jun 13, 2006.

  1. Sourdoughman

    Sourdoughman TigerFan of LSU and the Tigerman

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2003
    Messages:
    12,314
    Likes Received:
    560
    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,199241,00.html

    Democrats have failed once again.
    This president is so dumb but yet he is able to run circles around them
    time and time again.:lol:

    I guess that 10 page thread about Rove, Wilson and Plume was much to do about nothing.
    The Democrats will now use spin control and attack the prosecutor.
    They have too, its the way they operate.:thumb:


    Quote:
    “The fact is this, I thought it was wrong when you had people like Howard Dean, Red and (Sen.) Harry Reid presuming that he was guilty,” Republican Party Chairman Ken Mehlman told FOX News. :lol: :rofl: :D
     
  2. red55

    red55 curmudgeon Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    45,195
    Likes Received:
    8,733
    Naaa, it was the Republican justice department prosecutor that failed. The Executive branch has investigated itself and found itself innocent. The Republican Congress will not hold their own investigation so the Democrats will not have a chance to question anything.

    There was no leak, apparently. The Plame outing never happened. That is the conclusion of this prosecutor? Well, the political damage is done anyway. The public is not fooled.
     
  3. saltyone

    saltyone So Mote It Be

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2004
    Messages:
    7,647
    Likes Received:
    483
    That didn't take long.

     
  4. MemphisLSUTiger

    MemphisLSUTiger Founding Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2005
    Messages:
    195
    Likes Received:
    0
    Interesting. A few months ago Fitzgerald was the perfect professional, he would never let politics get in the way of justice...untill he said oops the libs were wrong. Now they all turn on him
     
  5. LsuCraig

    LsuCraig Founding Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2004
    Messages:
    1,607
    Likes Received:
    55
    Now it's the Republican prosecutor.....bahahahahaha.

    Can't say I didn't tell you so.
     
  6. LSUsupaFan

    LSUsupaFan Freshman

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2003
    Messages:
    8,787
    Likes Received:
    1,207
    Investigations like this one need to be more transparent. There is often times enough wiggle room for the one side or the other to scream witch hunt. I think alot of times there isn't enough independence, and that is just begging for someone to scream foul.

    I don't care if he gets indicted or not. It's pretty apparent that Rove is a dirty liar. I wouldn't trust him with my bank card. I mean he does associate with politicians.
     
  7. kcal

    kcal Founding Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2004
    Messages:
    8,140
    Likes Received:
    5,308
    true!!!!!!!!!!!! schumer(sp?) (d-ny) now wants the special prosecutor to respond as to why he didn't indict rove.
     
  8. red55

    red55 curmudgeon Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    45,195
    Likes Received:
    8,733
    Who are you talking about? Not me. Here is what I said when this leak scandal came up in 2005:

    http://www.tigerforums.com/showthread.php?t=32115 post 7.

    I've always been suspicious that the executive branch would not police itself properly. Libby has already testified that Bush OK'ed the leak. Then the president invoked executive privilege--said he could leak it if he chose to. So the prosecutor says, "OK then there no leak, I guess".

    So why did Bush tell us all at the beginning that he would find and prosecute the source of the leak? It didn't happen did it? Instead Bush just redefined the term "leak" when it came back to Dick, Karl and himself. There never was a leak we are now being told.

    Sure. The public believes that completely and will re-elect all the republicans, now. :lol:
     
  9. martin

    martin Banned Forever

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    19,026
    Likes Received:
    934
    you still dont understand a very simple concept. if you are the president, you decide what information is a leak and what isnt. when you say you will find leakers, you dont mean yourself. leakers are people who are not authorized to release information. the president is authorized.

    if your boss tells you not to do something that only he is authorized to do, that means you cannot do it, but he can. i cant see how you dont understand this.

    oops nevermind i did i make a mistake are you talking about the plame thing or the other leak thing? i dont think libby testified that bush ok'd the plame leak. i think we are mixing our leak stories?
     
  10. JoeReckless

    JoeReckless Founding Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2002
    Messages:
    1,588
    Likes Received:
    59
    There is a God!
     

Share This Page