Well "not charged" and "cleared" aren't exactly the same thing. But sure, it's got to be disappointing to the left.

Wait, did you write "American Left?" I thought you Bush deadenders wouldn't even make that much of a concession to the Godless, Traitor-ous, Slander-ous liberals. You're really getting soft, Mitch.

Soft? I'm a regular teddy bear.

I'd like to offer my personal condolences to Doug. This must be a very sad day. Rather like that day in early November, 2004. Well, buck up! Go out and catch a double feature of An Inconvenient Truth and A Prairie Home Companion. There's nothing like watching a comedy and a musical to lighten the heart.

If the GOP continues to fall back on the reverse-negativism mantras ("Nobody's been indicted lately! Thousands of Americans didn't die in Iraq today!") they will find their results this fall to be pretty thin indeed.

If the DFL continues to fall back on the convict-first/ask questions later mantra ("Just because he's not being indicted...doesn't make him innocent! Lock up Rove first, but free the terrorists in Gitmo!") they will find their results this fall to be pretty thin indeed.

Whatever happened to all of the updates from various lefties citing Marc Asch at Truthout claiming that his “source” assured him Rove was going to be (was already) indicted?

*crickets chirping*

I think at this point we can all safely assume that unless Marc Asch names (burns) the “source” who lied to him that there never was a “source” and he made the whole thing up.

Mitch you and I have both had dealings with this fellow in past, which do you think is more likely to be true?

Umm, Tim, Reverse-negativism? Wouldn't that by definition be optimism? No indictment is a pretty optimistic thing from Karls pov, don'tcha think?

LOL.

"Reverse negativism" is what happens when somebody's been hooting and twittering and jeering at you for months that a horrible event is in your future, and you observe that the twittering and jeering person is wrong.

It's a way of taking someone to task for being dishonorable in victory without seeming to, because on the day of your victory, you're gonna make the buggers' eyes water and we all know it.

Gosh... Thanks for the concern there kermit but after Rove went in front of the Grand Jury for a fifth time to discuss how he suddenly remembered that he in fact did talk to Matt Cooper, AND gave detail about the e-mails that did, didn't, did, uh didn't - wait - uh did exist... I knew it was pretty much over.

Remember, the issue was obstruction of justice and lying. If he finally came forward and delivered what he was hiding, there's no obstruction anymore.

Of course he covered his lying by saying he uh... forgot. That's it. yeah... he just forgot...

Too bad Clinton wasn't a republican because he could have gotten away with, "Well, I forgot I had sex with that woman..."

Thorley Winston-
You underestimate the power of self-delusion. Ash's latest on the Rove non-indictment can be read at http://forum.truthout.org/blog/story/2006/6/12/9216/61823

My favorite bit is this sentence:
"We believe that if any of the key facts that we have reported were materially false or inaccurate some statement to that effect would be forthcoming from Fitzgerald's staff."
It's obvious! Their story must have been true because Fitzgerald would have said something if they were wrong!

Hmmm...Dougie must have a day off from the fryers today.

Seems to me, a certain junior senator from some backwoods state....let's say...New York...once upon a time used the "I can't remember" or "I don't know" in reference to HER testimony on how she converted cattle futures into a pile of cash. I forget the count, but it approached the hundred mark.

But I guess we all forgot about that, huh?

Doug, I once heard a totalling of "I forgots" "I don't recalls" and "I don't remembers" from a Hillary testimony before Congress. It was a very large number.

Doug says "Remember, the issue was obstruction of justice and lying."

That's funny Doug - I could have sworn that this witch hunt was over WHO OUTED VALERIE PLAME... Did you forget about that??????

Did he forget about it? Judging by what I've read here so far, "forgetting about it" is the only way he can build an argument.

No Ms. logician, I haven't forgotten about that. The entire Grand Jury inquiry regarding Rove has been about whether or not he lied and obstructed justice in the investigation ABOUT who outed Plame.

Hope that helps clear things up for 'ya there.

Jeepers, as a Logician, I would have thought you would have a better understanding of the investigation.

And as I understand it there is still an on going investigation into whether or not Plames civil liberties were violated when "someone" leaked to the press what her actual responsibilities were at the CIA.

There is also the matter of whether we suffered any damage from losing an operative and contacts working on Irans WMD proliferation.

Way to put retaliation ahead of national security...

"Whatever happened to all of the updates from various lefties citing Marc Asch at Truthout claiming that his “source” assured him Rove was going to be (was already) indicted?"

That would have been FULCRUM, who came crashing through the comment doors of a totally unrelated thread--with a three foot stream of toilet paper on his right shoe--to frantically share his most terribly important news.

Thorley:

"Mitch you and I have both had dealings with this fellow in past, which do you think is more likely to be true?"

Oooh, man. that SO sounds like the former Rep from Shoreview, chair of Common Cause of Minnesota, and inveterate dickhead Marc Asch.

But I did a little g00gling, and it seems it's a different fella - Marc *Ash*, from California.

http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:P3Q-t2fXVZcJ:www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2006/05/rove_informs_white_house_he_will_be_indicted_will_resign/feed/+marc+asch+truthout.org+rove&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=2

Unless I'm missing something, it's not our old buddy.

http://www.g00gle.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=marc+asch+truthout.org+rove&btnG=Search

Bummer.

"There is also the matter of whether we suffered any damage from losing an operative and contacts working on Irans WMD proliferation."

Not as much as the leaking of (legal) NSA wiretapping. But that was ok, wasn't it?

"He's cleared" - no, he was not charged, that's not the same.

Rove had a deep hand in the process of outing someone for political purposes. There appears to not have been enough evidence to charge him.

That is all.

Other than - This never happens -

The rightie nuts claim Fitzgerald is a political pawn who would look to indict a ham sandwich for political purposes, but then he doesn't indict Rove.

They claim the charges against Libby are baseless and will be dropped.

They claim the charges against DeLay are baseless and will be dropped.

but then they aren't and instant Karma kettle and pot become one.

"There appears to not have been enough evidence to charge him.

That is all."

So says an anonymous commenter named "howdydoody".

Thanks for your participation.

This never happens...

Righty blogs never get taken in by incorrect information like Rove getting indicted - like, AAR is about to be kicked out by it's NYC affiliate and is "circling the drain."

And Rove is exactly as guilty as Clinton, he lied to a grand jury, and wasn't indicted. The only difference, one was about oral sex, the other about exposing national secrets - not phoney secrets like that Al Qaeda wouldn't have guessed we might wire tap them, but real ones, like that operatives worked for the CIA. Outside of that, they are exactly the same, except one gets a pass from thier political party for a "faulty" memory, the other gets a pass because he's a "good" president.

Slime=slime

And anonymous posts never hit blogs.

"And Rove is exactly as guilty as Clinton, he lied to a grand jury, and wasn't indicted."

And this lie was? And what is your evidence? Are you privy to some grand jury transcripts or internal memos that no one else is? Because if Rove perjured himself as you assert, you must have seen something that Fitzgerald didn't.

Or in other words, Fitz had no basis to charge Rove with perjury, just like you have no basis to claim he commmitted it. You are talking out your ass.

Please return to your "reality based" mothership now.

Why does "Howdy" sound like "PB"?

"about exposing national secrets"?!?!

First, if there was evidence to indict...then he would have been indicted. Second, are we talking about Valarie Plame, who had not "outed" herself to her neighbors and friends, while serving the previous 5 years from behind a desk at Langley? Wow, I reckon she was one of dem SUPER-DOOPER spies, huh? She must have be REALLY sneaky, driving her Volvo from home to the gates at CIA headquarters every work day. Wow, nobody would have guessed she worked for the CIA.

"The entire Grand Jury inquiry regarding Rove has been about whether or not he lied and obstructed justice in the investigation ABOUT who outed Plame. "

And yet Ambassador Wilson (among others) were dreaming of Mr. Rove being "perp walked" because he WAS THE ONE (according to these folks) who did out Ms. Plame! That was the entire basis of the Truthout "story".....

I can't believe how many people either forget, or ignore the fact that VALERIE PLAME WAS NOT COVERT AT THE TIME SHE WAS "OUTED"

The LAW dictates that a "covert" op is anyone who has been placed covertly OUTSIDE of the US within the past 5 years. At the time her questionable outing occurred, it had been between 6 and 7 years since she was covertly placed outside of our country.

From Wikipedia quoting the Boston Globe"

"The Boston Globe also editorialized: "Once before, Plame was caught up in a case illustrating how costly it can be for a CIA officer to be in danger of having her cover exposed. ***The agency called Plame home in 1997*** in fear that Aldrich Ames, the notorious Soviet mole inside the CIA, had revealed her true identity to his KGB handlers...."

(*** = mine)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valerie_Plame

That means that at the very latest, on 1/1/2003, SHE WAS NO LONGER UNDERCOVER. Why is this being ignored????

If I'm wrong, please correct me.

And in advance, STFU, Assclown.

Correction:

It had been between 7 and 8 years since she was covertly placed outside of our country, not between 6 or 7

" . . . not phoney secrets like that Al Qaeda wouldn't have guessed we might wire tap them, but real ones, like that operatives worked for the CIA. Outside of that, they are exactly the same, except one gets a pass from thier political party for a "faulty" memory, the other gets a pass because he's a "good" president."

Using the exclusive "like" when the inclusive "such as" is called for (x2!). Check.
Use of the plural noun "operatives" without a restrictive pronoun makes no sense in this context. Check.
Misspelling "thier" for "their". Check.

Aaron, old boy, I think you've scored a bullseye. Welcome back, PB!

Kermit said,

"Not as much as the leaking of (legal) NSA wiretapping. But that was ok, wasn't it?"

Sure Kermit, those terrorists would have never considered we might be listening until someone blew the whistle.

Doug, I have to congratulate you. You've proven, beyond any doubt, that all those billions we've spent on intelligence have been wasted.

Because no intelligence is worth having if the bad guys suspect you MIGHT be listening.

Brilliant.

I'm not one bit surprised about the fact that Karl Rove was not part or in part or a part of this CIA Leak. Mr. Rove is a professional and not in need of this type of game.

From my perspective, only the Dem’s are they type to infect themselves with this kind of questionable behavior.

I just wonder how much the Dem’s have wasted in tax dollars and how much more they will spend.

All that Rove, or anybody else, needed to tell a curious reporter is: See that guy there. That's Joe Wilson. Just follow him as he goes from CNN's Washington studios, to his lunch with Washington Post reporters, to NBC's Washington studios, to his dinner with Sen. Kerry, and then follow him to his home. Sit outside the home overnight, and then just follow the woman that comes out of the house in the morning to her job in Langley, VA. Notice, when you get there, the big sign in front of the huge government office building that she enters. Same result, but the "CIA" never mentioned.

Doug excreted: "Sure Kermit, those terrorists would have never considered we might be listening until someone blew the whistle."

Mo, tell it to the 17 Muslim terrorists caught last week in the Canadian plot. How do you think they were nailed? By understanding why they hate us?

Terry, a dude (or chick - I'm just not sure) who must have been the teacher's pet in 9th-grade English, said: "Using the exclusive "like" when the inclusive "such as" is called for (x2!). Check.
Use of the plural noun "operatives" without a restrictive pronoun makes no sense in this context. Check.
Misspelling "thier" for "their". Check.

Preved Medved

Thanks!!! furniture Very nice site.I enjoy being here.

redhead babe pic redhead teen ass