Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Lawrence O'Donnell: Update on Rove [Today! July 3rd! ROTFLMAO!]
Yahoo News ^ | July 3, 2005 | Lawrence O'Donnell

Posted on 07/03/2005 10:14:41 AM PDT by summer

Lawrence O'Donnell: Update on Rove

Lawrence O'Donnell 2 hours, 22 minutes ago

On Friday, I broke the story that the e-mails that Time turned over to the prosecutor that day reveal that Karl Rove is the source Matt Cooper is protecting. That provoked Rove’s lawyer, Robert Luskin, to interrupt his holiday weekend to do a little defense work with Newsweek and the Los Angeles Times.

On Saturday, Luskin decided to reveal that Rove did have at least one conversation with Cooper, but Luskin told the Times he would not “characterize the substance of the conversation.” Luskin claimed that the prosecutor “asked us not to talk about what Karl has had to say.” This is highly unlikely. Prosecutors have absolutely no control over what witnesses say when they leave the grand jury room. Rove can tell us word-for-word what he said to the grand jury and would if he thought it would help him. And notice that Luskin just did reveal part of Rove’s grand jury testimony, the fact that he had a conversation with Cooper. Rove would not let me get one day of traction on this story if he could stop me. If what I have reported is not true, if Karl Rove is not Matt Cooper’s source, Rove could prove that instantly by telling us what he told the grand jury. Nothing prevents him from doing that, except a good lawyer who is trying to keep him out of jail.


TOPICS: Extended News; News/Current Events; US: District of Columbia
KEYWORDS: cialeak; creepyliar; karlrove; msmidiots; robertluskin; rovesmear
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-99 next last
To: summer
Well, for one thing, O'Donnell doesn't quote the rest of Luskin's statement: Namely, that the prosecutor told Rove he is not the target of the investigation.

And it's quite telling I think, for O'Donnell to mention "traction for his story". Obviously, "traction" to malign Rove is what is on his mind.

Less than an hour ago, I watched a replay of O'Donnell on The McLaughlin Group. O'Donnell said himself he didn't think Rove could be prosecuted for outting an operative, rather he thinks Fitzgerald is going after Rove on perjury charges.

21 posted on 07/03/2005 10:35:58 AM PDT by YaYa123 (@I Will Support President Bush on his Supreme Court nominees.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: summer

bump


22 posted on 07/03/2005 10:36:29 AM PDT by lowbridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: YaYa123
Less than an hour ago, I watched a replay of O'Donnell on The McLaughlin Group.

As did I. He wondered aloud how many more minutes Rove had to continue in his position. He got a laugh out of me.

23 posted on 07/03/2005 10:39:29 AM PDT by Bahbah (Something wicked this way comes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: summer

I hereby invoke the "Chewbacca Defense". "Look at the monkey!"

24 posted on 07/03/2005 10:48:00 AM PDT by Dilbert56
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: YaYa123; cyncooper
rather he thinks Fitzgerald is going after Rove on perjury charges.

Dear God, is he posting this stuff from an insane asylum?

25 posted on 07/03/2005 10:51:52 AM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple
And of course, we know he has, because if he weren't addicted to cocaine he would stop me from getting traction with the story...

I'm all over that rumor! Glad to help!

26 posted on 07/03/2005 10:52:56 AM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
Well, you know, it all fits with a cocaine addiction: Hollywood contact who is a user, paranoia, hyper-emotional, delusions of grandeur...yep, I think cocaine is the explanation.

I invite others who know about this to comment on this thread. Perhaps they could ask around on other forums and blogs as well. Couldn't hurt, could it?

27 posted on 07/03/2005 11:01:04 AM PDT by Miss Marple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: summer

On other boards they already have Rove impeached, or no, wait, Bush, Ooooh, I F&$(*%$ hate the all SOOO BAD!!!


28 posted on 07/03/2005 11:01:31 AM PDT by anonymous_user (You gotta be passionate about something. I guess.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dilbert56

He needs a bunny on his head, with a pancake on its head.


29 posted on 07/03/2005 11:06:22 AM PDT by SERKIT ("Blazing Saddles" explains it all.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: summer
On Saturday, Luskin decided to reveal that Rove did have at least one conversation with Cooper,

Yeah, Larry, they decided to "reveal" this for the umpteenth time.

Here's a liberal column from over a year ago:

More details emerge on the Plame investigation, as Karl Rove's testimony is revealed for the first time.

March 8, 2004

President Bush's chief political adviser, Karl Rove, told the FBI in an interview last October that he circulated and discussed damaging information regarding CIA operative Valerie Plame with others in the White House, outside political consultants, and journalists, according to a government official and an attorney familiar with the ongoing special counsel's investigation of the matter.

But Rove also adamantly insisted to the FBI that he was not the administration official who leaked the information that Plame was a covert CIA operative to conservative columnist Robert Novak last July. Rather, Rove insisted, he had only circulated information about Plame after it had appeared in Novak's column. He also told the FBI, the same sources said, that circulating the information was a legitimate means to counter what he claimed was politically motivated criticism of the Bush administration by Plame's husband, former Ambassador Joseph Wilson.

~snip~

The characterizations in the 2004 citation are the lefty pov, but the bare facts are what we've long known and O'Donnell (and Newsweek) provided nothing new.

The 2004 column goes on to darkly mention Scooter Libby who has long since been cleared after he, like Rove, signed confidentiality waivers and reporters were compelled (and they fought it every step of the way) to admit Libby was not the source and you can bet that the reporters that have testified so far have cleared Rove, as well.

Thank you very much for the ping.

30 posted on 07/03/2005 11:08:01 AM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: summer

If I was Rove I would sue O'Donnell for slander, defamation of character and now it seems libel.

Maybe under a law suit the leaker's name - who I would wager is a democrat - would come out.


31 posted on 07/03/2005 11:09:27 AM PDT by Republican Red (''Van der Sloot" is Dutch for ''Kennedy.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: summer
If what I have reported is not true, if Karl Rove is not Matt Cooper’s source, Rove could prove that instantly by telling us what he told the grand jury.

On the other hand, Old Lar, if Rove has signed a confidentiality waiver (he has), what's stopping Matt Cooper from testifying about Rove being "the source"?

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm?

I'll have to go with the "You're a Creepy Liar", Larry.

32 posted on 07/03/2005 11:11:52 AM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: leadpenny

Trust me, he doesn't have a point. But you're right about the padded room.


33 posted on 07/03/2005 11:12:44 AM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple


Lawrence O'Donnell+cocaine addiction.
Lawrence O'Donnell+cocaine addiction.
Lawrence O'Donnell+cocaine addiction.
Lawrence O'Donnell+cocaine addiction.
Lawrence O'Donnell+cocaine addiction.
Lawrence O'Donnell+cocaine addiction.
Lawrence O'Donnell+cocaine addiction.
Lawrence O'Donnell+cocaine addiction.
Lawrence O'Donnell+cocaine addiction.
Lawrence O'Donnell+cocaine addiction.
Lawrence O'Donnell+cocaine addiction.
Lawrence O'Donnell+cocaine addiction.
Lawrence O'Donnell+cocaine addiction.

Just doing my part.


34 posted on 07/03/2005 11:15:52 AM PDT by tet68 ( " We would not die in that man's company, that fears his fellowship to die with us...." Henry V.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: YaYa123
O'Donnell wants to bait Rove into a discussion with him. I don't know why he wants to do that. Perhaps he wants to be the new leader of the moonbats. I always thought the leaker was Powell who did it unintentionally.
35 posted on 07/03/2005 11:20:11 AM PDT by Patriot from Philly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: All

Does anybody know if he's hooked up with Maureen Dowd yet? Those two seem like a match made in (hell).


36 posted on 07/03/2005 11:21:07 AM PDT by nj26
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: summer

Lawrence O'Donnell of the Dan Rather, Fake but Accurate School of Journalism.


37 posted on 07/03/2005 11:36:57 AM PDT by Eva
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: summer
Hello, Lawrence, come back to Planet Earth someday. You broke nothing except your reputation.

O'Donnell should go back to being head-writer for The West Wing.

-PJ

38 posted on 07/03/2005 11:43:35 AM PDT by Political Junkie Too (It's still not safe to vote Democrat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Political Junkie Too
I am beginning to think maybe he should be a patient in a west wing somewhere. Really, this is ridiculous what he is saying, that Rove should just publicly disclose all his testimony given in secret to a grand jury. Just go ahead, Karl, break the law, because I, Lawrence O'Donnel, said you can do it.

Meanwhile, everytime this O'Donnell opens his mouth, a bunch of news organizations report his drivel in this matter -- new, from EditorsandPublishers.com:

Lawyer Defends Rove, O'Donnell Does Not Buy It

However, even some Dems are skeptical now. The above article did not exactly attract a record-breaking number of Dem posters at this Dem site where it is posted HERE.
39 posted on 07/03/2005 11:52:51 AM PDT by summer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Eva
Lawrence O'Donnell of the Dan Rather, Fake but Accurate School of Journalism.

LOL...
40 posted on 07/03/2005 11:55:12 AM PDT by summer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-99 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson