Posted on 06/14/2006 5:08:47 AM PDT by libstripper
So much for having Karl Rove "frog-marched" out of the White House "in handcuffs." That's the fate Democratic partisan Joe Wilson once predicted for President Bush's political guru, and yesterday his hope and accusations vanished like fog on the Potomac.
Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald informed Mr. Rove's lawyers on Monday that he'll bring no charges as part of his investigation into who leaked the CIA identity of Mr. Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame. Mr. Wilson's original claims that Mr. Bush lied about Iraq intelligence have been discredited many times over, including in a bipartisan report from the Senate Intelligence Committee. And now we know that even the relentless Mr. Fitzgerald has concluded that the charge that Mr. Rove criminally blew Ms. Plame's CIA cover is false.
(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...
How many Sunday morning talk show will have Joe Frog as a guest this week?
This is another big "oops" for the MSM to defend!
"The liberal media put partisanship above their own interests in demanding a special counsel probe of "leaks"--until that probe turned on their own sources."
A prosecutor with any moral or ethical sense would have closed this face two years ago. Mr. Fitzgerald obviousy lacks those. He dragged this out to A: keep himself in the limelight as long as he was raking in the bucks and publicity and B: because he's a not-very bright and easily controllable political attack dog hired by the Democrat party to destroy the administration. He damned near succeeded.
Quite the contrare... they are portraying it as justice being denied. In fact, last night it was said(on 'Hardball') that it's now in the hands of the press to persue!
Fitz needs to be closed down, he has tossed enough money down the sewer.
"Face" was supposed to be "farce". More coffee....
Fitz is, quite literally, Bush's fault. His AG and assistant AG punted because of political pressure instead of investigating the Plame "outing," declaring "no harm, no foul," and giving the NYT the finger.They thought they couldn't stand the heat - so they got out of the kitchen and into the sauna.
Justice denied?......
"last night it was said(on 'Hardball') that it's now in the hands of the press to persue!"
That's a blow against Patrick Fitzgerald's abilities.....let's see Chris interrogate the prosecutor!
For what's it worth, my brother, who is a DC/VA lawyer, highly connected, thinks Libby will win his case. That's his personal opinion.
Print journalism is part of "the press", which also includes book publishing. And broadcast journalism is no part of "the press" - or else you wouldn't need a government license to do it.The First Amendment "gives the press the right to tell the truth." It also allows the press to be hyperpartisan - while claiming to be "objective."
Patrick Fitzgerald has the advantage of comparing what politicians in Illinois do to Karl Rove. There is no comparison. We in Illinois needs the full attendion of Fitz on IL. Sometimes us paranoids wonder if distracting Fitz with Washington wasn't an intentional effort to remove him from his calling here in Illinois.
It is now winding down to the nothing it was to start with.
After this, nobody can honestly say that Fitzie didn't try his best to nail the administration to the wall because he certainly DID try, and if he could find no wrongdoing, there must have been no wrongdoing.
Did you notice how quiet the CIA has suddenly become, BTW? That is a result of this investigation. That is Bush's "fault"
He definitely has done some good work in Illinois, particularly prosecuting and convicting the conetmptible RINO Ryan on numerous corruption charges.
I suspect he's right. My betting's on Scooter.
Thought this was an article about the French Army. Way to go Rove!
Aye there's the rub - they can't say it honestly. But what does that have to do with what journalists and other Democrats will say?? You know as well as I do that the answer to that is essentially, "Nothing!" Fitzpatrick passes on indicting Rove - and Chris Matthews says (undoubtedly for all of journalism) "that leaves it up to the press" to deal with Rove's crimes.So a pass from the special persecutor, if you get one (as Libby did not), essentially gets you right back to square one. They had no case before the special persecutor, and they have no case now - what's the difference? In their eyes, none at all.
You have to understand that "objective" journalism sees itself as the establishment, essentially a propaganda mafia. Nothing can, nothing shall, overturn their hegemony over political discourse. They are "made men" - they believe in the principle of journalistic solidarity like a mafia don believes it would be "wrong" to rat out a member of his gang. Openly political liberals curry the fabvor of journalists, rejecting any principle other than that of power via PR.
The difference being Rove will be able to sue the presstitutes if they try and smear him.
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.