Posted on 10/06/2005 12:19:41 PM PDT by West Coast Conservative
If Rove had anything to worry about his lawyers would not have offered his testimony. Calm down, everyone.
And we continue to beat a dead horse, no matter how much praying the Rove haters do,nothing will happen
What is the date/time of your Update? I wasn't clear if it was after this AP report. Thanks.
I am getting a set of piles like you would not believe watching this. We do not need this sh*t.
Just one minute....
The person who outed Plame was her husband Wilson...and
Aldridge (spy).
Rove should not be indicted because he was a gossiper anymore than Dan Rather, who also was a gossiper...
Note, neither provided news!
For what it's worth, D.C. has been swirling in the rumors and expectations that Rove would be indicted. And, many have been surprised by the seriousness of the charges. (Perjury among them)
I hope they're mistaken.
Could someone please how anyone could be indicted for "outing" Plame when her husband (Wilson) bragged about his "secret agent" wife on his web page some years ago? How can there be a leak when the secret was placed in the public domain by Mr Blabbermouth?
Regards,
GtG
If Fitzgerald had sent such a letter to me, my ass would slam shut so tight it would crip a penny. We do not need this.
It was not a "not a Target" letter. But it was not a "Target" letter, either. IOW, if you're a target, the letter would say you are. This letter only says they cannot assure him that at a future time he won't be indicted.
The only thing we know for sure is we don't know anything. It does seem highly unlikely that Rove would continue to cooperate with Fitzgerald if he felt there was a real possibility of being charged.
Never in my memory has so much been made over nothing.
there that should be better.
More information then I really need right now, maybe you could include that line in your next CW hit?
Regards,
GtG
My guess is this is just finishing up all available testimony. I cannot conceive Rove being indicted for anything.
If Rove's lawyer let me testify knowing he was a target, then Rove needs to find a new lawyer. That would be a very stupid move.
You don't have to testify to any Grand Jury even if you are not officially a target. That's why we have a 5th amendment in the Constitution.
He's gotta explain discrepancies between his testimony and the reporters' testimony. If the Grand Jury doesn't buy it, and they usually are pretty persnickity, then he'll be indicted.
Let him testify, not me. What was I thinking?
I don't think so. Miller did not claim that Rove was her contact.
Indicted for what Perjury? Very hard to prove.
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.