Just a thought, but.....
Does anyone think since Libby was NOT indicted for the "outing" of Plame, then Fitzgerald's "continuing investigation" of Rove could be for the stronger charge of "outing" Plame?
Just wondering.............
Nope. Trying to use Scooter to work the "Conspiracy" angle.
Don't be silly - there's no there there ... if there was anything this guy would have dropped it now - do you really think he wants to appear this foolish to all the DUmmies and their presstitutes after all the claims 22 high ranking white house associates were going down today?
Not really. This is routine prosecutor stuff. Once the prosecutor brings indictments, the investigation doesn't end until the trial is over. As long as Rove continues to cooperate and tells the truth, he should be okay.
Still, after two years, he cannot do better than a Martha Stewart charge. The leftist moonbats wanted "outing" charges against Rove, and instead they got Martha Stewart charges against Libby. This is like wanting Sam Alito, and getting Harriet Miers. Hehe...
Possibly, except for the minor detail that "outing" Plame was not illegal because she was not a covert agent. You might as well "out" my receptionist.
Yea, I think there might be more to this. It isn't really surprising that no indictment has been made on the underlying crime if it transpires that key witnesses were being liberal with the truth and thus sheilding the fact that a crime was comitted. It has to proceed one step at a time. What is clear, is that Fitzgerald has no other evidence beyond witness testimony with which to get a conviction for the underlying 'crime'; that's something of a good sign for the WH. So far, he has simply looked at the witness testimony - which is the only thing he's got to go on - and decided there is sufficient grounds for a charge of perjury. He will now endeavor to find out 'what really happened', and from that determine if the underlying crime was committed.
i.e. this is going to go on for a l..o....n...g.........t...i...m..e....