Prediction: At least three Bushco execs indicted

by **heath7** » Thu Oct 06, 2005 3:50 pm

<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lawrence-odonnell/plamegate-the-next-step_b_8447.html" target="top">Plamegate: The Next Step</a> If Karl Rove's lawyer, Bob Luskin, is still as easy to read as he has been since I broke the story that his client was Matt Cooper's source, then we now know that Rove has received a target letter from Patrick Fitzgerald. How do we know it? Luskin refuses to deny it. ... Prediction: at least three high level Bush Administration personnel indicted and possibly one or more very high level unindicted co-conspirators. Well it looks like Fitzy's investigation is coming to a head. A lot of speculation abounding that indictments will be handed down next week. (rubbing my hands together with my fingers crossed)

by **dbeach** » Thu Oct 06, 2005 5:19 pm

when the bush/cheny indcited story first broke this summer by noted conspiracy site cloakanddagger..the list of the indictedd included bush and cheny.. I posted it here at RI and at DU. of course I was laffed at and still get laffed at for saying that BUT the last laff is yet to come NOW I will be very pleased to see rover and scooter boy libby get busted even if the 2 major crooks bush/cheny go free. So when a MM propaganda shill like O'Donnel is penning this story THEN something GIGANTIC is happening. WOW! THANX for post!!!

by **dbeach** » Thu Oct 06, 2005 5:40 pm

<a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=4991860&mesg_id=4991860">www.democraticunderground...id=4991860</a> THANX AGAIN I posted it at DU

by **thrulookingglass** » Thu Oct 06, 2005 5:46 pm

Sorry to rain on the parade, but the corporate shill media begs to differ (gotta grain of salt handy?)... Source: CNN "...Rove's attorney, Robert Luskin, said Thursday he would not comment on any ongoing discussion he has had with Fitzgerald's office but that he has been assured no decisions on charges have been made. Rove would first have to receive what is known as a target letter if he is about to be indicted. "I can say categorically that Karl has not received a target letter from the special counsel. The special counsel has confirmed that he has not made any charging decisions in respect to Karl," Luskin said. He said that Rove "continues to be cooperative voluntarily" with the special counsel investigation and "beyond that, any communication I have or may have in the future are going to be treated as completely confidential..."

by **albion** » Thu Oct 06, 2005 6:06 pm

"Federal prosecutors have accepted an offer from presidential adviser Karl Rove to give 11th-hour testimony in the case of a CIA officer's leaked identity and have warned they cannot guarantee he won't be indicted, according to people directly familiar with the investigation." <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051006/ap_on_go_pr_wh/cia_leak_rove;_ylt=AiARnuQGFlxDbr8qaFb_cw.s0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA2Z2szazkxBHNlYwN0bQ--">news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051...NlYwN0bQ--</a> I dunno what it means, except that it will probably drag things out for a few more days.

by **Col Quisp** » Thu Oct 06, 2005 6:15 pm

Probably means Rove is agreeing to cooperate so that bigger fish will be caught. AT least I hope that's what it means. But he looks pretty happy in this old picture from Reuters <a href="http://olympics.reuters.com/news/newsPhotoPresentation.aspx?type=topNews&imageID=2005-10-06T200017Z_01_KWA603946_RTRUKOP_0_PICTURE0.xml">olympics.reuters.com/news...CTURE0.xml</a> Boosh looks pretty worried. He needs more loosh. Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=colquisp>Col Quisp</A> at: 10/6/05 4:17 pm

by **dbeach** » Thu Oct 06, 2005 6:55 pm

thurlooking glass see the DU thread saying that is not accurate. rover is rolling over is my new montra rover and libby are caught 2 huge fish

by **dbeach** » Thu Oct 06, 2005 7:16 pm

This is on DU thread "O' Donnell has an update since Rove returning News came out " "What this means is Rove's lawyer, Bob Luskin, believes his client is defintely going to be indicted. So, Luskin is sending Rove back into the grand jury to try to get around the prosecutor and sell his innocence directly to the grand jurors. Legal defense work doesn't get more desperate than this. The prosecutor is happy to let Rove go under oath again--without his lawyer in the room--and try to wiggle out of the case. The prosecutor has every right to expect that Rove's final under-oath grilling will either add a count or two to the indictment or force Rove to flip and testify against someone else. Also from the AP story, this Luskin quote: "I can say categorically that Karl has not received a target letter from the special counsel. The special counsel has confirmed that he has not made any charging decisions in respect to Karl." I love Luskin. I really do. He is the best legal curve ball pitcher in Washington. How is the AP reporter supposed to know that prosecutors do not have to send target letters to targets? Mafia lawyers are not sitting around waiting for target letters. Fitzgerald could have told Luskin verbally that Rove is a target. And because Fitzgerald is not subpoening Rove to testify, he has no obligation to send him a target letter. " <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lawrence-odonnell/update-...">www.huffingtonpost.com/la...update-...</a>

by **dbeach** » Thu Oct 06, 2005 7:59 pm

will rover rollover on jr..that would be so shaekspeare.. "So Karl Rove is returning to testify before the grand jury investigating the outing of Valerie Plame, and he's doing so without any guarantee that Patrick Fitzgerald won't prosecute him. How big of a development is this? "Stunning," a former federal prosecutor tells us. "There is no reason for Rove to make this appearance unless he and his counsel believe he is at serious risk of indictment. None." It's always risky to go before a grand jury. You can't take your lawyer into the room with you, and you don't know what the grand jury knows or doesn't know. It's especially risky if you've already testified once -- or, in the case of Rove, three times -- before: The odds of introducing inconsistencies into your testimony increase each time you give it. That's why, the former prosecutor tells us, a defense lawyer would advise his client to make a return appearance before the grand jury only in extreme circumstances. New York University law professor Stephen Gillers offers a similar assessment to the Associated Press. He calls Rove's return trip to the grand jury room an "ominous sign" that suggests Fitzgerald "has learned new information that is tightening the noose" around Rove's neck. "It shows Fitzgerald now, perhaps after Miller's testimony, suspects Rove may be in some way implicated in the revelation of Plame's identity or that Fitzgerald is investigating various people for obstruction of justice, false statements or perjury. That is the menu of risk for Rove." <a href="http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room//index.html">www.salon.com/politics/wa...index.html</a>

by **thrulookingglass** » Thu Oct 06, 2005 8:00 pm

Mm...I read the thread, and it's interesting and certainly plausible. I've been in a bad way lately and don't have much hope for things getting better. There's been too much chatter on the internet on what Fitz's investigation will bring forth and I can't afford to have high hopes on this one. I don't think I can watch the Bush cabal get away with another one. I'm a Red Sox fan and believe in the underdog, but miracles are few and far between.

by **dbeach** » Thu Oct 06, 2005 8:05 pm

BRO Its gonna hapen this time sure as 10/27/04 happened BTW My mom died on 10/27/73 and my dad was a HUGE SOX fan..Lived in Mass most of my life. I am a Kennedy man and a Sox fan but only in playoffs.. ROve is done.. his roving days are over

by **antiaristo** » Thu Oct 06, 2005 8:40 pm

Billmon is getting excited <blockquote>Quote:<hr>Karl's Moment of Truth? Well, I can't make heads or tails out of all the rumors and reports flying around, and I wouldn't know a target letter from a poison pen letter, but Larry O'Donnell has an outstanding won/loss record so far, so let's just go with him: What this means is Rove's lawyer, Bob Luskin, believes his client is defintely going to be indicted. So, Luskin is sending Rove back into the grand jury to try to get around the prosecutor and sell his innocence directly to the grand jurors. Legal defense work doesn't get more desperate than this. The prosecutor is happy to let Rove go under oath again -- without his lawyer in the room -- and try to wiggle out of the case. The prosecutor has every right to expect that Rove's final under-oath grilling will either add a count or two to the indictment or force Rove to flip and testify against someone else. O'Donnell's picks: At least three high level Bush Administration personnel indicted and possibly one or more very high level unindicted co-conspirators. Considering how high the presumed "high level" personnel sit in the White House pecking order, I can think of very few who would qualify for the honor of being "very high level unindicted co-conspirators." Only two, in fact. Which means this could end up being a bigger bombshell than I would have expected in even my wildest dreams. Update 6:00 PM ET: Murray Waas weighs in: During tomorrow's session, Rove will be pressed about issues as to why his accounts to the FBI and grand jury have changed, or evolved, over time. He will also be questioned regarding contacts with other senior administration officials, such as then-deputy National Security advisor Stephen J. Hadley and I. Lewis Libby, the chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney in the critical week before the publication of columnist Robert Novak's column on July 14, 2003, which outed Plame as a covert CIA operative. (emphasis added) per·ju·ry (pûr'ju'ree) 1. The deliberate, willful giving of false, misleading, or incomplete testimony. 2. The criminal offense of making false statements under oath. 3. The breach of an oath or promise.<hr></blockquote> <a href="http://billmon.org/archives/002232.html">billmon.org/archives/002232.html</a>

by **antiaristo** » Thu Oct 06, 2005 9:03 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>He will also be questioned regarding contacts with other senior administration officials, such as then-deputy National Security advisor Stephen J. Hadley<hr></blockquote> I've just recognised the significance. It was Stephen Hadley that jousted with Alan Foley of the CIA as to what could and could not be included in the SOTU. It was Stephen Hadley that came up with the form of words that Foley could not rebut, viz "The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa"

by **dbeach** » Thu Oct 06, 2005 10:47 pm

Wyne Madsen sums up the wild day in the USA "October 6, 2005 -- After it was reported that Karl Rove had agreed to give further testimony to the Grand Jury investigating the CIA leak, Rove's attorney Robert Luskin denied his client had received a target letter from special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, a formal "heads up" sent to individuals who are about to be indicted. However, it is being reported from well-informed sources throughout Washington that 1) target letters have been sent to Karl Rove, Scooter Libby, and Ari Fleischer; 2) Rove has agreed to testify and possibly agree to a plea bargain agreement in return for his testimony against other targets of the criminal probe; 3) Cheney and Bush may be named as unindicted co-conspirators; 4) Bush's "war speech" before the National Endowment for Democracy and a late Thursday afternoon report that "19 operatives" have arrived in New York City to place bombs on subway trains are blatant attempts by the White House to divert attention from the impending indictments against the Bush White House. The main stream media is just beginning to take notice that a "Watergate-level event" is about to occur in Washington." <a href="http://www.waynemadsenreport.com/">www.waynemadsenreport.com/</a>

Prediction: At least three Bushco execs indicted

Prediction: At least three Bushco execs indicted

Re: Prediction: At least three Bushco execs indicted

Re: Prediction: At least three Bushco execs indicted

Re: Prediction: At least three Bushco execs indicted

Not over yet

What it means....

Re: What it means....

Re: What it means....

more rover live 24 hrs

Re: What it means....

Re: What it means....

Re: What it means....

Re: What it means....

Re: What it means....

Who is online