Karl Rove is a Liar

For what I have seen going on, in the "Rovegate affair" he is in deep dodo, now Mr. Bush is not firing anybody and publicly said that Mr Rove has not been charge with anything.

I think the "Rovegate affair" is going to be around for a while.

[edit on 13-7-2005 by marg6043]

This could actually be Bush's watergate.

Time will tell.

It's astounding that a topic with a truism for its title can reach three pages.

I wonder how often the Whitehouse senior staff and the Bush criminal gang come together over drinks and laugh garrulously over the porkies they manage to sell.

Karl Rove broke no law. This is going to be great for Republicans. Finally people are going to see how the media and Democrats are so hell-bent on destroying Bush that they will stoop to the lowest levels.

Even the lawyer who drafted the law says Democrats are ignorant!

www.worldnetdaily.com...

Yeah, OK, so it is WorldNetDaily, but did you really expect the "elite" media to pick up on this?

Originally posted by Carseller4


Yeah, OK, so it is WorldNetDaily, but did you really expect the "elite" media to pick up on this?

I found a story in Pravda that said Bush has a devils tail But I really wouldnt expect the 'elite media' to ppick up on that story either

I dont care if they think Rove committed a crime or not. That is all symantics. He leaked an undercover operatives name. Bush said he would fire WHOMEVER leaked the name. Rove still has a job and that makes Bush a BONIFIDE LIAR! Just like Carl Rove.

Seems that Rove has chosen the perfect attorney!

www.laborers.org... has now uncovered new information that furthers the argument that Mr. Luskin has conflicts of interest that render him unfit to serve as LIUNA GEB Attorney investigating Mr. Coia.

Mr. Luskin, the attorney hired to rid LIUNA of mob-influence is no stranger to organized crime figures in Providence, Rhode Island, the home base of Mr. Coia.

Stephen A. Saccoccia was a client of Mr. Luskin. Mr. Saccoccia was a Rhode Island precious metals dealer convicted of money-laundering for the two South American drug cartels and La Cosa Nostra crime families in New England and sentenced in 1993 to 660 years in federal prison, fined $15.8 million and ordered to forfeit all laundered money. Former U.S. Customs Commissioner Carol B. Hatlett identified Mr. Saccoccia as "an associate" of the Raymond L.S. Patriarca crime family in Rhode Island and also as "a contract employee for the LCN [La Cosa Nostra]." Further in 1985, Mr. Saccoccia plead guilty to tax evasion in connection to his role as a key moneymaking "associate" for the Patriarca crime family and spent a brief time in jail.

On May 8, 1998, Mr. Luskin agreed to pay the Government $245,000 of $674,296 he received in "legal fees" from Mr. Saccoccia. Luskin said he received 45 gold bars valued at $505,125 and $169,171 in wire transfers from a Swiss bank account. The Government, led by recently retired U.S. Attorney Sheldon Whitehouse, went after Mr. Luskin and four other Saccoccia attorneys for the money paid to them out of profits laundered by Saccoccia. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that attorneys cannot be paid with funds acquired as result of the crime. Mr. Whitehouse charged Mr. Luskin with "willful blindness" in accepting the gold bars and wired funds -- after all, Mr. Whitehouse noted, Saccoccia's crimes involved precious metals, including gold, and Swiss bank accounts. Mr. Whitehouse further stated, "Luskin had reasonable cause to know that these funds were the proceeds of Saccoccia's money-laundering activities. Luskin, however, chose not to know the true origin of these funds."

The first issue against Mr. Luskin is his character. Should someone who the Government believes wrongfully and willfully took attorney fees from organized crime's profits (apparently including profits from La Cosa Nostra) be trusted at the same time by the same Government to root-out organized crime (including La Cosa Nostra) from one of America's most troubled labor unions? The Government's answer should be "No." Mr. Luskin, who de facto admitted that his acceptance of funds from Saccoccia was wrong with his May 8 settlement, should be not be trusted by the Government to continue a true LIUNA internal reform program.

The second and more important issue is the inherent conflict of interest between Mr. Luskin, Mr. Saccoccia, the
Patriarca crime family of Rhode Island and Mr. Coia. In 1981, Mr. Coia was indicted for bribery and racketeering. Codefendants in the case were Mr. Coia's father, the late Arthur E. Coia and the late Raymond L.S. Patriarca.

Originally posted by Carseller4
Karl Rove broke no law.

That remains to be seen.

This is going to be great for Republicans.

Like it was after Nixon's downfall?

Even the lawyer who drafted the law says Democrats are ignorant!

If I were you, I'd be looking for more and better sources.

[edit on 7/14/05 by EastCoastKid]

Originally posted by FallenFromTheTree

Seems that Rove has chosen the perfect attorney!

Hey what can you expect from people like them they all cut from the same material, they all have their own hidden and dirty agendas.

When it comes to organized crime links and ties, religion is not the main issue here. Its all about money,

Originally posted by marg6043

When it comes to organized crime links and ties, religion is not the main issue here.

Its all about money,

Money is the biggest "religion."

Karl Rove is a liar?

Stop complaining and do something about it.

Originally posted by junglejake
Karl Rove is a liar?

Stop complaining and do something about it.

Dude, do you think you are the only person who sends E-mails to the government? I have signed every petetion agianst Rove that I can find, not to mention sending out 2 E-mails. One to Senator McConnell and the other to Govenor Fletcher. Glad you are an activist, but you shouldnt assume that just because people are bitching about something here, they havent done something about it elsewhere.

I see the Rove deal is just about as "BIG" as the Downing Street Memo now.

Keep grasping, one day you might actually get a straw!

Originally posted by Carseller4
I see the Rove deal is just about as "BIG" as the Downing Street Memo now.

Keep grasping, one day you might actually get a straw!

Karl Rove's days are numbered.

Be sure.

If you want the best or one of the best takes on this thing go here:
www.antiwar.com...

Originally posted by EastCoastKid
Karl Rove's days are numbered.

Be sure.

We shall see. I suspect you're wrong, or in the event he will be ousted, it will be because of spin, not crimes. We shall see, though, the investigation is still on.

Originally posted by junglejake
We shall see. I suspect you're wrong

And if you're wrong?

If I'm wrong, Rove will be gone. If he isn't gone, I'll be standing there with the crowd complaining about Bush, possibly even calling for his impeachment.

Now, that statement could be used against me in the future. I am saying that, beyond the spin, Karl Rove is guilty of treason, is convicted, and Bush pardons him and keeps him on his staff. I have faith in our legal system. It works.

P.S. I really hope someone makes the connection in these comments that I just did. I'm really looking forward to it

Originally posted by Carseller4
I see the Rove deal is just about as "BIG" as the Downing Street Memo now.

Keep grasping, one day you might actually get a straw!

I love how you hardcore NeoCons can turn a blind eye to the lies of Bush, and when Liberals try and point it out, you downplay it and say its nothing big. I would say the leak of a CIA op is way more out of line than a BJ in the Whitehouse. Bush has stated he would fire ANYBODY involved in the leak. Rove WAS involved in the leak. He has admitted as such. Rove still has a job. That makes Bush a liar. No matter if it hurts your feelings or not, Bush is a liar and we have the evidence. Yet Conservatives consistantly refuse to acknowledge the truth of the matter. To you guys, Bush would NEVER lie. Well, I hate to break it to you, but Bush HAS lied about this, as well as other things. But this is just rediculas. There wasnt even an attempt to cover up the lie. Bush is just hoping noone will remember what he said.

Originally posted by Kidfinger
I love how you hardcore NeoCons can turn a blind eye to the lies of Bush, and when Liberals try and point it out, you downplay it and say its nothing big.

Yes, we're very unique in that we let our ideology occasionally blind us. It's only the neocons, though. No one else.

Originally posted by junglejake

Yes, we're very unique in that we let our ideology occasionally blind us. It's only the neocons, though. No one else.

Are you a Neocon or a Conservative JJ? I was under the impression you were a conservative. See the differance is the Neocon is to the Republican Conservative much as Alqueda is to Islam. They are both a bunch of lunitics trying to twist the beliefs of their affiliated party. Oh, anfd I wasnt directing my statement at you either. It was towards Carseller. You have actually shown the ability to see both sides of the story, unlike Carseller.

As far as letting idology blind you. Now is the time to have your eyes wide open. I will say this one more time. Bush said he would fire ANYONE INVOLVED with the leak. Rove has admitted involvment therefor, Rove should be fired. That comes straight from Bush's lips. And yet Rove is still employed. This is just one of the MANY examples of Bush's blatent lies to us. This is what the whole problem is. I dont care if it was a democrate who leaked it. Bush said he would fire them and he did not. He is a liar. And that is the point.

My eyes have been opened to this. As a result of the thread I linked to, I have made a far more active attempt to understand the reasoning behind the other side's arguement. (Damn, totally off subject, but I just threw a bird seed in my mouth to eat it, and it's completely lost...) I've looked into this matter extensivly, including what Bush said about this way back when. He never said he would fire anyone involved, he said he would (crap, happened again) fire anyone who was involved and broke the law. That information's out on the web, including verbatum quotes from Bush. Now, you really have to ask yourself, who is following only what their party speaks, carseller or you? Please don't take offense, I'm simply pointing out something you've said that was contrary to the facts, but in line with the democratic party's talking points.

As to the neocon question, every test I've taken people have put up here on ATS and everything I've read leads me to believe I could be, if you have to fit me in a group, a neocon. Am I embarassed? No, despite the reaction many want me to feel. I am who I am, and I've drawn the sociological implications of government from my life experiences which has caused me to become a neocon. So no, your assessment of me was incorrect, I'm not a paleoconservative, I'm a neoconservative. I just happen to be one that understands the other side's arguement because, when and before I was 14, I was one of them. Now I'm 26, and my high school experience taught me to be a neocon. Please note, I was not a Christian until I was 21. I don't believe the labels we try to use to slot people in a place have anything to do with our religious beliefs, though some politicians attempt to make it so.

Now that I've quoted Piccard, I'm going to hang with my fam. Rock, rock on.