It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Remembering Karl Rove And His Alleged Indiscresions....

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 22 2005 @ 12:10 PM
link   
I remember his latest one well. Does anyone else? Remember, he was the "big story" for about a week some time ago now, for having supposedly named Valerie Plame as an undercover CIA Operative?

I remember when Bush said something to the effect that the Whitehouse stood behind him all the way. I also remember a time a few years back, when GWB vowed to fire on the spot any Whitehouse official who was ever caught commititng such an indescresion.

However, now, to the best of my recollection, he said that he would stand behind Rove unless he was tried and convicted of such alleged crimes. Then, and only then would he fire him.

Well, I understand that all kinds of interesting things have been taking place, from the Tsunami to Katrina, to Cindy Sheehan and her anti-way protests, to Sandra Day O'Connor giving sudden noitice of her impending retirement, causeing all focus to be on John Roberts, Bush's then nominee to take her place. Then, of course that was shifted when Chief Justice Rhenquist passed away, and Bush accellerated Robert's nomination from filling the slot left by Sandra Day O'connor, to nominating him directly to Chief Justice.

Well, there has been lots more excitement to divert our attention from focusing on making sure that "Bush's Brains" are set for trial in a timely manner, that it sure is looking as if he is under the impression that the country has all but forgotten about that scandal, therefore there won't be any trial taking place in order to convice Mr. Rove of anything. So.....unless this story is brought back to the headlines, it looks as if absoluely nothing will be done. Nothing at all. One more sign of how deep the corruption reaches in the Bush Administration.




posted on Sep, 22 2005 @ 02:47 PM
link   
Carl who? At least that's how it seems. I brought that story up to a co-worker the other day and he replied with, "Oh yea, I forgot about that."



posted on Sep, 22 2005 @ 02:52 PM
link   
It sure has caused a diversion, hasnt it...One that has had much loss of life and one that has upped the price of oil, one that has silenced the "Rove" affair.

This is why some of us are so deep into these conspiracies...

There are NO coincidences.



posted on Sep, 22 2005 @ 03:55 PM
link   
This story will come back fairly soon. The Grand Jury investigating this whole affair is supposed to come to a close in the next few weeks and the Special Prosecutor in charge of the investigation is expected to release his findings and make formal charges if needed. It looks like he may be planning some type of conspiracy charge and Rove will not be the only senior person in the Bush Administration charged with a crime. Members of the media, such as Judy Miller, may also be charged. Rove, Cheney's Chief of Staffy Scooter Libby, and some say aides to John Bolton may also be charged. The prosecutor in this case, Fitzgerald, made a name for himself by prosecuting the Mob in Chicago. He's good at digging up corruption and exposing it. If a crime has been committed in this case he will likely get to the bottom of it.

[edit on 22-9-2005 by Delta 38]



posted on Sep, 22 2005 @ 06:31 PM
link   
Delta 38, I'm glad that you have kept up with this. A lot better than I have, I must say.

Well, that's comforting. It is good to know that it has not just gone burried and forgotten, as it has appeared to be as of late. It will be good to hear the details when this particular corruption does surface. Especially if more members of the Bush Administration are not only involved, but indicted if they do indeed deserve it.

The secrecy and corruption that has been going on in the Bush Administration, more so than any other Administration that I have heard of seems as if it has just gone too far unchecked. Obviously, Bush seems to be "above the law". But, in reality.... no one is, are they?



posted on Oct, 2 2005 @ 07:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Delta 38
This story will come back fairly soon. The Grand Jury investigating this whole affair is supposed to come to a close in the next few weeks and the Special Prosecutor in charge of the investigation is expected to release his findings and make formal charges if needed. It looks like he may be planning some type of conspiracy charge and Rove will not be the only senior person in the Bush Administration charged with a crime. Members of the media, ........................ may also be charged. Rove, Cheney's Chief of Staffy Scooter Libby,
[edit on 22-9-2005 by Delta 38]


Well you sure nailed that one just about perfectly! I wonder, well, I mean I wondered if anything will ever really come of it, but after your recent prediction so far, I figure you'll be pretty close on the rest. I don't like that Rove. He reminds me of weasle.


And Chenney, he didn't look so happy while that John Roberts was grinning while being sworn in. I guess old Cheeney knew that he had about and hour to go before the sh*t hit the fan. His own Chief of Staff about to be very publicly named in the scandle. Hmmmmmmm.



posted on Oct, 4 2005 @ 11:21 AM
link   
Actually, this ties into the new court nominee, as well, Harriet Miers. Bush was expected to appoint a hard-line right-wing nutjob (maybe he has, but we don't know yet what Ms. Miers' social issue voting record will be like), but instead he has nominated somebody known to be a major administration boot-licker who is known for being "fiercely loyal" to Bush. When the idictments against Rove, Libby, et. al. are handed down, you can bet that they will be appealed all the way up to the Supreme Court, and at that point the "fiercely loyal" new Justice will really come in handy for the criminal syndicate known as the Bush administration.
---Ryan



posted on Oct, 5 2005 @ 04:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by RyanC
Actually, this ties into the new court nominee, as well, Harriet Miers. Bush was expected to appoint a hard-line right-wing nutjob, . . . . . . . but instead he has nominated somebody known to be a major administration boot-licker who is known for being "fiercely loyal" to Bush. When the idictments against Rove, Libby, et. al. are handed down, you can bet that they will be appealed all the way up to the Supreme Court, and at that point the "fiercely loyal" new Justice will really come in handy for the criminal syndicate known as the Bush administration.
---Ryan


Hi RyanC, you know that I was thinking the exact same thing, although everyone else thought that I was crazy, since Supreme Court Judges have lifetime appointments. But my thinking is that although Bush know that, I thnk that it's even starting to dawn on him that he might be moving closer and closer to some really deep sh*t. If he didn't think of it himself, I'm sure that his advisors realized that there's possibility that things could continue to go downhill for him. And, if there does come a time during his presidency where he might actually have to appear before the Supreme Court himself, it sure couldn't hurt to have some judges sitting there who are loyal to him, perhaps old personal friends, maybe people he has done a lot of favors for, you know?

But the funny thing is, although there is no reason based in logic for this, I think I like her! I trust my instinct a lot. Sometimes it lets me down really bad, but more times than not, it doesn't. I know that the first time I looked at the new Chief Justice, Roberts, even before I knew of some of the things he had said in the past, and the possibility that he may attempt to turn over Roe V Wade, and succeed, I didn't trust him. I saw into those beady, sneering, like he's got a lot to hide eyes. It seemed clear to me, even through the TV, that I think he's up to no good. Just my opinion of course, and I have no credentials for judging him, or any of them. I don't know, I guess I wouldn't be a good judge, if you think I go by eyes. But, I don't know. I don't trust him. Now, I think (I know, I'm sure I'll probably be proven wrong, just because I wrote this publicly, but I wonder if Harriet Miers might not just be the perfect offset to him.

Aaaahhhh, it's late, time to stop rambling. But, I really do agree with your theory.


[edit on 10/5/2005 by CyberKat]



posted on Oct, 5 2005 @ 10:59 AM
link   
Well, I'm glad somebody likes her! She seems to be a pretty toxic appointment in the minds of critics on both the left and right. Which makes me wonder---
What if this appointment could possibly be designed to fail? Look at it this way: Bush wants another right-wing nutjob like Scalia or Thomas or (probably) Roberts on the court, but right now his reputation is in tatters (finally) and he can't win a big political fight. How would he get the kind of fascist conservative ideologue he wants on there at a time like this? Easy. He appoints somebody who stirs up a bunch of controversy and misgivings, wears the Senate out in a bitter confirmation battle that this appointee ultimately loses, and then when everyone is worn out and there's no appetite for another big confirmation fight, he finds somebody with a good and qualified legal record who also happens to be an activist conservative judge (I don't buy the argument that right-wing judges are any more "restrained" than so-called "leftist" judges) and they sail through confirmation.
In order to pursue this strategy, he would need someone who is willing to be a scapegoat appointment, someone willing to fall on their sword for Bush in order for him to get the kind of toxic right-winger he really wants on there without much of a fight. Ms. Miers certainly seems like she would be loyal enough to do it.
So there's another theory, meaning the real reason for this nomination is either what I outlined in my post yesterday, or else perhaps this scenario. Any thoughts?
---Ryan



posted on Oct, 7 2005 @ 06:31 PM
link   
I actually am not sure Rove was behind th elink, as evil as he is.
Ya gotta remember there are so many elements to this administration that really anything is possible.

Rove is definately one of the puppet masters behind Bush, but definately not above government.

Btw, as a side note, Karl Rove's grandfather was a Nazi governor in the late 30's/early 40's in Germany. I guess evilness runs in the family.



posted on Oct, 7 2005 @ 10:59 PM
link   
Seems like more is coming out which shows White House orchastration before it even made it public.

Reporter supplies notes in CIA leak case

A New York Times reporter has given investigators notes from a conversation she had with a top aide to Vice-President Dick Cheney weeks earlier than was previously known, suggesting White House involvement started well before the outing of a CIA operative, legal sources said.

Wilson asserts that administration officials leaked his wife's identity, which damaged her ability to work undercover, to discredit him for criticising President George W Bush's Iraq policy in 2003, after a CIA-funded trip to investigate whether Niger helped supply nuclear materials to Baghdad.

One source involved in the investigation said Miller's notes could help Fitzgerald show a long-running and orchestrated campaign to discredit Wilson, which could help form the basis for a conspiracy charge.

news.ninemsn.com.au...



posted on Oct, 21 2005 @ 04:53 AM
link   
Well, it's about time. I never thought we would see the day. If there are rumblings inside the Whitehouse now, of what life for the rest of Bush's term could be like without Rove, then there must be some really serious doubt that he will be staying on much longer. Link

We'll see what continues to transpire.



posted on Oct, 27 2005 @ 01:34 AM
link   
It is about time for Bush & Co to get what they have coming to them
. I was watching MSNBC tonight, there was a senator that came on who stated that he brought it to Fitzgerald's attention that due to some of the speaches that Bush gave for reason's to go to war with Iraq, ie; "the mushroom cloud" etc, lying to Congress and the citizens of the US in order to start the attack on Iraq was of criminal intent/conspircy, showing fake papers etc, to gain support from the Citizens of the US and Congress. Some Senators want all that added into Fitzgerald's investigation.

This Administration and their corruption in the Whitehouse reminds me of a house of cards,.... thats starting to cave-in or the domino effect,... one false move and it's all over, which I beleive is what is happening now.

As far as Bush's pick for the S.Ct., I don't trust her anymore than I trust the Bush families. The woman reminds me to much of George Jr's mother and I sure don't trust GW's mom look at the kind of sons she's raised and the type of morals they have,..... nope don't trust JR's pick for the S Ct, heck I don't trust GW himself, look at the way he's ran our country so far.



posted on Oct, 29 2005 @ 08:20 AM
link   
Well, I guess we all know what has happened so far. Too bad that Rove hasn't been dragged down......yet. As I read somewhere today, it would really be a bad time right now for Bush to lose his brains


Seriously though, I was wondering about something. Perhaps it is co-incidence(? but I don't necessarily believe in those...) anyway, I'm quite sure that I have read, heard or both somewhere along the line that there was some Whitehouse aide who also had the last name, Libby, who was deeply involved in Watergate.

Anyone else heard that? And if so, are they related?

Just curious.



posted on Oct, 29 2005 @ 08:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by nanna_of_6
It is about time for Bush & Co to get what they have coming to them
. I was watching MSNBC tonight, there was a senator that came on who stated that he brought it to Fitzgerald's attention that due to some of the speaches that Bush gave for reason's to go to war with Iraq, ie; "the mushroom cloud" etc, lying to Congress and the citizens of the US in order to start the attack on Iraq was of criminal intent/conspircy, showing fake papers etc, to gain support from the Citizens of the US and Congress. Some Senators want all that added into Fitzgerald's investigation.


Mushroom cloud? Fake papers? Did those two issues really have to do w/ going to Iraq? Seriously, I don't remember, is that mkultra mind-erasure technique used on the idiot box watchers?
If these are true, can bush et all be charged as criminals and can a conspiracy charge really be brought against them? I'm sure this would bring many voter's out of the woodwork to proclaim that they never voted for bush a second time and perhaps more criminal charges? There is absolutely no doubt in my mind these people have created countless criminals acts, and have gone against the constitutional law more times then I can count my farts.



posted on Oct, 29 2005 @ 08:44 AM
link   
Rove bought himself some time. Now is the time we have to worry and you will see many distractions in the weeks ahead. The window of opportunity is here.
I may be wrong.



posted on Oct, 29 2005 @ 09:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by CyberKat
Remember, he was the "big story" for about a week some time ago now, for having supposedly named Valerie Plame as an undercover CIA Operative?


From the Washington times:

Special prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald said Mr. Libby lied "under oath and repeatedly" when he testified before a federal grand jury about his conversations with three reporters regarding the identity of a CIA employee.

So a weeks back I too thought Rove was at the heart of all the accusations?
Who's job is more important to the higher ups? Libby or Rove?

ROVE!

vice president's chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby Jr., was indicted yesterday on charges of;
obstruction of justice,
perjury and
making false statements
in the CIA leak investigation. He immediately resigned and left the White House.


I guess he did what was told of him and left! He must of gotten a nice chunk of change for being the fall man. Because he seems pretty confident about getting out of this. see;

Mr. Libby, who could face up to 30 years in prison if convicted, resigned minutes after the five-count indictment was filed and later said, "I am confident that at the end of this process I will be completely and totally exonerated."

Why would he be completely and totally exonerated? I thought prosecutor Fitzpatrick said he couldn't find enough evidence to indict Rove on those charges let alone any other senior official in the white house? Could he not find enough evidence because nobody is talking and the only one who he could get was Libby because he's a bad liar and wasn't sure of what to say exactly and how to say it so he goofed and took the brunt?

Here's some more interesting snippits from the article; link is at bottom of page.

Despite speculation in the days leading up to yesterday's grand jury action, no other Bush administration official was indicted. Senior Bush adviser Karl Rove, who many Washington pundits predicted would be indicted, emerged unscathed, although the prosecutor said his probe was "not over." But Mr. Fitzgerald added that the "substantial bulk of the work of this investigation is concluded."
In addition, Mr. Fitzgerald, whose job was to probe whether there was an "unauthorized disclosure of a CIA employee's identity," was unable to find enough evidence to indict anyone on that charge. He also made no indictments regarding leaks of classified information.
After a frenetic day and just before he departed for a weekend at Camp David, President Bush praised Mr. Libby, saying he "worked tirelessly on behalf of the American people and sacrificed much in the service to this country."


washington times



posted on Oct, 30 2005 @ 04:59 AM
link   
Hi, first of all, I would like to appologize for something I wrote, or rather tried to confirm, that was wrong:

I wrote that I had heard or read of another top aide in the Nixon Administration by the same last name of Libby, who was supposedly deeply involved in the Watergate scandal..... Well, after writing that, I find today, that I had heard the name incorrectly. It was "Liddy", not "Libby" that I had heard. Sorry for the question that made no sense. O.K. now...


Originally posted by RyanC
Well, I'm glad somebody likes her! [....]
What if this appointment could possibly be designed to fail? Look at it this way: Bush wants another right-wing nutjob like Scalia or Thomas or (probably) Roberts on the court, but right now his reputation is in tatters (finally) and he can't win a big political fight. How would he get the kind of fascist conservative ideologue he wants on there at a time like this? Easy. He appoints somebody who stirs up a bunch of controversy and misgivings, wears the Senate out in a bitter confirmation battle that this appointee ultimately loses, and then when everyone is worn out and there's no appetite for another big confirmation fight, he finds somebody with a good and qualified legal record who also happens to be an activist conservative judge (I don't buy the argument that right-wing judges are any more "restrained" than so-called "leftist" judges) and they sail through confirmation.
In order to pursue this strategy, he would need someone who is willing to be a scapegoat appointment, someone willing to fall on their sword for Bush in order for him to get the kind of toxic right-winger he really wants on there without much of a fight. Ms. Miers certainly seems like she would be loyal enough to do it.
So there's another theory, meaning the real reason for this nomination is either what I outlined in my post yesterday, or else perhaps this scenario. Any thoughts?
---Ryan


Well, you have an interesting point there. It does sound quite plausable that the Bush (or rather probably Rove telling him to do so, if he did it on purpose) could have done just that. Especially in light of the fact that he was being pressured by ex-Justice O'Connell, many others, and his even his own wife to put a woman in there. If anything, she did fit that bill.

However, Miers would have had to be a real suck-up, in order to go through publically what she did, just to try to save what ever face there may be left on a miserably failing president. And to appoint his own private lawyer! How tacky. Well, um, what else but tacky do we expect anyway. But, you know with all the corruption that goes on in the Whitehouse that we do know of, not to mention the multitudes that we don't hear about, who really knows.... it could be that she was paid very dearly for what she did.

Or, it could be that as arrogant, etc.... that Bush had been for so long, it is becomming more obvious every time I see him on TV, that he is just about to either blow a literal head gasket, or simply just lose it, totally. Do and say random things that make no sense, even if he is warned by his staff, etc.... That is sort of how it looks to me, at least.

But, then again, that too, could be a show put on for our benefit. Maybe he thinks that people will start to let their guards down, thinking that he is totally washed up, and is nothing more than a zombie. That shouldn't be too hard of a role for him to play, except that......well, there are always going to be those, "but then again, maybe it was this..... then, it could always by that...." sort of guessing games put out there for us to play.

I still stick to part of what I origanally said, which was that I really agreed (and still do) with your other post, with the theory that with all the legal proceedings within the Whitehouse Cabinet, etc... and not looking too good (although, so far, I don't think that they have turned out badly enough. Rove's still there, and what about Cheney!), that although an appointment to the SCOTUS is life long, with Bush probably feeling immediate danger, he most likely thought that someone who had apparently been a life-long friend, one of his faith, and being his lawyer, probably received a huge raise - you know, just in case? would serve him the most good at the current time on the bench of the Supreme Court, rather than in her law office.

The other part of what I originally said, when I said I liked her, I guess I really had no reason too, except that I had such a strong, unpleasant feeling about Roberts. He looked and acted so much like he had something really nasty up his sleeve, something terrible that no one has even thought of. He really scared/scares me. So, I guess when I saw this meek, smiling woman, with warmth in her eyes (or so she appeared), I automatically saw her as someone who might be able to save us from whatever Roberts probably has in store. But, now, with or without her nomination, I decided that she really was, well.....not right for the job.


Originally posted by TrueLies
If these are true, can bush et all be charged as criminals and can a
conspiracy charge really be brought against them? I'm sure this would
bring many voter's out of the woodwork to proclaim that they never
voted for bush a second time and perhaps more criminal charges? There
is absolutely no doubt in my mind these people have created countless
criminals acts, and have gone against the constitutional law more times
then I can count my farts.


TrueLies, this is something that I have been wondering about for a long time. Since when he was just talking (at least in public) about starting the Iraq war. As time, and his way of mishandling everything he touches, corruption so deeply seeded in his Administration (no wonder they had to have so much secrecy), it was already obvious to me, and many others that there was something definately not cool going on there. This was before the Downing Street Memo was made public, before the CIA leak was make public. And then, the things that were made public, such as right after 9-11, probably a provision of the Patriot Act, or just another threat to our freedom on the side, he gave the CIA a much longer leash in terms of what they could do (toture), and gave the Military some rights to behave like policeman in civilian society in the US.


Now recently, it has been made public (all the while he insists that this Administration does not condone torture), he is threatening his own congress and military personell that if his exemption for the CIA to still be allowed to torture, under a new anti-torture law that is in the works, he will just make a face and deny 440 Billion Dollars to the Pentagon to keep the troops safe, while they're over there getting him some more "detainnes" to have tortured by the CIA. Talk about cutting off your nose t spite your face!


Anyway, I just can't see that we are the only ones that see what a true criminal he really is! Surely there are rich and powerful people out there who are smart enough to see what is going on, and put him on trial immediately, if not about 3 years ago or more!? I really have questioned this many, many times. Maybe, the list of his crimes, and those of his cronies is so, so very long, that no one has the energy to tackle it? Doubt that, too.


CyberKat

//ed to add this last comment//

TheShroudOf Memphis,

I just love your avatar of the Manchurian Candidates. It cracks me up whenever I see it!


[edit on 10/30/2005 by CyberKat]



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join