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.

 

Rove indicted in Plame leak case (truthout.org rumor)

page: 5
3
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 19 2006 @ 07:38 PM
link   
Yeah, I wasn't sure it was true but I hoped for it to be. I thought that was clear. I'm not really that sad, Seekerof, I'm over it already, ok?
Don't worry.

Before this story, although I had heard of truthout and read it a couple times. I had never heard any of the names involved, even Leopold. I had no investment in him being right other than to bring Rove down.




More rinse and repeat "speculations" and "guesses," huh?


Uh... guesses, like I said.




Here's a thought: Accuracy, integrity, fairness, TRUTHFULNESS in media:


Yeah, that would be good.



Originally posted by Seekerof
How about do not let your subjective 'blind' hate or dislike for a presidential administration, or officials therein, cause you to believe and swallow anything and everything that gets put to print by news media outlets...?


I don't.



Originally posted by jsobecky
Very true. The irony here is that had there been no trial, there would have been no crime. Usually the crime comes before the trial.


What trial are you talking about here?


[edit on 19-5-2006 by Benevolent Heretic]




posted on May, 20 2006 @ 08:30 AM
link   
truthout's 'apology'



The time has now come, however, to issue a partial apology to our readership for this story. While we paid very careful attention to the sourcing on this story, we erred in getting too far out in front of the news-cycle. In moving as quickly as we did, we caused more confusion than clarity. And that was a disservice to our readership and we regret it.


It doesn't really explain anything. In fact, it sounds like they still stand by their story... Nor does it sound like much of an apology for making such a huge mistake. But doesn't say it was a lie, either. I guess we may never know what really happened. I guess every news source can get it wrong from time to time.

I remember the Newsweek fiasco over the Quran being flushed at Gitmo. Fortunately, nobody died over the Rove misreporting... And if I remember correctly, that story turned out to be true.



posted on May, 20 2006 @ 02:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic



I remember the Newsweek fiasco over the Quran being flushed at Gitmo. Fortunately, nobody died over the Rove misreporting... And if I remember correctly, that story turned out to be true.
You remember correctly. I hear even Sean Hannity is nervous about Rove



posted on May, 20 2006 @ 02:36 PM
link   
Sean who?


Anyways...

This is an interesting take on the story (which is now more about truthout's mistake than it is about Rove). These guys seem to be standing pretty strongly behind their story.



Salon
So is Truthout saying that Jason Leopold's reporting was wrong? We put that question to Ash this morning, and his answer seemed to be a pretty unequivocal no.
...
He said that he isn't sure what's going on now to warrant keeping the alleged indictment under wraps, although he suggested that it must mean that Rove's team is cooperating with Fitzgerald somehow.

Finally, Ash said that "there are people whose life was made inconvenient by our story,"


I can't help but wonder what the heck's going on...

The plot thickens...


[edit on 20-5-2006 by Benevolent Heretic]



posted on May, 21 2006 @ 05:17 PM
link   
OK, firstly, Jason Leopold had no less than five sources. If I had 5 sources telling me that Rove was indicted, I would believe it, as I think most journalists would.
And, Jason Leopold is a recovering addict. He has turned his life around, worked hard at his craft and is an award-winning journalist. I might remind some folks that GWB also claims to be a "former" coc aine addict and alcholic. At least Jason L. went to rehab and tried to find out about his addiction.
There is no shame in being a recovering addict, the shame is on the people who want to still crucify someone who is a PAST user for being one, but has turned his/her life around.

I think there is something really fishy about the whole thing. All things considered, I'd sooner believe most anyone than I would this WH, have they ever told the truth about anything?

I wouldnt put it past this crew to deliberately try to ruin someone's journalistic integrity by giving out false information.



posted on May, 21 2006 @ 05:57 PM
link   
I totally agree with you, forestlady.

There have been many low blows to Leopold here for no real reason in my opinion. Just between you and me, I still believe he's telling the truth. Something I know about this WH is that they get what they want. I feel sure Rove's indictment will either become official or be brought out in the light of day at some time. And I could be wrong, but I haven't given up my thought that something about this story is true. I sure hope we find out what really happened.

This wouldn't be the first story BY FAR that was broken by the alternative media and turned out to be true (if it does). And if it does, you won't find me stuffing crow down others' throats because that's just about the most juvenile and ignoble thing to do.

OTOH, I thought this was a nice thing for Doug Thompson to write:

Capitol Hill Blue



It's time, I think, to call off the dogs and wait to see how things play out in the Truthout-Jason Leopold-Karl Rove indictment debate.
...
We still don't know, for sure, if Karl Rove was indicted nine or ten days ago. All we know for sure is that Truthout ran a story by Jason Leopold that said he was indicted
...
The credibility that any journalistic endeavor - print, broadcast or 'Net - enjoys with its readers is fragile at best. We are all just one mistake away from oblivion. None of us are perfect and we will make mistakes. The key is how we handle those mistakes.



posted on May, 22 2006 @ 10:15 AM
link   
Thanks BH. Nice quote from Doug Thompson, too. Especially, in light of the fact that he wrote a very disparaging piece on Leopold earlier.

And, jeez, come on, it's not like the New York Times or Washington Post never got a story wrong before and yet people quote them as gospel.



posted on May, 22 2006 @ 12:12 PM
link   
Could this be a Sealed Indictment?
Could Rove be turning state's evidence?



But what is a sealed indictment? Quite simply, a magistrate to whom an indictment is returned may direct that the indictment be kept secret until the defendant is in custody or has been released pending trial. Until the defendant is in custody, the clerk of court must then seal the indictment, ensuring that no person will be allowed to disclose the return of the indictment except when necessary for the issuance and execution of a warranty or summons.

In other words, the indictment is kept secret from everyone but the sheriff until the defendant is in custody. This may be done because a defendant is a flight risk, or because the publicity surrounding a case is so great as to make public disclosure prior to arrest prejudicial.




State's evidence is slang for testimony given by criminal defendants to prosecutors about other alleged criminals. A criminal defendant may agree to provide assistance to prosecutors in exchange for an agreement from the prosecutor that he will not be prosecuted. This agreement is commonly called turning state's evidence.



The reason I'm speculating is that Leopold (truthout.org) is still standing by his story.

That... and because it's fun.


Robert Luskin, Karl Rove's lawyer, denies that an indictment took place.

Is this all about some 'timing'? Will the indictment be revealed at a more 'convenient' time for Rove to be taken into custody and resign?



posted on Jun, 5 2006 @ 04:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Is this all about some 'timing'? Will the indictment be revealed at a more 'convenient' time for Rove to be taken into custody and resign?


Is it convenient' yet? Seems as though every claimed time frame for Rove's indictment and/or resignation has expired... Guess the "source' wasn't all that it was cracked up to be.




posted on Jun, 5 2006 @ 04:56 PM
link   
I have been reading along about Libby, Rove and the rest crowed over at patrickjfitzgerald.blogspot.com... some interesting comments coming from a few people who claim to work for the DOJ. Seems he has allot of work to do on other cases.



posted on Jun, 5 2006 @ 05:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sauron
I have been reading along about Libby, Rove and the rest crowed over at patrickjfitzgerald.blogspot.com... some interesting comments coming from a few people who claim to work for the DOJ. Seems he has allot of work to do on other cases.


I'm pretty sure that isn't Patrick Fitzgerald though. LOL, I read it every day, too. I at least get some interesting and entertaining comments out of it. Whoever it is, though, obviously has done some studying up on Fitz, and I mean, heavy studying. They know a lot about his personal life, and his favorite ties. I see I'm not the only one that goes there.



posted on Jun, 5 2006 @ 05:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mirthful Me Guess the "source' wasn't all that it was cracked up to be.


I guess not.
And if you're joining Seekerof's little campaign to hold me personally responsible for what truthout said, I can only say read over my posts here and see what I actually said. I believed the story, yes, but I never vouched for the credibility of the source. Others did but I did not.


Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Nor does it sound like much of an apology for making such a huge mistake.


In fact, I already called the story a "huge mistake". What do you want?

We all believe things that turn out to be not true sometimes.


I'm really curious about your motives in bumping this just to hassle me about it. :shk:



posted on Jun, 13 2006 @ 08:34 AM
link   
Certainly, for sure, this news will not be seen as a typical ATSNN topic....

At any rate, for you Rove spinmiesters and political pundits, seems your wishful thinkings and hopes have suddenly become just that: wishful thinkings and hopes.

Heads-up!
Leak Counsel Won't Charge Rove, Lawyer Announces

Someone get hold of the lame and debunked Truthout.org folks....so they can go ahead and CHANGE their names. Btw, I heard the new game to be had is called: Where's Jason Leopold and the folks that run Truthout.org?


Priceless=the wailing and gnashing of teeth to soon follow.




seekerof

[edit on 13-6-2006 by Seekerof]



posted on Jun, 13 2006 @ 11:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
We all believe things that turn out to be not true sometimes.



Perhaps what you say is true. It is hard to speak for everyone else, though. One key difference between what you did and at least some of the rest of us might be that we don't gleefully post the words of a "recovering addict" as if it were a new gospel - just because they go appear to go along with a smear campaign against someone we dislike.

So how was your crow prepared? Did it taste like chicken?



posted on Jun, 13 2006 @ 11:57 AM
link   
Give BH the credit due her. She is willing to admit when she might have made a mistake, a trait that many here would do well to emulate.



posted on Jun, 13 2006 @ 11:58 AM
link   
Glad to see the drama over Rove's possible indictment has finally ended. Now I can await the next try them & hang them in the press article.



posted on Jun, 13 2006 @ 02:23 PM
link   
Sorry seekerof, just because one story and one reporter were wrong does not mean that the organization is lame and discredited....if I follow your logic (if you can call it that) since Bush was wrong about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction then he is lame and discredited.......Hmmm.....actually, now that I think about it!



posted on Jun, 13 2006 @ 03:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by centurion1211
we don't gleefully post the words of a "recovering addict" as if it were a new gospel


Show me where I did this.
Let me help you...


Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Still no 'real solid' confirmation of this story,



Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I guess we shall see...



Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Or is the Rove indictment story a Hoax?



Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Still waiting...


Yes, I was gleeful at the prospect of criminals getting what they deserved, but if you think my comments indicate some kind of 'gospel', I don't know what to say other than you're living in a fantasy. You're making it up.

That's ok. I'm glad to bring some excitement and purpose into otherwise apparently dull lives...



posted on Jun, 13 2006 @ 05:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by grover
Sorry seekerof, just because one story and one reporter were wrong does not mean that the organization is lame and discredited....if I follow your logic (if you can call it that) since Bush was wrong about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction then he is lame and discredited.......Hmmm.....actually, now that I think about it!

And since you have been wrong now and then, grover, what shall we deduce about you? Hmmm....



posted on Jun, 13 2006 @ 05:41 PM
link   
*open canned response*

This is the News Network, let's discuss the topic, not each other.

And NO jsobecky, this was NOT directed at only you.

Edit to add: Did anyone take the time to read my newsletter article?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 13-6-2006 by intrepid]



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join