Fitzgerald: Rove will NOT be indicted, page 1
Pages:
ATS Members have flagged this thread 1 times
Topic started on 13-6-2006 @ 07:41 AM by jsobecky
Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald said on Monday that Karl Rove will not be indicted in the investigation of the identity leak of Valerie Plame, a CIA employee. Rove's lawyer, Robert Luskin, was notified of the decision after the prosecutor had notified U.S. District Judge Thomas Hogan of the news.



www.foxnews.com
WASHINGTON — Top White House aide Karl Rove has been told by prosecutors he won't be charged with any crimes in the investigation into leak of a CIA officer's identity, his lawyer said Tuesday, lifting a heavy burden from one of President Bush's most trusted advisers.

Attorney Robert Luskin said that special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald informed him of the decision on Monday, ending months of speculation about the fate of Rove, the architect of Bush's 2004 re-election now focused on stopping Democrats from capturing the House or Senate in this November's elections.



Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


There has been much speculation about whether Rove would be indicted, including a story last month by Jason Leopold of truthout.org, which claimed to have inside information that an indictment was imminent.

This should serve as a caution to all that we must not jump the gun in our zeal to bring down a person because of political differences.

Related News Links:
www.editorandpublisher.com

Related ATS Links:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 13-6-2006 by jsobecky]

[edit on 13-6-2006 by DontTreadOnMe]

[edit on 13/6/2006 by Mirthful Me]


reply posted on 13-6-2006 @ 08:13 PM by Benevolent Heretic
Originally posted by Mirthful Me
Are you insinuating that Patrick Fitzgerald is complicit in a coverup regarding Karl Rove?


More likely, Rove turned state's evidence.

And, no, seagull, it's not because people don't like jsobecky!

What can we say? It's all been said right here. Rove is currently "not guilty" in a court of law, but in the court of public opinion and in REALITY... that's another story. How many of you really truly believe he's an innocent man, I wonder? Just curious.

Not a word about it on truthout. Astronomer70, is that a new apology or the same one as before? If it's new, do you have a link?

Fitz Blog


“Does not anticipate seeking charges” means that if Rove testifies at Libby’s trial as expected, and as his agreement no doubt provides for him to testify, (lawyers call it providing “ongoing cooperation”), then all will be well for him. But if he “goes sideways” on Fitz and testifies differently from what is now expected, he could be charged–w/perjury certainly, and his deal to avoid criminal liability in the larger conspiracy could be “off” as he could face charges in that as well.


Pages:     ^^TOP^^