Link to future Rove/Libby Indictment Website at DOJ

Jedster · #1 10-21-2005, 03:42 PM

http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/iln/osc/index.html

This appears to be the URL where any indictments of Robe, Libby, or whomever else will appear next week.

Washington Post Article

<font color="green"> Fitzgerald Launches Web Site

By Dan Froomkin
Special to washingtonpost.com
Friday, October 21, 2005; 1:00 PM

Special prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald has just launched his own brand-new Web site.

Could it be that he's getting ready to release some new legal documents? Like, maybe, some indictments? It's certainly not the action of an office about to fold up its tents and go home. </font>

Felix_Nietsche · #2 10-21-2005, 06:29 PM

The leaks coming from the grand jury (which ares supposedly secret) imply that Rove/Libby will NOT be indicted on the Valerie Plame issue because there INSUFFICIENT evidence to even claim that a crime was even committed. Instead the rumors are Rove/Libby will be indicted on charges related to their conduct in cooperating with the grand jury investigation.

When federal prosecutors failed to indict Martha Stewart on insiding trading they nailed her on lying to investigators. The rumors are the federal prosecutor will try a similar tactic on Rove/Libby. I fear we have another partisan scumbag democrat DA.

I hope I'm wrong. I don't give a [censored] about either man but I am concerned at the tactics partisan democrat DAs are using to punish successful republicans. Rove/Libby were evidently VERY CONFIDENT that they did nothing wrong because they gave the reporters a full waiver so they could reveal Rove/Libby as the confidential sources. I think both men have underestimated the end-justifies-the-mean tactics that the Dems are using.

bobman0330 · #3 10-21-2005, 06:30 PM

Martha deserved what she got. So do Rove and Libby if they lied to investigators.

Jedster · #4 10-21-2005, 06:47 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I fear we have another partisan scumbag democrat DA.

[/ QUOTE ]

If by DA you mean Federal Prosecutor, then you are probably refering to Patrick Fitzgerald who is a Republican, was appointed a U.S. Attorney by Bush, and was appointed Special Prosector by Deputy Attorney General Comey, also a Republican (Ashcroft had recused himself).

ptmusic · #5 10-21-2005, 06:48 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I fear we have another partisan scumbag democrat DA.

[/ QUOTE ]

If by DA you mean Federal Prosecutor, then you are probably refering to Patrick Fitzgerald who is a Republican, was appointed a U.S. Attorney by Bush, and was appointed Special Prosector by Deputy Attorney General Comey, also a Republican (Ashcroft had recused himself).

[/ QUOTE ]

...and has prosecuted more dems than repubs.

-ptmusic

wmspringer · #6 10-24-2005, 01:00 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I fear we have another partisan scumbag democrat DA.

[/ QUOTE ]

If by DA you mean Federal Prosecutor, then you are probably refering to Patrick Fitzgerald who is a Republican, was appointed a U.S. Attorney by Bush, and was appointed Special Prosector by Deputy Attorney General Comey, also a Republican (Ashcroft had recused himself).

[/ QUOTE ]

...and has prosecuted more dems than repubs.

-ptmusic

[/ QUOTE ]

Why confuse him with the facts? It won't do any good anyway.

Felix_Nietsche · #7 10-24-2005, 02:12 PM

...and has prosecuted more dems than repubs.
-ptmusic
************************************************** ******
Link?

Felix_Nietsche · #8 10-24-2005, 02:10 PM

then you are probably refering to Patrick Fitzgerald who is a Republican,
************************************************** ********
Republican??? That is more than I know. Do you have a link which cites his political background? I would love to confirm this...

If I had to guess, I would estimate that 70% of all lawyers are liberals (aka democrats). Every major law organization is liberal, almost every law school has a liberal bias, and law schools applicants are usually from liberal arts backgrounds. The result is lawyers tend to be more liberal than the general population. Also, Bush43 has allowed several democrats from the Clinton administration to stay on their jobs. The reason was his misguided attempts to be bipartisan. In hindsight this was a terribly naive move by Bush43. Trent Lott made the same mistake by sharing the chairman seats in the US Senate. Once Jim Jeffords defected, the Senate Democrats showed no inclination to continue the spirit of bipartisanship. They Dems played to win and the republicans should have done the same. Anyway, regardless of his actual political affiliation, I have a deep suspicion of DAs. The DA office has enormous power and it is it takes an exceptionally principled person to not abuse the power of that office. As the saying goes, 'Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely'.... E.g. I think Rudy Giuliani (Republican) abused his power as a DA when he prosecuted Michael Milliken (aka the Junk Bond King). But that successful prosecution made Rudy a national figure and launched his poliical career.

One thing which makes me question the DAs neutrality is the failure to him to call Joe Wilson or his wife to testify in front of the grand jury. Joe Wilson has already been caught lying. He claimed Dick Cheney selected him for the mission when actually it was his wife that got him the assignment (despite not having the credentials to carry out such a mission). He claimed that Cheney received daily updates on Wilson's 'progress' in Niger which was lie. Joe Wilson had an agenda. Wilson wanted to attack the war his opposed, try to embarrass the Bush43 admin, write a book, and make money on the public speaking circuit talking to doggy-dinner-bowl-eyed democrat anti-war true believers.

I would love the DA to ask Wilson why he cited his wife's CIA background on his website.... Perhaps it is Joe Wilson who should be indicted.

#9 10-24-2005, 04:02 PM

I just plugged in "Patrick Fitzgerald is a republican" into google (could you not do that?) and came up with a bunch of links, all affirming that he is indeed a Republican. You can now apologize for your statement, rather than blather your way out of why you made the assumption he was a dirty tricks liberal.

[ QUOTE ]
and law schools applicants are usually from liberal arts backgrounds.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you know what liberal arts means? Please, baby, tell you me think 'liberal arts' means politically liberal.
Liberal Arts has absolutely nothing to do with the political label 'liberal.' Here, I'll save you the trouble (from dictionary.com):

liberal arts
pl.n.

Academic disciplines, such as languages, literature, history, philosophy, mathematics, and science, that provide information of general cultural concern: “The term ‘liberal arts’ connotes a certain elevation above utilitarian concerns. Yet liberal education is intensely useful” (George F. Will).

The icing on the cake is the quote by George Will. (he's a conservative)

Do you just have a kneejerk reaction to everything that has the word 'liberal' in it?

#10 10-24-2005, 04:11 PM

Please do not try to convince felix with facts which contradict his posts. It only tends to confuse his predisposition for his predeterminations.