Rove Won't Be Charged in C.I.A. Leak Case
By DAVID JOHNSTON 6:30 AM ET
The prosecutor advised Karl Rove that he would not be charged with any wrongdoing, effectively ending the nearly three-year criminal investigation.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/13/washington/13cnd-leak.html?hp&ex=1150257600&en=e40da3e03155858f&ei=5094&partner=homepage
So much for my birthday present.
By DAVID JOHNSTON 6:30 AM ET
The prosecutor advised Karl Rove that he would not be charged with any wrongdoing, effectively ending the nearly three-year criminal investigation.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/13/washington/13cnd-leak.html?hp&ex=1150257600&en=e40da3e03155858f&ei=5094&partner=homepage
So much for my birthday present.
no subject
Date: 2006-06-13 01:26 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-06-13 01:33 pm (UTC)But happy birthday anyway.
no subject
Date: 2006-06-13 01:39 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-06-13 02:16 pm (UTC)Even though WBZ when Viacom gained in with the purchase of what was once the Westinghouse Broadcasting System became a rightwinger editorial mouthpiece, one of the people interviewed said that anyone else who had been called multiple times by a Grand Jury to testify and had responded as Rove had apparently responded, would be up on charges--that Rove was let off the hook.
WTF is going on? And who's being protected by whom how? This makes "something is rotten in the state of Denmark" look squeaky clean and pure and saintly...
no subject
Date: 2006-06-13 02:46 pm (UTC)This may not be bad news
Date: 2006-06-13 06:18 pm (UTC)I probably is, but it may also mean that Rove has given testimony against someone else. I have no idea *cough*Cheney*cough* who that could be. I say this because when it appeared that Rove had been quietly indicted but there was no announcement to that effect, it sure looked to me like there must have been negotiations for testimony in play.
no subject
Date: 2006-06-14 02:06 am (UTC)