Why Wasn't Karl Rove Indicted?

[jfuh]

Quit flaming, jfuh.

how is calling you out to make your argument and yet you've done nothing of the sort. Proof here, instead of providing your argument you turn around and call me flaming.

 

[danarhea]

how is calling you out to make your argument and yet you've done nothing of the sort. Proof here, instead of providing your argument you turn around and call me flaming.

Dont feed the troll. He is only trying to derail the thread. Now back to the discussion.

 

[jfuh]

Derail the thread? :lol: This thread is about Rove NOT being indicted. My comment is that this is an excuse by liberals because their original prediction of Rove going to jail went down the toilet. That is completely on topic. :lol: Go away, flamer!

Again just more partisan flaming from you. Not a single argument based on the realities, only partisan rhetoric. Hate to be the one that breaks it to you, but I'm not flaming (something you enjoy doing) nor will I be going away anytime soon.

 

[jfuh]

Do you just say this same thing to everyone?

Nope, only to ppl who's premise start with partisan rhetoric.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

Where is your proof that a deal was cut? Please don't go to moveon.org or the DNC web sites....thanks........

I didn't say that a deal was cut. I merely pointed out that a lack of an indictment is not in and of itself an indication of a lack of evidence. This is true regardless of whether or not there is enough evidence for an indictment.
Though he may have, I see no indication that Fitzgerald would necessarily have chosen to indict as a first step if he did have enough evidence.

 

[Deegan]

I didn't say that a deal was cut. I merely pointed out that a lack of an indictment is not in and of itself an indication of a lack of evidence. This is true regardless of whether or not there is enough evidence for an indictment.
Though he may have, I see no indication that Fitzgerald would necessarily have chosen to indict as a first step if he did have enough evidence.

So did he like Rove, more the he did Scooter?:shock:

 

[danarhea]

So did he like Rove, more the he did Scooter?:shock:

I think the difference is that Rove was willing to give up others, where Scooter wasnt.

 

[Deegan]

I think the difference is that Rove was willing to give up others, where Scooter wasnt.

I guess we will see, but I just don't believe your source, but I could be wrong, or you could be wrong, or we both could. This is how much we know, nothing at the moment, but I guess we will learn more as the trial progresses.

 

[jfuh]

I think the difference is that Rove was willing to give up others, where Scooter wasnt.

No, I think it's not that. Rove is more valuable to white house policy then scooter was. Not only that but Rove is much more important towards the general election strategies of the Republican Party. So I think that Scooter was the scapegoat and took one for the team.

 

[danarhea]

I guess we will see, but I just don't believe your source, but I could be wrong, or you could be wrong, or we both could. This is how much we know, nothing at the moment, but I guess we will learn more as the trial progresses.

Ahhh, down to questioning the source now. OK, its a fair argument, but I will tell you that, in the Plame case, Raw Story has scooped the mediawhores by between 1 to 4 weeks on every story. The mediawhores have verified each story after the fact.

The present story stems from this one in Forbes Magazine, where it was confirmed (about a week after Raw Story printed about it) that another senior official was turning into a state witness against Libby. At the time, nobody knew who that official was, and the court said that Libby was not entitled to know. Raw story is now saying that it is Rove, based on what they call "sources close to the investigation". In about 1 to 4 weeks, you will hear the mediawhores saying the same, as they have always done before.

 

[Navy Pride]

I didn't say that a deal was cut. I merely pointed out that a lack of an indictment is not in and of itself an indication of a lack of evidence. This is true regardless of whether or not there is enough evidence for an indictment.
Though he may have, I see no indication that Fitzgerald would necessarily have chosen to indict as a first step if he did have enough evidence.

Looks like we sort of agree I think

 

[Navy Pride]

I think the difference is that Rove was willing to give up others, where Scooter wasnt.

And of course the SP Fitzgerald is involved in this conspiracy too huh...:rofl

You Liberal crack me up..........:lol:

 

[KCConservative]

how is calling you out to make your argument and yet you've done nothing of the sort. Proof here, instead of providing your argument you turn around and call me flaming.

Well let's see. This was your quote:

Originally Posted by jfuh
What's your argument KC? Or like always, no argument at all just a lame statment to derail a thread?

Now I don't know what your definition of flame is, but most would say that calling someone else "lame" is, indeed flaming. It's funny that you complain about flaming more than anyone else, and yet you do it more than anyone else.

In response to my not having an argument, please read post #2. Then go away.

 

[KCConservative]

Ahhh, down to questioning the source now. OK, its a fair argument, but I will tell you that, in the Plame case, Raw Story has scooped the mediawhores by between 1 to 4 weeks on every story. The mediawhores have verified each story after the fact.

The present story stems from this one in Forbes Magazine, where it was confirmed (about a week after Raw Story printed about it) that another senior official was turning into a state witness against Libby. At the time, nobody knew who that official was, and the court said that Libby was not entitled to know. Raw story is now saying that it is Rove, based on what they call "sources close to the investigation". In about 1 to 4 weeks, you will hear the mediawhores saying the same, as they have always done before.

Geez, who could argue with "sources close to the investigation"?

 

[jfuh]

Well let's see. This was your quote:

Originally Posted by jfuh
What's your argument KC? Or like always, no argument at all just a lame statment to derail a thread?

Now I don't know what your definition of flame is, but most would say that calling someone else "lame" is, indeed flaming. It's funny that you complain about flaming more than anyone else, and yet you do it more than anyone else.

In response to my not having an argument, please read post #2. Then go away.

Maybe learning how to read would be helpful. I didn't call you lame, I called your statment lame.
Now instead of providing an argument here you're simply worming your way out of it.
NOw here's your post from #2

Another excuse for why a liberal prediction has't come true.

No rational argument just a simple lame statment based on partisan rhetoric.

 

[KCConservative]

Maybe learning how to read would be helpful. I didn't call you lame, I called your statment lame.
Now instead of providing an argument here you're simply worming your way out of it.
NOw here's your post from #2
No rational argument just a simple lame statment based on partisan rhetoric.

My statement in post #2 was on topic and succinct. If you don;t like it, move on. How many times have you quipped at forum members that they don;t know how to read? You do it daily. It's tiresome. Please take your insulting quips to the basement, jfuh. You know where it is. Take your comments of how everyone is more lame than you and whatever mud you want to sling and go to the basement. We are sick of you trying to ruin our forum. Stop it. Stop with your childish and flame-baiting ways. Get some other hobby. But please, stop it!!!!!

 

[jfuh]

My statement in post #2 was on topic and succinct. If you don;t like it, move on. How many times have you quipped at forum members that they don;t know how to read? You do it daily. It's tiresome. Please take your insulting quips to the basement, jfuh. You know where it is. Take your comments of how everyone is more lame than you and whatever mud you want to sling and go to the basement. We are sick of you trying to ruin our forum. Stop it. Stop with your childish and flame-baiting ways. Get some other hobby. But please, stop it!!!!!

Actually it's only a very very select few that I've "quipped".
If you don't like it, then how about stopping with your baseless partisan rhetoric that you spew daily and make some real arguments.

 

[KCConservative]

Actually it's only a very very select few that I've "quipped".
If you don't like it, then how about stopping with your baseless partisan rhetoric that you spew daily and make some real arguments.

Because partisan rhetoric, if that's how you see it, isn't a violation of any rule. But flame baiting is. Stop it.

 

[jfuh]

Because partisan rhetoric, if that's how you see it, isn't a violation of any rule. But flame baiting is. Stop it.

Whatever floats your boat kid.

 

[KCConservative]

Whatever floats your boat kid.

In any case, thank you. It would be appreciated if you would stop with the flaming. If you don't like partisan rhetoric (if that's how you see my posts), then perhaps a politics forum isn't the most suitable forum for you. That's what happens here.

 

[lily]

No, I think it's not that. Rove is more valuable to white house policy then scooter was. Not only that but Rove is much more important towards the general election strategies of the Republican Party. So I think that Scooter was the scapegoat and took one for the team.

Well.......that's one way of looking at it. Another would be that Rove knows more dirty little secrets that Scooter..............but then again, I guess that would be in the category of "important"

 

[lily]

Geez, who could argue with "sources close to the investigation"?

That has been the scourge of this investigation all along. Fitzpatrick and his aides are the tightest lipped bunch of people I've seen in Washington. If only the White House was run this way.:rofl

........but then again, sources close to the investigation, have been pretty spot on.

 

[danarhea]

Well.......that's one way of looking at it. Another would be that Rove knows more dirty little secrets that Scooter..............but then again, I guess that would be in the category of "important"

Good observation. I would add that Rove is out to try and save his own butt, while Libby is still being a company man. That is probably why Libby is in deep doo doo and Rove is not.

 

[jfuh]

Good observation. I would add that Rove is out to try and save his own butt, while Libby is still being a company man. That is probably why Libby is in deep doo doo and Rove is not.

I think the verdict is still out on that. Think about it, even Cheny is now under investigation.

 

[danarhea]

I think the verdict is still out on that. Think about it, even Cheny is now under investigation.

That is because Rove steered Fitzgerald to the missing Cheney emails.