Well, I think Fitzgerald has done a good job. I just think Rove's ass is probably too well-covered. But if the Dems can re-take a chamber of the house this fall, we can then really look into some of the things this administration is doing.
7:07 PM, June 14, 2006
Well, it looks like those dreams of seeing Rove frog marched out of the Whitehouse will have to wait. It’s unclear to me right now if Rove cut a deal or if there just wasn’t enough evidence (yet) to indict him. I’m sad about this. There’s actually no law against lying. Digby and Andrew Sullivan both comment on the non-indictment. Here’s Sullivan (who often gets called “Sully” but unlike our president, I don’t want to saddle people with nicknames they didn’t pick themselves): Jonah asks: "Where does Karl Rove report to get his reputation back?"
He might start in South Carolina. (Referring to Rove’s smear of John McCain in the South Carolina primary. If I recall correctly, Rove spread false rumors that McCain had an illegitimate child.) According to the 6/13 Blogometer, Rove’s non-indictment was the hot topic in the Blogosphere.
posted by Zachary Drake at 11:21 AM on Jun 14, 2006
"Disappointment: Rove won't be Indicted for now"
2 Comments -
I would have been very surprised if he were indicted. And I hate that I'm not surprised that he wasn't.
Cheers
6:47 PM, June 14, 2006
Well, I think Fitzgerald has done a good job. I just think Rove's ass is probably too well-covered. But if the Dems can re-take a chamber of the house this fall, we can then really look into some of the things this administration is doing.
7:07 PM, June 14, 2006